Interview with Diana Matejuk, Leading specialist at wildlife department of Estonian Environment Agency

As part of the ClEmTo – The Climate Emotion Toolkit project, we spoke with Diana Matejuk, a young environmental professional from Estonia. Her work connects environmental governance, geospatial nature-protection data, climate policy and the emotional reality of living with climate change. In this interview, she reflects on why climate education needs more than information: it also needs emotional literacy, realistic hope, empathy and collective action.

1. Could you briefly introduce your background and explain how your work is connected with climate change and environmental issues?

I studied environmental technology at bachelor’s level and later completed a master’s degree in environmental governance. I chose that path because I realised that technology alone is not enough. A technological solution can be useful, but it does not automatically solve the deeper structural problems behind environmental degradation and climate change.

During and after my studies, I worked as a sustainability consultant in the private sector. We helped companies calculate their carbon footprint, understand their emissions and identify opportunities to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. We provided measurements, calculations and hard data. However, because much of that work was voluntary for companies, I sometimes felt frustrated. You can provide the evidence, but whether companies acted on that evidence was ultimately their choice. I think many young people recognise that feeling, they see the data, they understand the problem, and yet the response is still too slow.

Later, I worked on environmental impact assessments. That gave me a more hopeful perspective because the work was connected to legislation. When the law requires something, environmental recommendations cannot simply be treated as optional. That experience helped me understand how important governance and regulation are.

Today I work at the Environment Agency in Estonia as a lead specialist in nature protection. My team manages nature-protection data for the whole country, including protected areas, protected species and other spatial information related to nature. We work a lot with GIS and geospatial analysis. Although we are not the ones who decide where a protected area should be established, we provide and manage the evidence that can support better-informed decisions by the Ministry of Climate and other institutions.

2. When did climate change become personally important to you, and how do you feel about it today?

Climate change is something I think about very often, almost every day. It is difficult not to see how many things are connected to it: food prices, harvests, heat, floods, infrastructure, health and even the quality of everyday life. Some examples may sound small, but together they show how deeply climate change is already linked with our lives.

Estonia is geographically fortunate in some ways. We do not experience deadly heat waves in the same way as some parts of southern Europe, although heat still affects elderly people and people with chronic health conditions. At the same time, we are not fully prepared for flooding, especially in cities. Much of our infrastructure was designed according to older assumptions that did not include climate change. Changing that takes time, money and political will.

What frustrates me is that climate change often feels like common knowledge, yet some people still do not understand it or choose to ignore it.

For me personally, the issue became important around 2017, when I was still in high school and thinking about my future. I came across materials about the links between animal agriculture, climate change, environmental degradation, animal welfare and biodiversity loss. After that, I could not simply ignore what I had learned. I started watching documentaries, reading blogs and following different online sources. That was the moment when I understood that, if I wanted to do something meaningful in life, climate change would be one of the major issues I would have to engage with, directly or indirectly.

3. How has the climate-change mood among young people in Estonia changed since your high-school years?

When I was in high school, I had the impression that climate change was not something many ordinary teenagers discussed. There were enthusiastic young people who cared deeply, but the topic was not as visible as it is now. Looking back, I also feel that around 2017 it was less politically charged, although that may partly be how I remember it today.

Now, climate change is much more present in public life. It is in the news, Estonia has been working on climate legislation, and climate-related events are more visible: heavy rain, flooding, heat waves, drier wells and challenges for food production. I hope schools are also teaching climate change better now. What I am less sure about is whether schools are prepared to address the emotional side of the topic.

4. From your experience, what makes young people feel more worried, anxious or frustrated about climate change?

My perspective mostly comes from young people who are already involved in environmental or climate topics. For them, I think the strongest source of frustration is inaction at higher decision-making levels. There is a growing sense of hopelessness when climate action is delayed or overshadowed by other priorities.

In Estonia, security is understandably a very important issue because of the wider geopolitical situation. I do not want to diminish the importance of that. But climate change is also a security risk. The problem is that it is often treated as less immediate – as something that belongs to the future, or something that young people will have to solve later. That creates frustration, because young people can see that the risk is real, while the response is still not fast or serious enough.

5. How do you personally think about the future?

A few years ago, I felt genuinely hopeless. I do not want to pretend that I now have a clear plan, or that I am fully optimistic and believe everything will turn out well. I am not. But I try to stay informed about the difficult things that could happen, while also educating myself about ways in which the future can still be improved.

I follow people with scientific backgrounds who think seriously about possible better futures and about how societies can live with climate change. That helps me. At the moment, I try to be as realistic as possible without losing hope.

Climate change will get worse, and we cannot simply reverse all of its consequences. But we can reduce some impacts, and, very importantly, we can adapt. Without the possibility of mitigation and adaptation, it would be very difficult not to feel hopeless. I also believe that political and generational change matters. People who block necessary changes will not hold decision-making power forever.

6. Based on what you have seen in school, university and work, how prepared are teachers, youth workers and other professionals to talk with young people about climate-related emotions?

When I was in school, we had a class about climate change, and I told my teacher that I was reducing my meat consumption because of the environmental and climate concerns. They told me that I was foolish to do that. That kind of response is not supportive when a young person is trying to act on something they are worried about.

I hope teachers and youth workers today are better prepared to respond to young people who want to do something. They do not have to agree with every action a young person takes, but they should know how to respond constructively and how to support engagement rather than ridicule it.

At university, I also met professors who were very aware of climate change and understood its political dimensions. They took the issue seriously. At times, however, I sensed a certain hopelessness, , and dark humour seemed to be a way of coping. I am not sure how helpful that is for young people. It is important to be realistic, but realism without hope or support can easily pull people into despair.

That is why I think teachers and professors also need support. It is acceptable to feel worried or hopeless sometimes, but educators need ways to process their own emotions before they can help students process theirs.

7. What should a climate emotion toolkit offer to teachers and young people?

I think such a toolkit should not only help teachers support young people; it should also help teachers reflect on their own climate-related emotions. Climate change does not affect only young people. A teacher who is 50 today will still live with the consequences of climate change for decades. Some older adults were not raised with the idea that it is acceptable to feel anxious, worried or emotionally affected by global crises. That is why emotional literacy is important for teachers as well as pupils.

Teachers also need to know where to find reliable and balanced sources, including sources that offer hope without being naive. They need a healthy scepticism towards the idea that technological fixes alone will solve everything. It is important to see the bigger picture. If teachers can believe that meaningful action and adaptation are possible, young people may find it easier to believe that too.

I have often heard adults tell young people: “You are better than us; you will fix this.” But young people are usually not the ones with the most power. It is unfair to place the responsibility only on them. A toolkit should help teachers work with their own emotions and responsibilities, not only manage the emotions of pupils.

I would also strongly emphasise empathy and collaboration. Climate change will not affect all people equally. Some places will be hit harder than others, and climate migration will increasingly be part of our future. We must communicate about this honestly, but we must not use climate migration to villainise people. It is not their fault if some areas become difficult or impossible to live in.

If societies become segmented, fearful and hostile towards groups affected by climate impacts, that fear can feed exclusionary, authoritarian and even fascist narratives. That is why climate education should also teach empathy, solidarity and collaboration. The only way to go through climate change is collectively, not as isolated individuals.

8. How do you cope with climate anxiety and other difficult feelings connected with climate change?

It depends on my mood. In the bigger picture, there is not always much new information: I already have some understanding of how difficult the future may be. What helps me is looking for realistic alternative visions of the future.

For example, I follow the degrowth movement and other post-growth ideas. They offer ways of thinking about a different future, one that does not depend only on technology but also on structural changes in society. That gives me hope because it shows that the current path is not the only possible one.

It still frustrates me that these ideas are not discussed more widely. At the same time, whenever I see people questioning whether endless economic growth is the only path to prosperity, it gives me hope. I also read books and essays about climate doom. That may sound heavy, but for me it can put things into perspective and help me understand the scale of the challenge.

9. What is the key message you would like teachers, youth workers and institutions to take from this conversation?

Climate education needs more than information. It needs emotional honesty, realistic hope, empathy and collaboration. Young people should not be left alone with the responsibility to solve the climate crisis. Teachers, professionals and institutions also need to recognise their own emotions and responsibilities.

If we want young people to act, they need to feel that action is shared, meaningful and collective.

Interview conducted by: Branislav Trudić, Green and Youth Policy Adviser

This interview was prepared within the ClEmTo – The Climate Emotion Toolkit project, funded by the European Union. The views and opinions expressed in the interview are those of the interviewee only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Neither the European Union nor EACEA can be held responsible for the content of the interview.