International Day of Hope 2025

(This article was originally published on 10 July 2025 by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) on the SDG Knowledge Hub)

‍

This commentary is also available in French and German. See links below.

‍
By Tobias Brosch, Edward Mishaud, and Disa Sauter

“An elevator-pitch definition of fear might be a neurobiological process to keep us alive,” writes cultural historian Robert Peckham in his 2023 book, ‘Fear: An Alternative History of the World.’ Indeed, fear – that full-on jolt of adrenaline we feel throughout our body – has served humanity well. It kept our early ancestors alert to danger and ultimately enabled the human species to survive and evolve to where it is today.  

In modern times, negative emotions continue to play a key role in how we function and navigate our complicated and emotionally layered lives. Fear alerts us to immediate threats and rouses us to act, thanks to its urgency-inducing parameters. Fear, at its simplest, is the trigger of our fight-or-flight mode.

Sadly, our survival instinct and fear response struggle with far away events, those out on the horizon. The climate crisis and the breakdown of planetary life systems are two that come to mind. Hearing that the current year is the “hottest on record,” or that we continue to miss the Paris Agreement’s targets for reducing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, appears to have little impact in galvanizing the response that is so urgently needed.  

However, attempts to stir up fear, anger, or shock towards these topics and others point out the flipside of fear: too much of it can paralyze us, leading to inertia or emotional shutdown to avoid feeling overwhelmed. In some cases, well-intended communications and outreach campaigns have arguably prompted the opposite effect of what is desired. Instead of moving people into action, such strategies have provoked public backlash against the very organizations and individuals trying to create mobilization.  

While fear and other negative emotions have their rightful place in the communications and advocacy toolbox, relying on them exclusively is akin to having just one tool. A more diversified set of approaches is required to solve a problem. So, the question becomes, what other emotional tools are at our disposal, and how do we shift the emotional dial in a direction that triggers long-term engagement and concrete behavioral change?

Answers and clues to this question lie at the heart of a new global conversation on hope and other positive emotions, one that has prompted the UN to declare 12 July the International Day of Hope. The research and work we have been doing through our respective institutions and with our partners point to the need for more hope. This is not a fluffy, feelgood proposition, but one backed by facts.  

But first, why hope? Because hope is forward-looking. It depicts in our minds a picture of a future worth striving for, which can be a far more potent motivator over the long term than fear and doom alone. Hope offers a sense of possibility and helps overcome the desperate feeling that nothing we do will make a difference.  

Recent research in the field of affective science shows that, among positive emotions, hope packs a particularly strong punch in helping us find our way through challenges. What is more, the positive effect of hope appears to be nearly universal. Studies conducted across different cultures found virtually no cultural variation in the power of hope. That is a striking finding. It suggests that harnessing hope could be a globally resonant strategy, a rare emotional common denominator in a world that is in crisis.

Of course, hope on its own is not a panacea to the world’s ills. Used in isolation, hope can be just as off-putting and demotivating as fear. The notion of “false hope” – the kind that assumes “everything will work out on its own” or that “someone else will fix it” – isn’t the kind of hope we are advocating for. The hope we need is the belief in a positive future, paired with the willingness to work collectively towards change. This is the kind of “constructive hope” that, for instance, powered civil rights movements.

Importantly, the relevance and power of hope are now being recognized at the highest levels, notably through this first International Day of Hope. The resolution establishing it, adopted earlier in 2025, calls on UN Member States to recognize “the relevance of hope and well-being as universal goals and aspirations in the lives of human beings around the world, and the importance of their recognition in public policy objectives.”  

The International Day of Hope gives the necessary boost to mainstream the insights garnered on hope and the broader field of affective science into how emotions can drive change for people and the planet in the long term. Notably, the resolution clearly stands in opposition to the emotionally negative and psychologically disruptive tactics being used by different political movements to placate citizens into inaction. It encourages bringing what we know about emotions into the multilateral space, where it should be applied to negotiations and policymaking to overcome the growing gridlock and apathy in diplomacy.  

Crucially, the kind of hope being advocated for today is collective hope. It is not about lone individuals each feeling optimistic – it is about forging a shared sense of purpose and possibility. Climate activist and author Bill McKibben put it best: “the most important thing an individual can do is be somewhat less of an individual. Join together with others.”

On this inaugural International Day of Hope, let us take stock of our emotional toolkit. Fear will remain a useful resource, jolting us awake when complacency creeps in, but we need to lead with hope.  

This is our elevator pitch for hope. It is humanity’s other survival mechanism. Fear was a vital emotion that helped early humans survive and evolve, but hope will help us thrive.

* * *
‍

Tobias Brosch is a professor at the University of Geneva, where he holds the Chair for the Psychology of Sustainable Development.

Edward Mishaud is a senior advisor with the Beyond Lab at UN Geneva and leads its work on affective sciences.

Disa Sauter is an associate professor of psychology at the University of Amsterdam.