A dual-continuum framework to evaluate climate change impacts on mental health

Abstract

Climate change is driving a suite of stressors that could increase the global mental health burden. In this Perspective we consider three mental health frameworks to evaluate this burden. The pathogenic framework focuses on symptom management in the presence or absence of mental disorders. The salutogenic framework emphasizes factors related to psychological wellbeing such as personal strengths, resilience and socio-environmental resources. The third approach—the dual-continuum or ‘complete state’ framework—considers mental disorders and psychological wellbeing simultaneously. Drawing on the cross-disciplinary literature, we find that the dual-continuum framework is a practical and empirically valid approach to evaluate climate-related impacts on mental health. This is because mental disorders and reduced wellbeing, though related, are conceptually and empirically distinct, and encompass different climate-related antecedents and psychosocial endpoints. Both are necessary to evaluate the full burden of climate change. In this Perspective, the authors present a framework for evaluating the burden of climate change to mental health that considers both mental disorders and psychological wellbeing.