Nilüfer Khudaykulov – DDRN

The Emotional Path We Take for Climate Change

Nilüfer Khudaykulov — Wed, 31 Dec 2025 15:21:32 +0000

Have you felt that we have failed to address environmental crises? If so, you may be experiencing anxiety or guilt feelings while you hunt for alternatives to flights for your dream trips. Or perhaps, you have stopped giving such importance to it, convinced there is little left you can do to save the planet.

This article continues our exploration from “Humor can help climate crisis? You must be joking!”. In this second part, we turn to insights from Massih Zekavat’s forthcoming second book, Leveraging Satire for Environmental Advocacy, discussed during an exclusive DDRN interview.

For years, climate advocacy has relied on a single powerful emotion: fear. Images of melting ice caps, raging fires, and flood disasters are intended to shock us into action. Yet this urgency does not seem to be effective. Zekavat argues that it has reached its emotional threshold and began to often produces paralysis, rather than mobilization.

This paralysis does not stem from ignorance; rather, it is partly rooted in an emotional paralysis. It means that despite knowing all about climate change, we feel powerless to mitigate it. In his second book, one of the points Zekavat sheds light on is the denialism and quietism through apocalyptic narratives. Through these narratives, we tend to have the illusion of living in the “end times” and denying ecological urgency as a coping mechanism. The missing link, he proclaims, is material engagement, and one way toward this is looking into the culture industry, where satire plays a pivotal role.

“The main psychological mechanism behind apocalyptic narratives is fear… and overexposure to fear can also lead to negative impacts on it. It can cause eco-anxiety, eco-distress, and essentially apathy…which might lead to political inaction and inertia.”

Apocalyptic narratives often portray the end of the world as it is distant, far away in time and place. When our daily lives appear normal, surrounded by trees and blue sky, people do not feel threatened, as the imagined end does not match the daily observations. Climate change, however, is not spatially or temporally distant; it is here now. The planet is indeed deteriorating, but not in the way we expected from myths or movies. “Instead of using apocalyptic narratives… we should use narratives that facilitate speaking power to truth for people whose voices have been silenced,” Zekavat says.

Satire enables us to illuminate the aspects of individual and collective behavior that environmental psychology overlooks, including the power dynamics ingrained in class, race, gender, and material inequality.

When coping becomes complicity

Climate policies, particularly within the European Green Deal, have long prioritised resilience, adaptation, and coping. Zekavat warns that this maintenance can preserve the status quo, rather than challenge it. “You are making sure that the status quo goes on… we can still dig up fossil fuels, still burn them, still make money out of that. And someone else will pay the price.”

That “someone else” is rarely the ones who benefit from fossil fuels. It is the communities in Africa, Middle East, or other countries already burdened by environmental injustice; it is the global majority. “This is essentially what resilience and coping come down to,” Zekavat remarks critically.

“We have empirical data that uncertainty emotions could be more effective, and shame is one of those emotions that could be induced by satire,” he explains. “Satire is again a very strong rhetorical means of creating shame and indignation.” He contends that what we need is not better coping, but an actual disruption. And holding the powerful to shame can spark real transformation.

Within or against nature: a story of ambitious Homo Sapiens

Anthropocene is described as the geological period in which human activity has become as dominant as much as other geological forces. It is a time when mountains can be destroyed not only by earthquakes but also by mining companies. The term is famously used by the literature to indicate the level of adverse impact of humans on the planet. However, it carries significant flaws.

Zekavat points out that the term blames Anthropos, targeting humanity as a single, unified entity. It ignores the staggering inequality of who caused the damage and who suffers from it. “It doesn’t really differentiate responsibility,” he argues. “The responsibility of Senegal, for example, as compared to the Netherlands, China, or the US – both in creating the climate crisis and in their capacity to address it – is not even comparable.”

The second flaw is that Anthropocene often reflects a colonial, imperial perspective. Much of climate fiction pictures New York or Florida being submerged in movies, yet “Pakistan was actually submerged. A third of this country was underwater two years ago in the summer, and nobody talks about that. It’s not even something that might happen in the future; it is something that actually happened. It is a part of the lived experience of those.”

This supposedly universal “we” in climate storytelling needs to be questioned. In response, Zekavat persuasively embraces using the concept of Chthulucene, allowing us to reconsider the interconnections between the species in nature. He states that the framing of words is essential, giving an example of the shift between ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’, which incrementally eliminated sceptics and denialists. Anthropocene, however, still obscures responsibility.

Two major misconceptions in climate communication

Zekavat identifies two persistent misunderstandings in climate advocacy:

“If we inform people, they will change”

This assumption misrepresents how human behaviour works. Smokers, for example, are fully aware of the health hazards, but it does not help them change their behavior. Knowledge alone does not lead to action. Likewise, behavior can change without information, such as through propaganda or nudging, which is a term used to get people’s attention gently, by placing small bars of chocolate near the cashier in supermarkets, for instance. “If you want to change energy consumption behavior… change the architecture. People won’t even notice how their behaviour changed, but it will change.”

“one-size-fits-all”

As elaborated in his first book, Satire, Humor and Environmental Crises, climate campaigns must reflect the diversity of habits in different communities around the world, since environmental behaviors come with some degree of abstinence, giving up travel, meat, and convenience. As might be expected, not everyone has the same capacity for sacrifice.

Humor provides a solution to both of these misconceptions. It simultaneously engages audiences on cognitive and emotional levels, making it exceptionally potent. It is also very context-dependent, culturally specific, and deeply tied to who delivers the message and who is targeted. “It reaches the audience at two levels, cognitive, rational, and emotional. So it’s not just giving information cognitively. It’s not scientific writing. There’s also an emotional, visceral, affective, imaginative aspect to that,” Zekavat says.

It is important to underline that humor should not belittle the crisis; instead, it should belittle the deniers. “Instead of poking laughter at the climate crisis, you poke laughter at people who deny the existence of the climate crisis.” Zekavat cautiously reminds us that satire must be used responsibly, as it can reinforce prejudices or punch down on vulnerable groups if misdirected. However, if it is used wisely, it becomes a “moral weapon”, as he aptly describes.

“We must be more open to approaches and strategies that are not established. It doesn’t mean that if something is not as popular or as frequently seen as others, it doesn’t work. Maybe nobody has dared to try them.” Satire is one such overlooked approach, in alternative to apocalyptic narratives. He hopes that environmental campaigns will change their focus from targeting ordinary people to confronting political and corporate powers. “This is a systemic, political issue… not an individual opinion choice.” He concludes.

Our planet’s decline is slow and unjust, and it is driven by choices we can still change. Who we shame, who we comfort, and whose responsibility we point at matters.

Nilüfer Khudaykulov is a Master student in International Politics and Governance at Roskilde University, Denmark, and a DDRN intern.

Life between Machines and Trees: Local Voices under Deforestation

Nilüfer Khudaykulov — Sun, 09 Nov 2025 07:57:18 +0000

How can a rich forest be protected from illegal logging, while safeguarding the communities who rely on it for survival? Two expert groups from Cambodia and Brazil share how memory, community knowledge and technology can shape sustainability and partnership amid the conflicting interests of resident communities and loggers.

Cambodia and Brazil are two different countries, yet their stories intersect at crucial points by the logging of their abundant forests and the presence of indigenous people living there. These forests are commonly being targeted by governments and private enterprises for commercial interests. It poses a significant threat to the environment and the livelihoods of resident indigenous people.

Prey Lang in Cambodia

Cambodia set a world record for deforestation with which 1.5 percent of the country’s forests disappeared in 2021. Additionally, the country lost 31 percent of trees in protected areas since 2000, equivalent to 2.7 million hectares.

Prey Lang is the largest forest in Cambodia and the last remaining major lowland rainforest in the Southeast Asia. It is home to 250,000 indigenous Kuy people, 530 species of plants and animals. Protecting Prey Lang is vital not only for the ecosystem, but also for Kuy people who rely primarily on the land for survival, as well as 22 threatened species registered in the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List.

Prey Lang has incrementally been the victim of illegal logging and deforestation due to its profitable luxury woods, agricultural potential for demanded plantations such as sugar, rubber and cassava, and presence of minerals such as timber. The forest is also aspired for further mining explorations for iron and gold. Considering the profits accrued by concession companies from Prey Lang, the environmental importance of the forest and livelihood of Kuy people has been systematically overshadowed.

The Prey Lang Community Network (PLCN) took place to protect the forest from demolition with voluntary collaboration of indigenous community members. It mainly focuses on collection and dissemination of the information about illegal logging activities. PLCN has been utilizing smartphone technology with the Prey Lang App created in 2013 to collect data such as photographing and pinpointing the location of logging activities. The app also enables recording interactions with authorities, threats, and violence, as well as ascertaining climate-related figures.

The monitoring app is a geographic citizen science application that integrates with satellite GPAs and runs on smartphones. It was designed through a partnership between the University of Copenhagen (UCPH), PLCN, and local and international NGOs.

Besides restraining illegal logging in Prey Lang, the project team also induce advocacy by collection of data through the UCPH. They teach the Kuy people to use a social media platform, so that their reports can be the voice of them to draw public attention, like a citizen journalist.

Territories surrounding Trombetas River in Brazil

In this context, Brazil shares a similar pattern with Cambodia. Mining activities on the Trombetas River, mainly conducted by the fourth largest bauxite producer Mineração Rio do Norte (MRN), have adversely impacted the local quilombolas who face challenges in securing legal rights over the territories Alto Trombetas I and II. They have been neighbours of MRN and experienced firsthand the severe environmental effects of its operations for decades. The mining territories are federally conserved units by the government, which overlap with the territorial rights of quilombola communities.

The territorial conflict between quilombolas and conservation units for mining activities obstructs land titling. Furthermore, the continued distrust between the government and indigenous groups necessitates more time for the hearing process rather than for information and decision steps.

Julia Marques Dalla Costa, who served as deputy coordinator of the National Quilombola Environmental Licensing Team at The Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária – INCRA (National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform): “… it’s a process. We have to believe in the process, and we have to be very mindful with everything, every step on the way. So you became exceptional by time, you know, exempting yourself from the government or the image of the government they built over time by their traumas. Then you build the hearing again. By hearing, you try to understand. So you kind of became the common ground between them.”, she further explains how angry and frustrated quilombola people were initially.

“We are allies of the quilombolas because we are responsible for the titling of their lands. So they were like, you left us, you abandoned us. We were here for 10 years without any notice, without any resources.”, she adds what was crucial that worked for them to build the trust, through consistently being the same people that they can contact to, “we always try to keep with our word. So we have to be very cautious with what we are saying, what we are committing to”.

The indispensable pillars: collaboration and understanding

Community involvement is a highly effective strategy to cope with environmental issues. It is cost-effective, and capable of comprising a sustainable foundation for all parties involved. However, it requires multidimensional approach that incorporates social, institutional and economical aspects. When these aspects are absent, communities encounter problems that endanger their livelihoods and safety. Therefore, it is vital for both Kuy and Quilombola people that the education and peacebuilding process is handled in a multidimensional and sustainable way.

The project team in Prey Lang also facilitates peacebuilding between the community and the government through peace dialogues. They bring the communities into dialogue, both with local authority and moving forward with the national levels. They also held several forums that brought together key actors in this forest sector, including indigenous groups, NGOs, private sector representatives, and officials from the Ministry of Environment to present their priorities and the support they need. The forums were crucially important for relevant key actors to illustrate the issue and reach a common ground.

Integrating faith for biodiversity among the community was another step taken for sustainable peacebuilding and biodiversity protection. Forest is a sacred place for indigenous groups – a place for spiritual practices. Additionally, collaborating with monks and other religious leaders to hold tree ordination and tree planting eased the process for Prey Lang. “Religious leaders hold moral authority, and they are able to mobilize communities for tree planting. For example, if we have reforestations initiatives, they mobilize the community and engage with authority. Authorities are more collaborative when it comes to religious leaders so that they join the efforts. And this kind of initiative also creates more understanding and trust between the communities and authorities.” the project team member explains.

“We hope that at the end of the day, the communities, the states and those who work in the forest sector can understand each other and collaborate to protect the forest.” the team member says.

Indigenous People and Local Communities (LCIPs) hold deep ecological knowledge, and they have great wisdom in forest protection, with a long-standing tradition of passing on their knowledge from one generation to the next. For this reason, it is extremely helpful for researchers and states to integrate the science knowledge with traditional knowledge and recognise the crucial role of LCIPs in forest and biodiversity conservation.

Julia refers to Bronislaw Malinowski’s pioneering quota to approach this particular issue: “We should have the native point of view… it’s very basic but important and core lesson in anthropology that you have to connect to understand why that person or group having that position is making those statements, what is their point of view towards that problem, that institution or someone.”

“A first step for them to trust you. Imposing your own information on them, look, you feel in this way, you need this… As an outsider, you just need to bring their own knowledge, own experiences, values and feelings. Combine and prioritize their own experiences over your solutions.” Julia concludes.

Malinowski’s theory claiming to “grasp the native’s point of view, his relation to life, to realize his vision of his world” sheds light on the path to partnership with local communities in response to the damage caused by mining companies in Prey Lang and the territories surrounding the Trombetas River over the years. It is therefore vital to empower local people, not only for their fundamental rights, but also to facilitate collaborative efforts to preserve the biodiverse landscapes that are home to hundreds of species.

Nilüfer Khudaykulov is a MSc student in International Politics and Governance at Roskilde University and a DDRN intern