Chartered Psychologist Roger Paxton on causation and resolution around the problems facing our world.
09 September 2026
The world is in a state of polycrisis. The climate and ecological crisis; increasing polarisation and the rise of the far right threatening democracies; vast economic and social inequalities; raging wars which may well spread; the ignoring of human rights and international justice; and the unknown threats posed by artificial intelligence (AI). Moreover, the crises are causally interrelated: as the continuing climate and ecological crisis makes more places uninhabitable, migration pressures will increase, strengthening the far right, further threatening democracy and international security, and so on.
The seriousness of the threats cannot be overstated. There are political, economic, sociological and moral aspects of all the crises, and actions against them are needed at many levels, including of course the psychological level.
In a forthcoming paper (Paxton, in press), I argue that psychology and morals lie at the centre of the polycrisis – the centre of both its causation and resolution. In this article I summarise the argument in that paper and then expand on the actions proposed, demonstrating their necessity and practicality..
The polycrisis and morals
Polycrisis has been defined as the causal entanglement of crises in multiple global systems in ways that significantly degrade humanity's prospects (Lawrence et al, 2024). (We should add that it is not just humanity's prospects that are affected). Various conceptual and theoretical frameworks have been applied to understand it, as Lawrence et al note. A different approach is taken in the paper summarised here, focusing on psychology. It is psychological factors – human decisions and actions - that have caused and are still causing all of it.
There are many psychological aspects of the polycrisis, but a striking feature is that all the component crises result from people not caring enough about others; in particular others who are distant or different. If we cared more about more people who are far away and about future generations we would look beyond the short term to change our lifestyles and try to empathise with and help rather than ignoring or scapegoating distant people. We would pressure our politicians to act morally, to ease global suffering, counter terrifying threats and try to protect future generations. Of course, as is often the case, the moral course of action here coincides with enlightened longer term self-interest, but short term self-interest too often predominates.
Our insufficient concern for these many millions of distant and different people can be seen as an altruism failure. Such failures have been called 'the ur problem of morality' – the origin of all morally problematic situations (Kitcher, 2021). Another way to put it is that our 'circle of moral concern' (Singer, 2011; Buchanan & Powell, 2018) is narrow, and moral progress, in the form of caring more about more people, means widening the circle of moral concern. Although this is hard, history shows that it is possible. Commonly cited examples are the abolition of chattel slavery, the expansion of opportunities for women, and the acceptance of gay relationships. None of this is without room for further improvement, but the examples all show expansion of the moral circle on a wide international scale to include groups that were previously greatly wronged.
These expansions can be seen as steps in our social and moral evolution. The progress needed now will be a great but necessary further step in the social evolution of morality. In the deep past, survival was enhanced by cooperating and caring in local areas, beyond kinship groups (Sauer, et al., 2021). Now morality, and even human survival, require caring and cooperation on a global scale.
Moral advances have typically occurred on several fronts, with individual changes in awareness and commitment spreading, leading on to public declarations, modifications of laws, and the further widening of changes in the attitudes and conduct of individuals. These are social movements (Tilly, 2004), in which awareness, commitment and campaigning spread, involving increasing numbers of people in sharing a wider circle of moral concern, and producing sustained pressure on policy makers to change. Much broader and stronger social movements are needed now.
The polycrisis and psychology
What can psychologists, psychology and psychological organisations contribute to developing social movements to produce the huge changes that are needed?
We can and should act at various levels. Firstly, as citizens we should stay informed about the many crises, and, in relation to the climate and ecological crisis in particular, behave responsibly and consistently, striving to change our lifestyles accordingly – living greener lives and voting with reference to moral principles. We should value and contribute to our local communities, helping to develop awareness of these vital issues and the need for change. Kitcher (2021) outlines a process he calls democratic contractualism, that includes engaging with, rather than avoiding, political opponents. We should accept that political disagreements may rest on different value sets (set out in detail by Haidt, 2012) which might productively be explored.
As psychologists we can make special contributions, addressing the moral issues that underpin and reinforce the polycrisis and helping to promote the moral expansion required. We can bring expertise to develop conversations to counter what Sandel (2012) calls the moral vacancy of contemporary public life; the steady erosion of the public sphere, the spread of marketisation, the near-normality of lying, and the absence of morals in statements by politicians. We can use moral psychology, such as Rest's model of moral reasoning (Narvaez & Rest, 1995), to inform discussions, identifying moral issues and adding moral questions to discussions about the economics and politics of policy choices.
Applied psychologists, drawing on evidence from social and political psychology and behaviour change, can do more to publicise the psychological causes and effects of the elements of the polycrisis, not just in their teaching and practice, in which several Divisions of the British Psychological Society (BPS) are already active, but also in making public statements, disseminating evidence on the psychological causes and consequences of the crises and publicising appropriate actions..
Psychological organisations like the BPS can extend and build on these personal conversations and interventions, publicising not just the causes and consequences of the crises, but also the personal as well as social benefits of moral reflection and progress. Consciousness of one's values, choosing moral values and structuring one's life around their fulfillment is an important contribution to personal wellbeing (DeYoung & Tiberius, 2022), which is also associated with positive mental health (Goering et al, 2024). The BPS should lobby for moral wellbeing to be supported as a matter of national policy, analogous to the familiar public health emphasis on both physical and mental wellbeing (Paxton, 2020).
Psychological organisations are in a stronger position than individual psychologists to influence public opinion, helping to develop social movements. The BPS, the European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA), the American Psychological Association (APA) and others have made clear statements, particularly in relation to the climate and ecological crisis. An example is the BPS Position Statement on the Climate and Ecological Crisis. There is much more for psychology to contribute to broadening public understanding of the crises, including climate and ecological anxiety, and the intellectual, emotional and social harm of disinformation, human rights abuses, and the challenges to democracy.
Psychological organisations can also exert wider influence by publicising the activities of their members who campaign to shift public opinion and national policy in the areas of the polycrisis. The Psychologist magazine published an account from a BPS member describing her part in peaceful protests against the climate and ecological crisis and her reasons for these actions (Jones, 2020). The Psychologist also published a special issue focused on the climate and biodiversity crisis (Morrisey, et al., 2025).
Political influence
The preceding paragraphs summarise actions taken by the BPS so far, specifically in relation to the climate and ecological crisis. Similar energy is needed regarding the other crises. We know that democracy is associated with improved life satisfaction, trust and social relationships, and we know that global insecurity is an obvious source of anxiety, and so on. Psychological changes – changes in awareness, attitudes and actions – are required to confront all of them. Given the clear current worsening of the climate and ecological crisis, not to mention the other components of the polycrisis, the Society should be aiming higher, in terms of the range of topics and in seeking to achieve national policy changes.
But could this be seen as the Society engaging in political activity? And if so, would this be legitimate with regard to its stated objectives, strategy and legal obligations and constraints as a charity?
The answer to both these questions is yes. Seeking to influence politicians is undeniably political activity. However, reference to relevant documents, as follows, shows that actions against the polycrisis should be of central relevance to the BPS, and are fully in keeping with its responsibilities as a charity.
The BPS Royal Charter ( updated 19 July 2022) says (section 3 (1), that 'The objects of the Society shall be to promote the advancement and diffusion of a knowledge of psychology pure and applied and especially to promote the efficiency and usefulness of Members of the Society…' (italics added). The BPS Strategy, last revised in 2024, expresses the Society's vision as; 'Building a world where psychology transforms lives'; an ambitious and admirable statement. In addition, the BPS is a member of EFPA (the European Federation of Psychologists' Associations), the stated purpose of which is: contributing to society, developing psychology, serving psychologists.
So far as the legitimacy of seeking to influence policy makers is concerned, the Charity Commission Guidance on political activity and campaigning by charities is as follows: 'Charities… can take part in political activity that supports their purpose and is in their best interest ….(italics added). Charities must remain independent and must not give their support to a political party'.
To summarise, the BPS has a duty to assist its members in applying psychology for the public good. The public good is very seriously threatened by the polycrisis, and political actions are needed to challenge it. Political, but not party political, influence is legitimate and necessary.
What next? The above summary of actions that have been taken shows that more has been done against the climate and ecological crisis than about any of the other crises. It is arguable that it is the most pressing of the crises, but all are desperately serious. For moral reasons, and simply in pursuit of survival, we must give sustained attention to the climate and ecological crisis while devoting more energy in the same ways to the others. And, as well as extending the range of our concerns - extending our circle of moral concern much more widely - we must act more publicly and therefore more effectively to contribute to achieving the social and political changes required. The BPS can legitimately and consistently do more to contribute to the political influence needed.
Aspiring to these huge changes may seem naive and idealistic, but in fact it is realistic as well as necessary. The greatly underreported multi-authored Global Justice Report: a plan for equality and prosperity within planetary boundaries (Chancel, et al., 2026), demonstrates that planetary habitability can be reconciled with high well-being for all, if there is fast decarbonisation, major shifts in consumption patterns and drastic reductions in inequalities. It shows that all these changes are technically and economically feasible. These changes are not just about climate and ecological justice but much more widely about social and economic justice, all of which are needed for a peaceful future. Although the required changes are enormously challenging, the report presents a quantified plan to show that this better future is possible, and details what its achievement will involve. Survivability and social justice are possible, but major social and political changes are required for their achievement.
In the longer term, if we survive the polycrisis many lessons will be able to be drawn, not the least of which, as Buchanan (2020) notes, will be the need for more resilient institutions that will support morality more effectively; better protecting truth and openness, and promoting care for others. Psychology needs to assist with all these changes, immediate and longer term.
Roger Paxton PhD CPsychol FBPsS is a member of the BPS Climate and Environment Action Co-ordinating Group. He is a retired clinical psychologist, past Chair of the BPS Ethics Committee, and Associate Editor for 'Looking Back' on The Psychologist.
SOURCE:
Physical abuse happens when someone causes bodily harm; for example, by hitting, pushing, or slapping. Physical abuse may also include restraining an older adult against their will, such as by locking them in a room or tying them to furniture.
