Balancing stakeholder engagement in climate action: A symbiotic typology approach

Climate change presents an urgent and complex challenge, demanding immediate and effective action. This conceptual paper uses a narrative approach and a snowballing strategy to examine the intricate balance between stakeholders’ willingness to engage in climate action and their comfort with the resulting changes. We propose a novel typology that draws parallels with three types of ecological symbiotic interactions: parasitism, commensalism, and mutualism. This analogy helps us categorize different stakeholder responses to climate action. Within our typology, mutualism represents actions that benefit both the environment and human society, exemplifying an ideal balance in which stakeholders’ willingness to act aligns with their comfort levels. Commensalism describes scenarios where actions benefit one party without significantly harming the other, yet these actions could sometimes negatively affect stakeholders’ willingness or comfort. Parasitism, conversely, benefits one party at the significant expense of the other, leading to discomfort and reluctance among stakeholders. Our paper contributes to the broader discourse on climate change management, offering a unique lens to understand and influence stakeholder dynamics in climate action and policymaking. • Urgent and complex climate change crisis calls for immediate and effective action. • A need to balance stakeholders' willingness to act and comfortability with actions. • Mutualistic action among stakeholders is ideal for long-term climate action. • Commensalistic and parasitic actions are less ideal climate actions. • Parasitic actions can bring discomfort and reluctance among stakeholders.