Analysis: Rising fuel costs and persistent headlines about ongoing uncertainty are psychological issues as well as economic ones<\/p>\n
At first glance, the Strait of Hormuz<\/a> feels a long way geographically, politically and culturally from Ireland. Yet as tensions disrupt this critical global shipping route, the consequences are being felt much closer to home. Rising fuel costs, persistent headlines about threats and instability and ongoing uncertainty are psychological issues as well as economic ones.<\/p>\n The immediate mental health consequences of such a shock are familiar. Anticipatory stress, energy insecurity<\/a> and a flood of crisis coverage<\/a> and speculation in the media surround us with a low but continuous level of stress and uncertainty. Indeed uncertainty<\/a>, more than scarcity, is often what people find most challenging to live with.<\/p>\n It is precisely this uncertainty and distress that governments try to address with emergency measures. Fuel subsidies, tax cuts and prices controls are not just economic tools \u2013 they are psychological ones too. The signal action, stability and responsiveness. In the short term, they cushion economic shocks and ease public anxiety. A fuel package is not just a financial bailout, it is a reassurance that the situation is, at least temporarily, under control.<\/p>\n We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences<\/a><\/p>\n From RT\u00c9 Radio 1’s News At One, European Commission announces measures designed to tackle the impact of the energy crisis<\/p>\n Yet these measures are not cost-free. They come with consequences that are less immediate but equally, if not more, significant. Economists warn that emergency blanket measures disproportionately benefit higher-income groups<\/a>. In this way, they can widen existing inequalities, even as they offer temporary relief.<\/p>\n Over time, widening inequality is itself a well-established driver of mental health difficulties<\/a> and distress. Wealth inequality is linked to chronic stress, diminished perceptions of fairness and reduced social cohesion<\/a>. Many of these effects were on display throughout the recent blockade by a small number of unelected and disenfranchised citizens of roads and ports across Ireland.<\/p>\n So how do we weigh up short-term relief against long-term distress? One approach is not to see short term and long term mental health as opposing goals but rather the same issue explored across different timelines.<\/p>\n We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences<\/a><\/p>\n From RT\u00c9 Radio 1’s Drivetime, Strait of Hormuz ‘completely open’ but US blockade of Iran ‘in full force’<\/p>\n Experts have outlined a range of economic and policy options including targeted emergency subsidies, investments in public transport and energy efficiency, and the development of renewable energy sources, such as Ireland’s vast off-shore wind energy \u2013 all of which offer short term stimulus and long term stability. Even the framing of such policy matters \u2013 a reactionary policy that assuages anxiety today but increases exposure to future shocks may be less effective than it first appears.<\/p>\n We have been in this position before during the COVID-19 pandemic when emergency measures helped soften the immediate economic shock but also contributed to a significant widening of wealth inequality. We are only beginning to understand the true effects of this widening of inequality now<\/a>.<\/p>\n Mental health is often seen as a downstream consequence of political or economic events rather than a factor shaping responses to them. But if our psychological responses are taken seriously as a policy objective, then stability, fairness and sustainability of the systems people depend on (for example our energy, food and transport systems) become central concerns.<\/p>\n We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences<\/a><\/p>\n From RT\u00c9 Radio 1’s Today with David McCullagh, do we need to embrace more hybrid working and online learning to cope with the energy crisis?<\/p>\n There is no simple resolution to the tension between short-term and long-term relief from the distress and uncertainty of the energy crisis precipitated by the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz. But the question remains \u2013 it is better to minimise distress now, even if it increases the risk of deeper, more persistent, distress later on? Or should Government policy aim to reduce the likelihood of future crisis, even at the cost of greater uncertainty and discomfort in the present?<\/p>\n The answer may not lie in choosing one over the other but in recognising that mental health is shaped as much by the predictability and fairness of the future as by the pressures of the present.<\/p>\n Follow RT\u00c9 Brainstorm on WhatsApp<\/a> and Instagram<\/a> for more stories and updates<\/p>\n The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RT\u00c9<\/p>\n