Exploring opportunities to integrate climate change into Gross National Happiness for Bhutan and its application for global wellbeing-centred Climate Resilient Development.

Exploring opportunities to integrate climate change into Gross National Happiness for Bhutan and its application for global wellbeing-centred Climate Resilient Development - PMC Skip to main content An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Here's how you know Search Log in Primary site navigation Search Log in Search PMC Full-Text Archive Search in PMC Journal List User Guide As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more: PMC Disclaimer | PMC Copyright Notice Environ Manage . 2026 May 28;76(6):196. doi: 10.1007/s00267-026-02501-5 Exploring opportunities to integrate climate change into Gross National Happiness for Bhutan and its application for global wellbeing-centred Climate Resilient Development Tashi Dorji 1, ✉ , Angus Morrison-Saunders 2, 3 , David Blake 2 Author information Article notes Copyright and License information 1 School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Perth, WA Australia 2 Centre for People Place and Planet, Edith Cowan University, Perth, WA Australia 3 Research Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa ✉ Corresponding author. Received 2025 Nov 20; Accepted 2026 May 5; Issue date 2026. © The Author(s) 2026 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . PMC Copyright notice PMCID: PMC13219176  PMID: 42209709 Abstract Climate change poses an increasing threat to human wellbeing, but despite this intricate relationship, addressing climate change rarely mainstreams wellbeing objectives. This study explores opportunities to integrate climate change into Bhutan’s development philosophy of Gross National Happiness (GNH) and examines how this experience can inform a wellbeing-centred global application through Climate Resilient Development (CRD). Using a qualitative design combining semi-structured interviews with 41 policy influencers in Bhutan, document analysis, and literature synthesis, this study identifies two complementary points of integration. The first involves identifying and then embedding climate-wellbeing stressors into the 9 domains and 33 GNH indicators used in the nationwide survey that constructs the GNH index. The second focuses on identifying and integrating climate-wellbeing stressors into the GNH screening tool through the 23 determinants used in assessing policies. Building on Bhutan’s GNH and climate experience, this study identifies six global pathways to operationalise wellbeing-centred CRD through strengthening governance and leadership, embedding wellbeing metrics into climate policy instruments, advancing knowledge pluralism and participatory co-production, linking local resilience to global frameworks, mobilising finance for wellbeing-oriented climate action, and multi-level integration. This study positions GNH as a globally relevant guide for transforming climate action towards human and planetary flourishing and offers an integrative approach for nations pursuing wellbeing objectives to combine these with climate action for holistic development. Its global relevance lies in offering a wellbeing-centred approach to CRD. Keywords: Bhutan, Climate change, Climate resilient development, Gross national happiness, Holistic development Introduction The intensifying impacts of climate change are reshaping the conditions for human wellbeing the world over (Lamb & Steinberger, 2017 ). Climate impacts like rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, biodiversity loss and the escalation of floods, droughts, and storms are causing disruptions beyond the material, and it is changing the way people experience the sense of security, belonging, and wellbeing (Adger et al., 2022 ). Taking note of the multidimensional impacts of climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2023 ) calls for a more holistic approach to addressing climate change in its 2022 Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). It advocates nations to embed equity, social justice, and human wellbeing into climate policy through Climate Resilient Development (CRD), which is a multidimensional process combining mitigation, adaptation, and sustainable development in an integrated manner to reduce systemic vulnerabilities while enhancing human and ecological wellbeing (Schipper et al., 2022 ). Nonetheless, translating wellbeing concepts into governance and policy practice remains a global challenge (Schipper et al., 2022 ). While a growing body of research recognises the links between climate change and human wellbeing, the literature remains fragmented across disciplines. Existing studies often examine specific dimensions—such as health impacts, livelihood disruptions, or psychological stress—in isolation rather than within an integrated framework of wellbeing (Adger et al., 2022 ; Doherty & Clayton, 2011 ). Similarly, adaptation and resilience scholarship emphasises the importance of social equity, local context, and diverse knowledge systems, including Indigenous and community-based approaches (Ensor et al., 2016 ; Schipper et al., 2022 ). However, these strands of research rarely converge into coherent models that embed wellbeing within climate governance systems. Consequently, there is limited practical guidance on how to operationalise climate–wellbeing linkages within national development frameworks and policy processes (O’Brien & Selboe, 2015 ). This gap highlights the need for integrative approaches that move beyond conceptual recognition towards actionable governance mechanisms that align wellbeing objectives with climate action. An initial phase of the broader research, of which this paper forms a final component, comprised two systematic literature reviews of global evidence on climate change and wellbeing (Dorji et al., 2023 , 2024 ), alongside two empirical studies examining Bhutan’s experience (Dorji et al., 2025 , 2026). Key findings from the first literature review (Dorji et al., 2023 ) reveals that climate change impacts on wellbeing are complex and multidimensional and calls for adaptation and resilience strategies that are socially just, locally grounded, context-specific, and holistic. Further, where Indigenous Peoples are involved, key additional climate change considerations for wellbeing and adaptation are that Indigenous Knowledge (IK) offers local and time-tested adaptive approaches for managing land, water, agriculture, and biodiversity to deal with climate impacts with substantial implications for wellbeing (Dorji et al., 2024 ). Integrating IK with climate change and wellbeing also warrants embracing more holistic approaches to development. Together, the two papers (Dorji et al., 2023 , 2024 ) show that wellbeing and resilience are mutually reinforcing—wellbeing of communities is more sustainable when it has the capacity to adapt, and communities adapt more effectively when wellbeing exists (Becvarik et al., 2025 ). This reciprocal relationship shows that wellbeing should be a core component in designing and assessing climate action contrary to the conventional separation of climate action and wellbeing studies (Adger et al., 2022 ). The insights point to the need to integrate climate change and wellbeing objectives by adopting strategies that are context-specific and socially equitable (Schipper et al., 2022 ). The empirical studies from Bhutan drew on insights from 41 policy influencers consisting of political leaders, civil servants, NGO representatives and media editors (further details in methodology section later). This included an evaluation of gross national happiness (GNH) as a development model and a governance tool in Bhutan (Dorji et al., 2025 ) and Bhutan’s experience with addressing climate change (Dorji et al., 2026 ). Key findings reveal both the promise and fragility of GNH in addressing climate change. While GNH provides a multidimensional and comprehensive governance framework embedding beyond-GDP dimensions like psychological wellbeing, time use, culture, and community vitality (Ura, 2022; Ura et al., 2012 Thinley and Hartz-Karp, 2019 ), its translation into practice is constrained by the absence of binding policy mechanisms, limited resources, and the inconsistent application of GNH. Moreover, it exposes Bhutan’s climate change paradox as the world’s only carbon negative country (Bhattarai, 2021 ) yet being highly vulnerable to climate impacts because of its location in the fragile Himalayan region (Hoy et al., 2015 ; Chhogyel et al., 2020 ) highlighting tensions between aspiration and exposure. The findings, therefore, points out that for GNH to realise its transformative potential to reframe climate change as a wellbeing issue, it must work towards a coherent integration of climate change and GNH. GNH represents Bhutan’s distinctive approach to development, positioning wellbeing as the central objective of governance (Ura, 2022; Ura et al., 2012 ,). Emerging in the 1970s and later embedded in Bhutan’s 2008 Constitution, GNH reflects a values-based philosophy grounded in holistic and collective notions of wellbeing (Thinley and Hartz-Karp, 2019 ; Ura, 2022 ). It is operationalised through a multidimensional framework comprising four pillars and measured using the GNH Index, which includes nine domains and 33 indicators capturing diverse aspects of human and societal wellbeing (Ugyel et al., 2023 ; Ura, 2022 ). Beyond measurement, GNH also functions as a governance tool, informing national planning processes and policy appraisal mechanisms. However, scholarship highlights persistent challenges in its practical implementation, including inconsistent application, limited institutionalisation, and tensions between wellbeing objectives and economic development priorities (Dorji et al., 2025 ). These characteristics underscore both the relevance of GNH and the need to strengthen its integration with climate change and wellbeing governance. This paper extends the foundations laid by the broader research on the relationship between climate change and wellbeing by examining how climate change can be coherently integrated with GNH. It addresses two research questions: (i) What are the opportunities to integrate climate change into the GNH framework? and, (ii) How to use the insights from Bhutan’s experience for global application of wellbeing-centred climate resilient development? The next section explains the research methodology, outlining the qualitative approach used to examine integration opportunities. It is followed by an integrated results and discussion section presenting findings for the two research questions, focusing on integrating climate change into GNH and its implications for global wellbeing-centred Climate Resilient Development (CRD). The conclusion summarises the key contributions and outlines implications for policy and future research. Methodology This paper employed a qualitative research design combining semi-structured interviews, document analysis and literature synthesis. Guided by the two research questions outlined previously, this section outlines the methods in two complementary components. Methods in integrating climate change into the GNH framework This component drew primarily on empirical evidence from Bhutan and document analysis. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Bhutan over two months in early 2024 with 41 policy influencers, including politicians, civil servants, NGO leaders, and media professionals. A detailed breakdown of participants by professional background and expertise is provided in Table 1 . Participants were selected using a purposive sampling approach, targeting individuals with direct experience and expertise in GNH and climate change, based on their roles in policy, governance, and public discourse. Data saturation was reached when no new themes or insights were emerging from additional interviews. The first author conducted all the interviews between February and April of 2024. The interviews pursued three lines of inquiry: (i) the efficacy of GNH application (reported in Dorji et al., 2025 ); (ii) Bhutan’s experience with addressing climate change (reported in Dorji et al., 2026 ); and (iii) opportunities for integrating climate change and GNH—which is the focus of this paper. These three lines of inquiry were designed to generate both contextual understanding and practical insights on the intersection of climate change and GNH. Table 1. The professional background and related expertise in climate change and GNH of the 41 participants Occupation/Profession Participant numbers Total 1. Civil Servants (S) 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 39, 40, 41 22 2. Politician (P) 2, 6, 9, 11, 13, 17, 22, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 40, 41 14 3. Non-government organisation (N) 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31, 35, 37, 38, 39 19 4. Media (M) 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 14, 16, 19, 21, 28, 30, 32 13 Expertise 1. GNH (G) 8, 20, 21, 29, 30, 35, 41 7 2. Climate change 1, 12, 15,18, 23, 24, 25, 26, 31, 33, 36, 39, 41 13 Open in a new tab For this paper, the interview data were analysed thematically in NVivo 12 (Phillips & Lu, 2018 ) to identify opportunities for integrating climate change into the GNH framework and informing its global application through CRD. The analysis followed an inductive coding process, where relevant responses were first coded and then grouped into categories based on similarities. These categories were further refined into sub-themes and overarching themes that captured key integration entry points. The themes derived from the interviews were used to establish the rationale for integration and identify key entry points—particularly the GNH Index and the GNH Policy Screening Tool—which guided the subsequent document analysis. The data were also re-analysed to identify broader governance and implementation themes, which were compared with CRD principles from the IPCC literature, leading to the development of six pathways for operationalising wellbeing-centred CRD. Towards integrating climate change into the GNH framework, a qualitative document analysis (Bowen, 2009 ) of peer-reviewed literature was conducted to identify the relationship between each of the 33 indicators and climate change. To accomplish this, the first step involved searching articles indexed in Scopus and Google Scholar using combinations of the keywords “climate change” OR “global warming” AND “Bhutan” AND each indicator term. Scopus was selected to ensure the retrieval of strictly peer-reviewed literature, while Google Scholar was additionally used to capture both peer-reviewed and relevant grey literature, thereby broadening the evidence base. For each indicator term, the first 10 most relevant results were reviewed to establish the climate–wellbeing relationship. Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed or high-quality grey literature, written in English, and demonstrated explicit or inferable linkages between climate change and the relevant GNH indicators or determinants, while duplicates, non-English sources, low-rigour materials, and irrelevant studies were excluded. The analysis followed a clearly defined stepwise thematic procedure. First, relevant studies were reviewed to extract evidence on how climate change influenced each GNH indicator, and these relationships were recorded (column 4, Table 2 ). Second, climate-related stressors—such as temperature trends, rainfall variability, and species range shifts—were identified and coded in NVivo (column 5, Table 2 ). Third, an inductive coding process was applied, whereby similar stressors were grouped into categories based on conceptual similarities. Fourth, these categories were iteratively refined and synthesised into higher-order themes, resulting in harmonised climate–wellbeing stressors (Table 3 ). This process reduced overlapping stressors into a smaller set of analytically coherent themes. Finally, these harmonised stressors were mapped onto each relevant indicator to complete the integration process. A schematic diagram (Fig. 1 ) illustrates each step of this analytical process to enhance clarity and replicability. Table 2. Relationship between 9 domains, 33 indicators of GNH and climate change, and harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors that could be integrated into each indicator 9 Domains 33 Indicators Relationship with Climate Change Climate-related stressors defining the relationship between the indicator and climate change Harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors to be integrated into the indicator 1. Ecological diversity & resilience Wildlife change Rising temperatures and altered monsoon rainfall are shifting vegetation zones and species ranges, leading to increased human–wildlife conflict and biodiversity stress (Penjor et al., 2022 ; Sharma et al., 2020 ; Chhogyel et al., 2020 ) Temperature trend, rainfall variability, and species-range shift variables Temperature Stress; Hydro-climatic Variability; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress Urbanisation issues Climate-driven crop failures, water scarcity, and land degradation accelerate rural-to-urban migration and expose urban areas to floods and heat stress from extreme rainfall (Jamtsho et al., 2025 ; Chhetri et al., 2024b ) Precipitation intensity, flood recurrence, and migration pressure variables Hydro-climatic Variability; Disaster Hazard Exposure; Migration & Displacement Pressure Responsibility to environment Increasing forest-fire frequency, prolonged dry seasons, and water scarcity weaken traditional conservation ethics and limit adaptive stewardship (Chhetri et al., 2024b ; Delma et al., 2024 ) Forest-fire incidence, drought duration, and water-availability index Disaster Hazard Exposure; Hydro-climatic Variability; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress Ecological issues Glacial retreat, erratic monsoons, and slope instability increase soil erosion and sedimentation, threatening hydropower and agricultural productivity (Lama et al., 2024 ; Khandu et al., 2022 ) Embed glacial-melt rate, landslide frequency, soil-erosion index, and river-sediment load Glacial & Cryosphere Change; Disaster Hazard Exposure; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress 2. Psychological wellbeing Life satisfaction Climate-induced livelihood insecurity from floods, droughts, and crop failure reduces perceived happiness and stability, leading to declining life satisfaction (Kamei et al., 2020 ; Thinley & Hartz-Karp, 2019 ). Livelihood security, disaster-recovery stability, and income-loss frequency Livelihood & Income Instability; Disaster Hazard Exposure; Psychosocial & Emotional Stress Positive emotions Extreme weather events, displacement, and livelihood loss increase fear, anxiety, and trauma while reducing optimism and emotional stability (Wouters & Dema, 2024 ; Chhetri, et al., 2024a ) Stress frequency, coping capacity, and post-disaster emotional recovery Psychosocial & Emotional Stress; Disaster Hazard Exposure Negative emotions Spirituality Glacial retreat, floods, and landslides damage sacred sites and interrupt rituals, weakening spiritual connection to nature and cultural landscapes (Dorji, 2024 ; Yangzom & Wouters, 2024 ; Phanchung et al., 2022 ) Sacred-site vulnerability, ritual disruption frequency, and landscape loss Infrastructure Disruption; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress; Disaster Hazard Exposure 3. Health Self-reported health status Increasing temperature, heatwaves, and water contamination heighten risks of heat stress, diarrhoeal disease, and vector-borne illnesses, affecting overall perceived health (Chhetri et al., 2024a ; Ruby et al., 2025 ) Temperature rise, heatwave exposure, and vector-borne disease incidence Temperature Stress; Health & Disease Risk Healthy days Extreme weather, pollution, and food insecurity reduce the number of days individuals feel physically and mentally healthy (Chhetri, et al., 2024a ; Ruby et al., 2025 ). Air-quality index, extreme-temperature frequency, and food-security stability Health & Disease Risk; Temperature Stress; Livelihood & Income Instability Disability Floods, landslides, and related disasters cause injuries and long-term disabilities, particularly in rural communities with limited health infrastructure (Dhimal et al., 2021 ; Chhetri, et al., 2024a ) Disaster-related injury frequency, rehabilitation access, and infrastructure damage Disaster Hazard Exposure; Infrastructure Disruption Mental health Displacement, livelihood loss, and recurring disasters lead to psychological distress, depression, and trauma in affected populations (Chhetri, et al., 2024a ; Ruby et al., 2025 ) Disaster-related trauma, stress prevalence, and psychosocial support availability Psychosocial & Emotional Stress; Migration & Displacement Pressure 4. Time Use Work Climate disasters disrupt normal work routines, increase recovery time, and require additional labour for resource collection such as water and firewood (Kjellstrom et al., 2017 ; Nilsson & Kjellstrom, 2010 ). Disaster-recovery time, resource-collection duration, and work disruption frequency Disaster Hazard Exposure; Livelihood & Income Instability Sleep Heatwaves, displacement, and post-disaster stress reduce sleep quality and duration, affecting rest and recovery (Rifkin et al., 2018 ; Gaston et al., 2023 ). Night-time temperature variation, disaster displacement, and stress-induced sleep disruption Temperature Stress; Psychosocial & Emotional Stress 5. Education Literacy Floods, landslides, and infrastructure damage from extreme weather disrupt access to schools, especially in rural areas, limiting opportunities for literacy development (Katel et al., 2025 ; Thapa, 2024 ). School-closure frequency, infrastructure damage, and education-interruption days Infrastructure Disruption; Disaster Hazard Exposure Schooling Climate-related disasters cause displacement and reduced school attendance due to damaged facilities and unsafe travel routes (Katel et al., 2025 ; Thapa, 2024 ). Disaster-related absenteeism, education-access stability, and infrastructure recovery time Infrastructure Disruption; Disaster Hazard Exposure Knowledge Loss of local ecological knowledge from ecosystem degradation weakens communities’ adaptive capacity and climate awareness (Katel et al., 2025 ; Thapa, 2024 ). Traditional-knowledge continuity, climate-literacy level, adaptive-learning inclusion Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress; Health & Disease Risk Values Environmental degradation and exposure to climate risks reshape ecological ethics and pro-environmental attitudes among youth (Thapa, 2024 ; Delma et al., 2024 ). Climate-awareness level, ecological-value perception, sustainability-attitude index Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress; Psychosocial & Emotional Stress 6. Cultural diversity & resilience Zorig chusum (local arts and crafts) skills Scarcity of natural raw materials such as wood, pigments, and bamboo caused by droughts, forest fires, and resource depletion affects the continuity of traditional craftsmanship (Granfelt, 2014 ; Honwad et al., 2020 ) Raw-material availability, forest-resource stress, production loss rate Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress; Hydro-climatic Variability Cultural participation Extreme weather events and disasters disrupt religious festivals, community gatherings, and cultural events, reducing participation and continuity of cultural expressions (Garcia, 2019 ; Granfelt, 2014 ). Festival disruption frequency, event-cancellation rate, recovery duration Disaster Hazard Exposure; Infrastructure Disruption Speak native language Climate-induced migration from rural to urban areas reduces intergenerational language transmission and weakens linguistic diversity (Garcia, 2019 ; Granfelt, 2014 ). Migration-induced language shift, community-retention rate, Migration & Displacement Pressure Driglam Namzha (code of etiquettes) Damage to monasteries and heritage sites from floods and landslides threatens the preservation of etiquette-based practices and traditional learning spaces (Garcia, 2019 ; Allison, 2004 ). Heritage-site vulnerability, restoration frequency Infrastructure Disruption; Disaster Hazard Exposure 7. Good governance Political participation Climate disasters and displacement reduce citizens’ ability to engage in political processes and community decision-making, particularly in remote and hazard-prone regions (Bisht, 2013 ; Moore et al., 2024 ) Disaster-displacement frequency, participation disruption days Disaster Hazard Exposure; Migration & Displacement Pressure Services Floods, landslides, and extreme events interrupt delivery of essential public services such as health, education, and utilities, especially in rural communities (Katel et al., 2025 ; Bisht, 2013 ) Service-interruption frequency, infrastructure recovery time, and public-service resilience Infrastructure Disruption; Disaster Hazard Exposure Governance performance Institutional credibility and trust are influenced by the government’s ability to respond effectively to climate impacts and disasters (Penjor et al., 2022 ; Katel et al., 2025 ) Disaster-response efficiency, adaptation-policy implementation, and institutional-resilience rating Disaster Hazard Exposure; Livelihood & Income Instability Fundamental rights Relocation, food insecurity, and resource scarcity during disasters threaten equitable access to rights, justice, and security (Katel et al., 2025 ; Bisht, 2013 ). Displacement rate, resource-access inequality, and rights-protection under climate stress Migration & Displacement Pressure; Livelihood & Income Instability 8. Community vitality Donation (time and money) Recurrent climate disasters increase the need for community donations and volunteerism but also strain household resources, reducing capacity for charitable giving (Yangzom & Wouters, 2024 ; Phanchung et al., 2022 ) Disaster-frequency, volunteer-response rate, and donation-capacity Disaster Hazard Exposure; Livelihood & Income Instability Safety Extreme weather, landslides, and floods heighten perceived and real threats to life, property, and public spaces, reducing feelings of personal safety (Yangka et al, 2018 ; Penjor et al., 2022 ) Disaster-risk exposure, injury and fatality rate, and infrastructure-vulnerability Disaster Hazard Exposure; Infrastructure Disruption Community relationship Floods, landslides, and agricultural losses disrupt communal events and traditional cooperation systems, weakening trust and mutual support networks (Gyeltshen et al., 2025 ; Penjor et al., 2022 ) Community-cooperation rate, collective-action participation, and recovery-coordination Disaster Hazard Exposure; Livelihood & Income Instability Family Climate-induced displacement, migration, and economic stress divide families and reduce intergenerational care and emotional support (Katel et al., 2025 ; Gyeltshen et al., 2025 ). Migration-related separation, livelihood-stress index, and family-support stability Migration & Displacement Pressure; Livelihood & Income Instability 9. Living standard Household per capita income Climate-related crop loss, livestock mortality, and water scarcity reduce farm income and employment opportunities, particularly in rural and subsistence sectors (Katel et al., 2025 ; Chhogyel et al., 2020 ). Income-loss frequency, agricultural-yield fluctuation, and livelihood diversification Livelihood & Income Instability; Hydro-climatic Variability Assets Floods, landslides, and windstorms destroy physical assets such as houses, livestock, and productive land, lowering household security and recovery capacity (Chhogyel et al., 2020 ; Khandu et al., 2022 ). Asset-damage index, insurance-coverage level, and asset-recovery time Disaster Hazard Exposure; Infrastructure Disruption Housing Intense rainfall, heatwaves, and storms damage housing infrastructure, water systems, and sanitation, particularly among low-income families (Chhogyel et al., 2020 ; Khandu et al., 2022 ). Housing-resilience score, storm-damage frequency Infrastructure Disruption; Temperature Stress; Disaster Hazard Exposure Open in a new tab Table 3. The 10 harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors and the grouped climate stressors Harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors Constituents of the harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors comprising thematically grouped climate-related stressors (from column 5, Table 1 ) 1. Temperature Stress Temperature trend; heatwaves; night-time temperature variation; extreme-temperature frequency 2. Hydro-climatic Variability Rainfall variability; precipitation intensity; drought; drought duration; water scarcity; water-availability index; fluctuating river flows 3. Disaster Hazard Exposure Floods; flood recurrence; landslides; storms; forest fires; forest-fire incidence; GLOF risk; disaster frequency; storm-damage frequency; injury/fatality rate 4. Glacial & Cryosphere Change Glacial melt rate; glacial retreat; snowline shift; glacial-lake expansion 5. Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress Habitat degradation; species-range shifts; forest decline; soil-erosion index; river-sediment load; loss of ecosystem services; raw-material availability; forest-resource stress 6. Livelihood & Income Instability Crop loss; agricultural yield fluctuation; livestock mortality; income-loss frequency; livelihood security; food price shocks; market disruption; livelihood-stress index 7. Infrastructure Disruption Damage to homes, schools, bridges, health facilities; infrastructure damage; service interruption frequency; infrastructure recovery time; damage to heritage sites 8. Migration & Displacement Pressure Rural–urban migration; migration pressure; climate-induced relocation; migration-related separation; family fragmentation; community fragmentation 9. Health & Disease Risk Heat illness; heatwave exposure days; vector-borne diseases; vector-borne disease incidence; waterborne diseases; pollution exposure; air-quality index 10. Psychosocial & Emotional Stress Anxiety, trauma, disaster-related stress; post-disaster emotional recovery; fear; grief from loss; spiritual distress; stress prevalence; coping capacity Open in a new tab Fig. 1. Open in a new tab Stepwise process of qualitative document analysis for integrating climate change into Bhutan’s GNH framework. The figure illustrates the sequential process from literature search and study selection to data extraction, coding, categorisation, thematic synthesis, and integration mapping. The process results in the development of harmonised climate–wellbeing stressors, which are embedded into GNH indicators (measurement) and policy screening determinants (evaluation). To extend the analysis from measurement to policy application, a similar document analysis process was applied to the 23 determinants of the GNH Policy Screening Tool (Penjore, 2008 ). Using the same search strategy, selection criteria, and analytical steps, literature was reviewed to establish the relationship between each determinant and climate change. Climate stressors defining this relationship were recorded and analysed in NVivo (Table 4 ). To ensure consistency and avoid duplication, the stressors identified at the determinant level were aligned with the previously developed harmonised climate–wellbeing stressors ensuring a unified analytical framework across both components. Integrating these harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors into the determinants transforms the GNH Policy Screening Tool into a climate-GNH policy screening mechanism. Together, these analyses constitute the empirical foundation for identifying key entry points for integrating climate change into Bhutan’s GNH framework. Table 4. Relationship between 23 determinants of the GNH policy screening tool and climate change, and harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors that could be integrated into each determinant Determinant Relationship with Climate Change Climate stressors defining the relationship between the determinant and climate change Harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors to be integrated into the determinant 1. Pollution Air pollution and greenhouse-gas emissions contribute to climate change and affect public health (Chhogyel & Kumar, 2018 ) Greenhouse-gas emission rate, air-quality index, waste and effluent levels, pollution-exposure days. Health & Disease Risk; Temperature Stress; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress 2. Biodiversity Climate change drives habitat loss and species decline, weakening ecosystem services (Banerjee & Bandopadhyay, 2016 ) Habitat-fragmentation rate, species-migration trend, ecosystem-restoration progress, forest-cover change Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress; Hydro-climatic Variability 3. Nature Deforestation, soil degradation, and water scarcity are intensified by climatic shifts (Banerjee & Bandopadhyay, 2016 ; Yangka et al., 2018 ) Forest-cover loss, soil-erosion index, watershed-restoration progress Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress; Hydro-climatic Variability 4. Health Heat stress, vector-borne diseases, and malnutrition rise with temperature and rainfall changes (Chhetri, et al., 2024a ; Ruby et al., 2025 ) Temperature anomaly, vector-borne disease incidence, malnutrition prevalence, heatwave exposure days Health & Disease Risk; Temperature Stress 5. Security Floods, droughts, and landslides threaten human safety, food, and water security (Lama et al., 2024 ; Khandu et al., 2022 ) Disaster-frequency, food-security index, water-availability variability Disaster Hazard Exposure; Hydro-climatic Variability; Livelihood & Income Instability 6. Productivity Extreme weather disrupts agriculture, energy supply, and labour capacity (Sharma et al., 2020 ; Chhogyel et al., 2020 ) Agricultural-yield fluctuation, renewable-energy performance, work-disruption frequency Livelihood & Income Instability; Hydro-climatic Variability; Disaster Hazard Exposure 7. Equity Climate impacts are unevenly distributed, widening social and gender inequalities (Yangka et al., 2018 ) Gender-differentiated vulnerability, income-loss disparity, access-to-adaptation resources Livelihood & Income Instability; Migration & Displacement Pressure 8. Participation Participatory governance enhances adaptive decision-making and social resilience (Bisht, 2013 ; Moore et al., 2024 ) Stakeholder-engagement rate, local-climate-planning participation, policy-coherence Governance-related Stress (via Infrastructure Disruption + Disaster Hazard Exposure); Psychosocial & Emotional Stress 9. Family Climate migration and economic stress weaken family and community cohesion (Katel et al., 2025 ; Gyeltshen et al., 2025 ) Migration-induced separation rate, livelihood-stress index, family-support stability Migration & Displacement Pressure; Livelihood & Income Instability; Psychosocial & Emotional Stress 10. Recreation Heat and pollution reduce outdoor safety and quality of recreational spaces (Katel et al., 2025 ; Thapa, 2024 ) Urban-heat index, air-pollution exposure, green-space availability Temperature Stress; Health & Disease Risk; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress 11. Values Environmental change influences ethical views and sustainability attitudes (Delma et al., 2024 ). Climate-awareness level, environmental-ethics perception, sustainability-attitude. Psychosocial & Emotional Stress; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress 12. Material Disasters cause loss of assets, housing, and livelihood resources (Katel et al., 2025 ) Asset-damage index, housing-resilience score, livelihood-recovery time Infrastructure Disruption; Disaster Hazard Exposure; Livelihood & Income Instability 13. Stress Uncertainty and disaster trauma increase psychological distress (Chhetri, et al., 2024a ; Ruby et al., 2025 ) Disaster-induced stress prevalence, trauma-recovery duration, access to psychosocial-support services Psychosocial & Emotional Stress; Disaster Hazard Exposure 14. Learning Climate literacy improves preparedness and adaptive capacity (Katel et al., 2025 ; Thapa, 2024 ) Climate-change curriculum coverage, adaptive-learning participation, public-awareness Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress; Health & Disease Risk; Hydro-climatic Variability 15. Information Access to hazard and early-warning information strengthens community safety (Katel et al., 2025 ; Thapa, 2024 ) Early-warning dissemination rate, communication reach, hazard-information reliability Disaster Hazard Exposure; Infrastructure Disruption 16. Anti-corruption Transparent climate-finance governance builds trust in adaptation programs (Dorji et al., 2025 ) Climate-finance transparency, audit frequency, adaptation-fund accountability Governance-related Stress (subset of Infrastructure Disruption; Disaster Hazard Exposure) 17. Rights Displacement and resource scarcity raise risks to property and social rights (Yangka et al., 2018 ) Relocation-safeguard effectiveness, property-loss compensation rate, rights-protection mechanisms Migration & Displacement Pressure; Livelihood & Income Instability 18. Judiciary Access Access to justice ensures redress for environmental and climate harms (Turner & Ahuja, 2021 ) Grievance-redress frequency, environmental-case resolution time, accessibility of climate-litigation processes Governance-related Stress (via Infrastructure Disruption) 19. Judiciary Effectiveness Enforcement of climate and environmental laws determines compliance (Turner & Ahuja, 2021 ) Environmental-law enforcement rate, case-resolution efficiency, climate governance institutional-capacity Governance-related Stress; Infrastructure Disruption 20. Culture Climate hazards threaten heritage sites and cultural continuity (Granfelt, 2014 ; Honwad et al., 2020 ) Heritage-site vulnerability, disaster-damage frequency, restoration-success rate Infrastructure Disruption; Disaster Hazard Exposure; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress 21. Spirituality Loss of sacred landscapes affects spiritual wellbeing and environmental ethics (Yangzom & Wouters, 2024 ; Phanchung et al., 2022 ) Sacred-site vulnerability, ritual-disruption frequency, eco-spirituality participation Psychosocial & Emotional Stress; Infrastructure Disruption; Ecosystem & Biodiversity Stress 22. Discrimination Vulnerable groups face disproportionate climate risks and recovery barriers (Johnson, 2023 ) Gender- and disability-sensitive adaptation metrics, recovery-time disparities, and inclusion indices Equity-related: Migration & Displacement Pressure; Livelihood & Income Instability; Health & Disease Risk 23. Support Social solidarity and mutual aid enhance community adaptation (Yangzom & Wouters, 2024 ; Phanchung et al., 2022 ) Volunteer-response rate, community-network strength, and social-safety-net coverage Community Stress: Psychosocial & Emotional Stress; Livelihood & Income Instability; Disaster Hazard Exposure Open in a new tab Methods in developing global application of wellbeing-centred CRD In choosing CRD as the mechanism for global application of climate change and wellbeing, a range of existing frameworks with the potential to integrate climate change and wellbeing were considered including sustainable development, resilience thinking, adaptive governance, the wellbeing economy, and Doughnut Economics. However, our choice of CRD was influenced mainly by the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (Schipper et al., 2022 ; IPCC, 2023 ), which offers it as an ideal framework towards ecological and human wellbeing (Schipper et al., 2022 ) and thus provides the conceptual and operational basis for translating Bhutan’s experience into a globally applicable approach. To operationalise this translation, the empirical findings from Bhutan and the interview data were re-analysed and coded to identify conceptual resonances between GNH and CRD, assess transferability, and identify themes for global application (Braun & Clarke, 2006 ). For global application, themes representing GNH’s implementation challenges, governance processes, institutional structures, and wellbeing outcomes (Dorji et al., 2025 ) were systematically compared to CRD’s enabling conditions outlined in the IPCC (Schipper et al., 2022 ) and global academic literature (Sánchez & Fernández, 2024 ; Doherty & Clayton, 2011 ; McPherson & Clarke, 2024 ; McKenna, 2017 ; Juhola et al., 2022 ; Calvet et al., 2022 ; Adger et al., 2022 ). The harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors derived earlier provided the substantive content through which climate–wellbeing linkages were interpreted when comparing GNH with CRD. This comparative analysis identified conceptual overlaps, convergent patterns, and gaps between GNH and CRD and it resulted in the emergence of six recurring and mutually reinforcing themes as outlined in the results and discussion section. These themes formed the principal integrative mechanism linking GNH and CRD for global application. Finally, a transferability assessment (Wenger & Olden, 2012 ) was adopted to evaluate the extent to which insights from Bhutan’s GNH framework can be applied to other contexts, based on criteria such as conceptual resonance, institutional compatibility, and operational feasibility as outlined in the section titled 'limitations and challenges of transferability'. Results and discussion This section presents the findings organised around the two research questions, with interpretation integrated to highlight their analytical and policy relevance. Exploring opportunities to integrate climate change into the GNH framework for Bhutan Two entry points to integrate climate change into the GNH framework were identified; firstly, through the 9 domains and 33 indicators of GNH that guide national policy, and secondly, through the GNH policy screening tools that assess all policies in Bhutan. Integrating climate change into the 9 domains and 33 indicators of GNH Most ( n = 35, 85%) of the policy influencers interviewed expressed a clear view that the climate change is conceptually embedded within the GNH philosophy through the pillar of environment conservation, and they did not see climate change as a divorced idea from GNH. However, most agreed that it is time for Bhutan to explicitly and more systematically integrate climate change into the GNH framework. A former prime minister and a global authority on GNH described the GNH index as a dynamic and flexible construct, remarking that: “The time has come for GNH to address climate change more directly and explicitly. Although the idea of climate change has always been infused into GNH, it was not a central concern. But it should be.” Interviewees consistently identified the national GNH survey as the most direct and practical entry point for such integration. The survey constructs the GNH Index that guides national policy and planning in Bhutan (Ura et al., 2012 ). It is organised into 9 domains and 33 indicators representing multidimensional wellbeing (Thinley & Hartz, 2019). Participants explained that if these indicators incorporated climate-related stressors, Bhutan could operationalise climate-responsive wellbeing without altering GNH’s philosophical intent. Building on these interview insights, this study identifies how climate change can be integrated into the GNH measurement framework by linking climate-wellbeing stressors to the existing indicators. Table 2 presents the outcome of this analysis. Columns 2 and 3 lists the 9 GNH domains and 33 indicators. The fourth column (“relationship with climate change”) summarises the findings on how each indicator is influenced by climate change, while Column 5 lists the climate related stressors influencing this relationship. An examination of these stressors reveals patterns of similarity, overlap, and interconnection across indicators, indicating that climate change affects multiple dimensions of wellbeing in a systemic manner. These overlapping stressors are synthesised into higher-level harmonised climate–wellbeing stressors (Column 6), which provide a structured basis for integration. For example, the harmonised stressor ‘temperature stress’ (row 2 in Table 3 ) combines temperature trend (from the indicator ‘wildlife change’), heatwaves (self-reported health status), night-time temperature variation (sleep), and extreme-temperature frequency (healthy days). This consolidation highlights how diverse climate impacts converge into common stressors affecting wellbeing. This process reduced the 93 climate stressors identified earlier into the 10 harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors in Table 3 . Finally, for each indicator, the relevant climate-wellbeing stressors were mapped resulting in each indicator having 1-3 harmonised stressors for integration (column 6 in Table 2 , and Fig. 2 ). Fig. 2. Open in a new tab Integration of climate-wellbeing stressors into the 9 domains and 33 GNH indicators: The figure presents a layered structure of the Gross National Happiness (GNH) framework. The innermost circle represents the GNH core, followed by concentric rings displaying the 9 domains and their associated 33 indicators. Surrounding these, are up to three coloured outer rings, which collectively represent the harmonised climate–wellbeing stressors identified in this study. These outer rings do not represent hierarchical levels or distinct categories; rather, they are used for visual clarity to display multiple stressors associated with each indicator. The placement of stressors within these rings does not follow any specific order or organisational logic. Instead, the stressors are distributed across the rings simply to illustrate their relevance to each of the 33 indicators, with each indicator linked to between one and three relevant stressors. The figure therefore demonstrates how climate–wellbeing stressors can be systematically mapped onto the GNH framework, enabling the integration of climate change considerations into all dimensions of wellbeing. (Figure source: developed by authors) In this way, all 33 indicators can integrate the harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors that influence wellbeing (Table 2 , Fig. 2 ). The intention here is not merely to list correlations between indicators and climate-wellbeing stressor but to operationalise the process of integration by specifying how it can be embedded within the GNH framework. For example, in the ecological diversity domain, the wildlife change indicator could integrate temperature stress, hydro-climatic variability, and ecosystem and biodiversity. In the psychological wellbeing domain, the life satisfaction indicator could integrate livelihood and income instability; disaster hazard exposure; and psychosocial and emotional stress. Likewise, all the 33 indicators can embed the 10 harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors (Table 2 , Fig. 2 ). Empirically, our approach demonstrates that climate change interacts with all dimensions of wellbeing, extending beyond the ecological domain. Analytically, it provides a structured evidence base for enhancing the GNH survey instruments into a climate-responsive wellbeing index. These insights highlight that GNH offers an existing institutional scaffold through which climate and wellbeing can be jointly monitored and evaluated, enabling Bhutan to align national happiness metrics with adaptation and resilience objectives as advocated by Thinley & Hartz-Karp ( 2019 ) and Ura et al. ( 2012 ). Overall, this section demonstrates that climate change can be systematically embedded within each of the 33 indicators—and by extension across all nine domains—to transform the GNH Index into a climate-responsive wellbeing framework. While the current study limits itself to conceptual identification rather than operational execution, it establishes a strong analytical foundation for future research to test and refine these proposed indicators. The following section extends this analysis by examining the second point of integration—the incorporation of climate variables into the GNH Policy Screening Tool—thus moving from measurement to policy application. Integrating climate change into the GNH Policy Screening Tool Many interviewees pointed out that the next entry point for integrating climate change into the GNH framework is through the GNH Policy Screening Tool. Whereas the first approach embeds climate-wellbeing stressors within the measurement system of the GNH Index, this second focuses on embedding climate sensitivity into Bhutan’s policy-evaluation and decision-making process. Together, they represent complementary mechanisms: one measures climate–wellbeing outcomes, and the other governs policy coherence and implementation. The GNH Policy Screening Guidelines (Penjore, 2008 ) stipulate that all new proposed national policies must undergo evaluation before adoption (Ura et al., 2012 ). A multistakeholder team of experts applies a scoring system, and proposals must reach a minimum threshold score for approval (Thinley & Hartz-Karp, 2019 ). The tool currently uses 23 determinants that capture cross-sectoral wellbeing dimensions derived from the 9 GNH domains (Penjore, 2008 ). Although determinants such as pollution, biodiversity, and nature partially reflect environmental concerns, they do not fully account for the wide-ranging impacts of climate change. This limitation provides a clear opportunity to strengthen the tool’s ability to assess climate–wellbeing linkages in policy appraisal. To operationalise this enhancement, a qualitative document analysis was undertaken to identify climate-wellbeing stressors thematically relevant to each of the 23 determinants. Peer-reviewed academic literature was reviewed to determine how climate change influences each determinant and to identify climate-wellbeing stressors that could be integrated into the existing screening framework. This process mirrored the approach used in exploring integration of climate change into the GNH measurement, where climate-wellbeing stressors were thematically aligned to the 33 GNH indicators, ensuring methodological consistency in both cases. As in the case of integration with the 33 GNH indicators, the initially broad list of climate stressors was consolidated into the same ten harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors to ensure conceptual coherence across the two integration approaches. Using the same harmonised stressor categories for both indicators and determinants enhances analytical clarity and allows the screening tool to evaluate policies against climate impacts in a consistent and non-duplicative manner. The results are presented in Table 4 , which maps the relationship between each determinant and climate change, together with the specific climate-wellbeing stressors to be integrated into each determinant. For instance, the determinant “pollution” can include stressors such as health and disease risk; temperature stress; and ecosystem and biodiversity stress; “biodiversity” and “nature” can integrate ecosystem and biodiversity stress; and hydro-climatic variability. By aligning these with the harmonised stressors, the screening tool can systematically assess how proposed policies influence key climate–wellbeing pressures—such as exposure to hazards, infrastructure disruption, ecosystem degradation, health risks, and psychosocial stress. These additions would enhance the screening tool to assess not only the wellbeing implications of proposed policies but also their climate impacts and contributions to national resilience. The relationship between the 23 determinants discussed here and the 33 indicators presented earlier is complementary rather than duplicative. The indicators measure population-level wellbeing outcomes, whereas the determinants serve as policy-evaluation criteria derived from those same domains. Aligning the determinants with the climate-wellbeing stressors, therefore, complements the indicator-level integration by ensuring that policies are evaluated for climate–wellbeing coherence, while survey indicators track the resulting impacts. Together, they provide a comprehensive system through which Bhutan can integrate, implement, and monitor climate-responsive wellbeing. Embedding climate-wellbeing stressors into the Screening Tool would also align Bhutan’s policy architecture with its international obligations. It would directly connect GNH policy evaluation to the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the National Adaptation Plan (NAP), and Bhutan’s carbon-neutral pledge (Yangka et al., 2018 ), while reinforcing the principles of the IPCC’s CRD framework that prioritises equity, justice, and human wellbeing (Schipper et al., 2022 ). This enhancement would transform the GNH Screening Tool into a dual-purpose mechanism—evaluating both wellbeing and climate outcomes—and position Bhutan as a model for integrating national happiness with global climate accountability. Global application of wellbeing-centred CRD Given that GNH is unique to Bhutan (Ura et al., 2012 ), it is appropriate to consider other relevant mechanisms that might be utilised by other nations to integrate climate change and wellbeing. Different frameworks were considered including sustainable development (Ruggerio, 2021 ), resilience thinking (Walsh-Dilley et al., 2016 ), adaptive governance (Munaretto et al., 2014 ), the wellbeing economy (Hensher, 2023 ), and Doughnut Economics (Wahlund & Hansen, 2022 ), but CRD was chosen given its endorsement by the IPCC (Schipper et al., 2022 ; IPCC, 2023 ). The IPCC defines CRD as a multidimensional process combining mitigation, adaptation, and sustainable development in an integrated manner to reduce systemic vulnerabilities while enhancing human and ecological wellbeing within planetary limits (Schipper et al., 2022 , p. 2657). Both CRD and GNH treat wellbeing not as an outcome but as the core objective of development, consistent with the view of O’Brien and Selboe ( 2015 ) that transformative adaptation requires re-imagining what it means to thrive under climate uncertainty. The concept of CRD marks a shift from reactive climate adaptation to the integration of climate action with social justice and sustainable wellbeing (Schipper et al., 2022 , IPCC, 2023 ). This section positions Bhutan’s integration of climate-wellbeing stressors into both measurement (GNH Index) and policy appraisal (Screening Tool) as complementary mechanisms that translate climate–wellbeing linkages into practice. By linking the climate-wellbeing stressors to CRD’s enabling conditions – governance and leadership, metrics, knowledge, resilience, finance, and multi-level integration – Bhutan provides an adaptable model for embedding wellbeing into global CRD. Operationalising a wellbeing-centred approach to CRD Operationalising a wellbeing-centred approach to CRD requires translating the intersecting climate–wellbeing content presented in Tables 2 and 4 into institutional, policy, and implementation processes. The harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors identified earlier represent the core substantive material through which climate change affects human wellbeing. These stressors outline what must be integrated into CRD, while the six pathways described in this section outline how CRD can be constructed to embed that content. The pathways are sequenced deliberately, beginning with governance and leadership, followed by metrics, knowledge, resilience, finance, and multi-level integration, reflecting a logical progression from institutional foundations to enabling conditions. First, effective wellbeing-centred CRD requires building institutions for integrative and ethical governance supported by compassionate and values-based leadership. Governance is central to CRD because it determines how risks are prioritised, how adaptation decisions are made, and how justice and wellbeing are upheld (Schipper et al., 2022 ). Bhutan’s governance framework—including its longstanding emphasis on moral responsibility, collective welfare, and public stewardship—shows how leadership can embed wellbeing in climate-oriented planning (Thinley & Hartz-Karp, 2019 ). Institutional arrangements that integrate wellbeing into climate policy allow governments to consider the full spectrum of harmonised climate-wellbeing stressors. For example, livelihood and income instability requires governance systems capable of aligning climate adaptation with social protection and economic diversification policies (Sánchez & Fernández, 2024 ). Similarly, psychosocial and emotional stress calls for institutions that integrate mental-health considerations into disaster recovery and climate communication (Doherty & Clayton, 2011 ). Leadership that values equity and intergenerational responsibility—core GNH principles—facilitates governance processes that recognise that climate impacts are not merely environmental disruptions but transformations in how people live, relate, and find meaning (McPherson & Clarke, 2024 ). Such leadership is essential for ensuring that CRD reflects wellbeing-centred values rather than narrow technocratic efficiency. Second, a practical way of operationalising wellbeing-centred CRD is by embedding wellbeing metrics into climate policy instruments. Metrics make visible the kinds of impacts that must be addressed and provide the foundation for monitoring progress (Ravenscroft et al., 2017 ). The Bhutan experience shows that the climate-wellbeing stressors presented in Tables 2 and 4 should form the basis of CRD metrics. This ensures that climate-related wellbeing impacts are captured within national climate monitoring systems. Bhutan’s GNH Index provides a model for integrating psychosocial, cultural, ecological, and economic variables into a coherent measurement framework (Ura et al., 2012 ). Likewise, the GNH Policy Screening Tool shows how policy appraisal can incorporate multidimensional wellbeing considerations (Penjore, 2008 ). For CRD, metrics derived from the climate-wellbeing stressors offer a way to track the climate–wellbeing interface systematically. They allow countries to assess not only exposure and vulnerability but also emotional security, community vitality, livelihood stability, and ecosystem integrity. Embedding such metrics in CRD also supports evidence-based policymaking aligned with the holistic aspirations articulated in O’Brien and Selboe’s ( 2015 ) vision of transformative adaptation. Third, advancing CRD requires recognising that wellbeing and resilience emerge through knowledge pluralism and the participatory co-production of diverse knowledge systems. Knowledge pluralism refers to the recognition and meaningful integration of multiple ways of knowing—local, experiential, Indigenous, and scientific—to inform more holistic and inclusive understanding and decision-making (McKenna, 2017 ). As such, it would ensure that CRD is able to respond to climate-wellbeing stressors that are perceived and lived by communities. While scientific knowledge maps temperature trends and precipitation patterns, local and Indigenous Knowledge provides insights about how the physical environmental shifts impact the cultural, emotional and ecological wellbeing (Dorji et al., 2024 ; Katel et al., 2025 ). Bhutan offers a compelling example into integrating its spirituality, cultural values and lived experience into environmental governance (Yangka et al., 2018 ). Globally, empirical evidence shows that local and Indigenous communities have generational knowledge about forest behaviour, ecosystem rhythms, water sources, and social coping strategies (Dorji et al., 2024 ). Such knowledge is instrumental in addressing migration and displacement pressures or ecosystem and biodiversity stress through culturally informed adaptation strategies (Dorji et al., 2023 , 2024 ). As such, incorporating plural knowledge systems deepens the understanding of human and ecological wellbeing which is crucial for CRD but frequently ignored in technocratic climate policy (Schipper et al., 2022 ). Fourth, strengthening CRD requires linking local resilience and global climate frameworks (Juhola et al., 2022 ). In a wellbeing-centred perspective, resilience refers to the capacity of individuals, communities, ecosystems, and institutions to maintain stability, identity, meaning, and functionality in the face of climate stress (McEvoy et al., 2013 ). The climate-wellbeing stressors identified in Tables 2 and 4 show that resilience emerges across multiple domains of wellbeing. Local practices in Bhutan, including community forestry, watershed conservation, social cooperation, and cultural rituals, demonstrate how resilience is generated through social cohesion, ecological stewardship, and emotional security (Lama et al., 2024 ; Khandu et al., 2022 ). Linking these local expressions of resilience to global frameworks such as the Paris Agreement, the 2030 Agenda, and the Sendai Framework (Schipper et al., 2022 ) ensures that climate action remains grounded in lived realities while aligning with international commitments. As already discussed, integrating climate-wellbeing stressors into both local adaptation strategies and national reporting systems provides a coherent mechanism for building resilience that is socially meaningful, ecologically grounded, and globally connected. Fifth, advancing CRD requires transforming climate finance mechanisms to mobilise resources for wellbeing-oriented climate action. Finance is a critical enabling condition because it determines which climate–wellbeing priorities are implemented, scaled, or neglected (Calvet et al., 2022 ). Conventional climate finance has often privileged carbon efficiency, technological upgrades, or infrastructure protection, while underinvesting in the social, cultural, ecological, and psychological dimensions of climate vulnerability (Bracking & Leffel, 2021 ). A wellbeing-centred CRD approach requires redirecting financial flows toward livelihood security, mental-health and psychosocial recovery, ecosystem integrity, cultural continuity, and community resilience (Schipper et al., 2022 ). Integrating the climate-wellbeing stressors from Tables 2 and 4 into financing decisions offers a systematic way to allocate resources to areas of greatest climate-related wellbeing risk. Bhutan for Life initiative illustrates how financing aligned with wellbeing priorities can simultaneously safeguard ecological assets and strengthen social and economic wellbeing (Lham et al., 2018 ). In this way, climate finance becomes the mechanism that enables the substantive climate–wellbeing integration outlined earlier to be realised in practice. Finally, strengthening CRD requires multi-level approach linking climate–wellbeing integration across local, national, and global systems. Multi-level integration is essential because climate impacts and wellbeing outcomes materialise differently across scales, and coherent governance ensures that these differences are recognised in planning and implementation (Adger et al., 2022 ). The climate-wellbeing stressors identified in Tables 2 and 4 must be embedded consistently across community action, national policy instruments, and global reporting frameworks so that monitoring systems, financing decisions, and resilience strategies remain aligned. Climate impacts vary by level: community-level psychosocial and emotional stress may contrast sharply with national concerns around livelihood and income instability, while infrastructure disruption may affect urban and rural settings in divergent ways (Thompson et al., 2013 ; Yangzom & Wouters, 2024 ). Ecosystem degradation can also cross administrative boundaries, undermining conventional governance lines (Thompson et al., 2013 ). A multi-level approach reduces trade-offs, enhances co-benefits, and ensures that wellbeing-centred CRD reflects both lived climate realities and national strategic priorities. This strengthens the capacity of NDCs, NAPs, and carbon-neutral commitments to remain grounded in local vulnerabilities while ensuring coherence with global climate frameworks such as the Paris Agreement and the Sendai Framework. The six pathways (illustrated in Fig. 3 ) demonstrate how the climate-wellbeing stressors identified earlier can be systematically embedded within the institutional and operational dimensions of CRD for global application. By aligning governance and leadership, metrics, knowledge, resilience, finance, and multi-level integration, this framework shows how wellbeing can become a practical organising principle rather than an aspirational ideal. The Bhutan case illustrates that integrating climate–wellbeing linkages requires both substantive clarity about the nature of climate impacts and coherent mechanisms for acting on them. Operationalised in this way, wellbeing-centred CRD offers an adaptable model that strengthens equity, responsiveness, and long-term resilience, while ensuring that climate action remains grounded in the lived realities of communities and ecosystems. Fig. 3. Open in a new tab Operational pathways for a wellbeing-centred approach to CRD: The figure illustrates the six pathways identified for operationalising a wellbeing-centred approach to CRD. These pathways represent the institutional, policy, and systemic mechanisms required to translate wellbeing priorities into climate action. Together, they show how Bhutan’s experience can inform a coherent framework for advancing wellbeing-centred climate action in global contexts. (Figure source: developed by authors) Limitations and challenges of transferability The application of Bhutan’s GNH experiences into global CRD practice is not without challenges despite its conceptual resonances. Firstly, the moral foundations of GNH are rooted in Buddhist philosophy and governance culture and it may not be compatible with other pluralist or market-driven societies and governance models that are divorced from their ethical foundations. Secondly, the technical, administrative, and financial resources needed to implement wellbeing-centred CRD are significant and still differ between countries (Braunschweiger & Pütz, 2021 ). Bhutan’s own experience shows that supporting the philosophical intent of operationalising GNH requires strong operational tools (Dorji et al., 2025). Thirdly, resilience indicators frequently ignore intangible elements like trust, meaning, and belonging, making it intrinsically challenging to measure wellbeing without erasing cultural nuances (Schipper et al., 2022 ). Finally, replacing GDP with wellbeing metrics could invite political resistance and as such, institutionalising wellbeing indicators into national planning, legislation, and budgetary system could help secure the continuity and legitimacy of CRD beyond political objectives (Averchenkova et al., 2017 ). Therefore, the application of wellbeing-centred CRD globally calls not for replication of Bhutan’s model but for contextual adaptation—embedding wellbeing-centred principles within climate policy frameworks that reflect diverse governance systems, social values, and cultural realities. Conclusion This study examined how climate change can be systematically integrated into Bhutan’s development philosophy of GNH and how this experience can inform a wellbeing-centred CRD for global application. This paper first identified practical entry points for integration within Bhutan—specifically through embedding climate-wellbeing stressors into the 9 GNH domains and 33 indicators that guide national policy, and into the 23 determinants of the GNH Policy Screening Tool used for assessing policies. These two points of integration demonstrate how climate change considerations can be mainstreamed into Bhutan’s wellbeing architecture without altering its philosophical core. Drawing on Bhutan’s experience, this study shows that wellbeing-centred CRD can be operationalised through six interconnected pathways for global application. Strengthening governance and leadership provides the moral and institutional basis for equitable climate action. Embedding wellbeing metrics into climate policy instruments ensure that climate–wellbeing impacts are systematically recognised and acted upon. Knowledge pluralism ensures culturally meaningful adaptation. Linking local resilience to global frameworks aligns community priorities with international commitments. Wellbeing-oriented finance directs resources to areas of greatest vulnerability. Finally, multi-level integration ensures coherence across scales, grounding CRD in lived realities while maintaining global alignment. Together, these pathways show that CRD can be achieved in its spirit of equity and social justice only when it is meaningfully integrated with wellbeing principles. This study positions GNH as a globally relevant guide for transforming climate action towards human and planetary flourishing and offers an integrative approach for nations pursuing wellbeing objectives to combine it with climate action for holistic development. Its global relevance lies in offering a wellbeing-centred approach to CRD. Acknowledgements This paper was written as part of a PhD research project, and the authors would like to thank two scholarship providers for the lead author for his PhD study: i) Edith Cowan University for Higher Degree by Research (HDR) Scholarship; and ii) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Scholarship Programme with financial support of the Cuomo Foundation. The PhD research is on “Understanding climate change and wellbeing through Bhutan’s pursuit of Gross National Happiness.” This document was produced with the financial support of the Cuomo Foundation. The contents of this document are solely the liability of Tashi Dorji and under no circumstances may be considered as a reflection of the position of the Cuomo Foundation and/or the IPCC. Author contributions All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Tashi Dorji. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Tashi Dorji and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Funding While no specific funding was provided for the conduct of this research, the lead author has two scholarships (as explained under acknowledgements) for his PhD study. Author Angus Morrison-Saunders and Author David Blake have no financial or non-financial interests to disclose. Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions. Data availability All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics approval Ethics approval (REMS No: 2023-04424-DORJI) was sought from the Human Research Ethics Review by the Research Services of Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia. Footnotes Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. References Adger WN, Barnett J, Heath S, Jarillo S (2022) Climate change affects multiple dimensions of well-being through impacts, information and policy responses. Nat Hum Behav 6(11):1465–1473. 10.1038/s41562-022-01467-8. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Allison E (2004) Spiritually motivated natural resource protection in Eastern Bhutan. Uni-Heidelberg.de. https://fid4sa-repository.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/2628/1/22_SpdrPglt.pdf . Banerjee A, Bandopadhyay R (2016) Biodiversity hotspot of Bhutan and its sustainability. Curr Sci 110(4):521. 10.18520/cs/v110/i4/521-528. [ Google Scholar ] Becvarik ZA, Leviston Z, Walsh EI, Lal A (2025) Community resilience to the health and wellbeing impacts of environmental and climate change: a review. Environ Res Lett. 10.1088/1748-9326/ae0b91. Bisht M (2013) Bhutan and climate change: identifying strategic implications. Contemp South Asia 21(4):398–412. 10.1080/09584935.2013.859658. [ Google Scholar ] Bowen GA (2009) Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qual Res J 9(2):27–40. 10.3316/qrj0902027. [ Google Scholar ] Bracking S, Leffel B (2021) Climate finance governance: fit for purpose? WIREs Climate Change, 12(4). 10.1002/wcc.709. Braunschweiger D, Pütz M (2021) Climate adaptation in practice: How mainstreaming strategies matter for policy integration. Environ Policy Gov 31(4):361–373. 10.1002/eet.1936. [ Google Scholar ] Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. [ Google Scholar ] Calvet L, Gianfrate G, Uppal R (2022) The finance of climate change. J Corp Financ 73:102162–102162. 10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2022.102162. [ Google Scholar ] Chhetri B, Zangpo D, Gyeltshen D (2024a) Climate change and mental health in Bhutan. Bhutan Health J 10(2). 10.47811/bhj.174. Chhetri IB, Gyeltshen S, Dema K (2024b) Investigating the interplay between urban dynamics and environmental factors in Thimphu, Bhutan: a satellite remote sensing approach. Environ Monitor Assessm 196(8). 10.1007/s10661-024-12882-x. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] Chhogyel N, Kumar L (2018) Climate change and potential impacts on agriculture in Bhutan: a discussion of pertinent issues. Agricult Food Secur 7(1). 10.1186/s40066-018-0229-6. Chhogyel N, Kumar L, Bajgai Y (2020) Consequences of climate change impacts and incidences of extreme weather events in relation to crop production in Bhutan. Sustainability 12(10):4319. 10.3390/su12104319. [ Google Scholar ] Delma S, Gilmour D, Ota LS, Warner K, Temphel KJ, Herbohn J (2024) Carbon stocks and sequestration potential of community forests in Bhutan. Trees For People 16:100530–100530. 10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100530. [ Google Scholar ] Dhimal M, Bhandari D, Dhimal ML, Kafle N, Pyakurel P, Mahotra N, Akhtar S, Ismail T, Dhiman RC, Groneberg DA, Shrestha UB, Müller R (2021) Impact of climate change on health and well-being of people in Hindu Kush-Himalayan region: a narrative review. Front Physiol 12. 10.3389/fphys.2021.651189. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] Doherty TJ, Clayton S (2011) The psychological impacts of global climate change. Am Psychol 66(4):265–276. 10.1037/a0023141. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Dorji K (2024) Storied toponyms in Bhutan. Routledge EBooks, 71–86. 10.4324/9781003484394-4. Dorji K, Yangzom K, Tenzin P, Chuwan HB, Darjee B (2025) Leveraging technology for anti-corruption strategies in forestry services: insights from Bhutan. Asian J Res Agricult Forestry 11(2):197–204. 10.9734/ajraf/2025/v11i2399. [ Google Scholar ] Dorji T, Morrison-Saunders A, Blake D (2025). Implementing gross national happiness in Bhutan as a development model and governance tool – perspectives of policy influencers. Bhutan Insights, 1(1), 29-39. Bhutan Insights. https://bhutaninsights.com/index.php/bij/article/view/14 . Dorji T, Morrison-Saunders A, Blake D (2026). Navigating climate change in carbon negative Bhutan: insights from policy influencers and comparison to the wider Himalayan region. Journal of Mountain Science, 23(2), 775-797. 10.1007/s11629-025-9752-7. Dorji T, Morrison-Saunders A, Blake D (2023) Understanding how community wellbeing is affected by climate change: evidence from a systematic literature review. Environ Manag 72(3):568–586. 10.1007/s00267-023-01833-w. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Dorji T, Rinchen K, Morrison-Saunders A, Blake D, Banham V, Pelden S (2024) Understanding how indigenous knowledge contributes to climate change adaptation and resilience: a systematic literature review. Environ Manag 74(6):1101–1123. 10.1007/s00267-024-02032-x. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Ensor JE, Park SE, Attwood SJ, Kaminski AM, Johnson JE (2016) Can community-based adaptation increase resilience? Clim Dev 10(2):134–151. 10.1080/17565529.2016.1223595. [ Google Scholar ] Garcia BM (2019) Resilient cultural heritage: from global to national levels—the case of Bhutan. Disaster Prev Manag: Int J 29(1):36–46. 10.1108/dpm-08-2018-0285. [ Google Scholar ] Gaston SA, Singh R, Jackson CL (2023) The need to study the role of sleep in climate change adaptation, mitigation, and resiliency strategies across the life course. SLEEP, 46(7). 10.1093/sleep/zsad070. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] Granfelt R (2014) The Sacred Practice of Patra. SIT Digital Collections. https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/1830/ . Gyeltshen N, Gyeltshen C, Dema S, Ghimire SK, Konig N, Hart R (2025) A swirling offering: climate change impacts on incense and other useful alpine plants of Bhutan. Econ Bot 79(3):231–246. 10.1007/s12231-025-09643-3. [ Google Scholar ] Hensher M (2023) The economics of the wellbeing economy: understanding heterodox economics for health-in-all-policies and co-benefits. Health Promot J Austr 34(3):651–659. 10.1002/hpja.764. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Honwad S, Coppens AD, DeFrancis G, Stafne Montshire M, Bhattarai S (2020) Weaving strands of knowledge. Learning about environmental change in the Bhutan Himalayas. Nordisk Museol 30(3):62. 10.5617/nm.8700. [ Google Scholar ] Hoy A, Katel O, Thapa P, Dendup N, Matschullat J (2015) Climatic changes and their impact on socio-economic sectors in the Bhutan Himalayas: an implementation strategy. Regional Environ Change 16(5):1401–1415. 10.1007/s10113-015-0868-0. [ Google Scholar ] IPCC (2023) Synthesis report of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) Summary for Policymakers. In IPCC. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf . Jamtsho K, Lund MA, Blake D, Van Etten E (2025) Contrasting effects of impervious cover on riparian plant and soil bacterial communities in a rapidly urbanising Himalayan city. Sci Total Environ 1003: 180681. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.180681. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Johnson E (2023) Climate change and refugees in Bhutan. Environ Clim Change Migration South Asia, 72–86. 10.4324/9781003367802-5. Juhola S, Käyhkö J, Heikkinen M, Neset T-S, Tuhkanen H (2022) Governance and everyday adaptations? Examining the disconnect between planned and autonomous adaptation through justice outcomes. Ecol Soc 27(4). 10.5751/es-13664-270441. Kamei M, Wangmo T, Leibowicz BD, Nishioka S (2020) Urbanization, carbon neutrality, and Gross National Happiness: Sustainable development pathways for Bhutan. Cities 111:102972–102972. 10.1016/j.cities.2020.102972. [ Google Scholar ] Katel O, Chapagai PP, Nair A, Tenzin J, Yangchen U, Suberi B (2025) Advancing Climate Resilience Through Curriculum Development and Capacity Building at the Royal University of Bhutan. 1–19. 10.1007/978-3-031-25960-9_104-1. Khandu Y, Polthanee A, Isarangkool Na Ayutthaya S (2022) Ecological dynamics and regeneration expansion of treeline ecotones in response to climate change in Northern Bhutan Himalayas. Forests 13(7):1062. 10.3390/f13071062. [ Google Scholar ] Kjellstrom T, Freyberg C, Lemke B, Otto M, Briggs D (2017) Estimating population heat exposure and impacts on working people in conjunction with climate change. Int J Biometeorol 62(3):291–306. 10.1007/s00484-017-1407-0. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Lama F, Degen A, Shang Z (2024) Ecological conservation and restoration in Bhutan. CABI EBooks 84–100. 10.1079/9781800622579.0007. Lamb WF, Steinberger JK (2017) Human well-being and climate change mitigation. WIREs Clim Change 8(6). 10.1002/wcc.485. Lham D, Wangchuk S, Stolton S, Dudley N (2018) Assessing the effectiveness of a protected area network: a case study of Bhutan. Oryx 53(1):63–70. 10.1017/s0030605317001508. [ Google Scholar ] McEvoy D, Fünfgeld H, Bosomworth K (2013) Resilience and climate change adaptation: the importance of framing. Plan Pract Res 28(3):280–293. 10.1080/02697459.2013.787710. [ Google Scholar ] McKenna R (2017) Pluralism about knowledge. Epistemic Pluralism, 171–199. 10.1007/978-3-319-65460-7_7. McPherson C, Clarke A (2024) Leadership and climate change mitigation: a systematic literature review. Climate 12(12):207. 10.3390/cli12120207. [ Google Scholar ] Moore B, Geese L, Kenny J, Dudley H, Jordan A, Pascual AP, Lorenzoni I, Schaub S, Enguer J, Tosun J (2024) Politicians and climate change: a systematic review of the literature. Wiley Interdisciplinary Rev Clim Change, 15(6). 10.1002/wcc.908. Nilsson M, Kjellstrom T (2010) Climate change impacts on working people: how to develop prevention policies. Glob Health Action 3(1):5774. 10.3402/gha.v3i0.5774. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] O’Brien K, Selboe E (2015) Climate change as an adaptive challenge. Adapt Challenge Clim Change, 1–23. 10.1017/cbo9781139149389.002. Penjor U, Cushman SA, Kaszta ŻM, Sherub S, Macdonald DW (2022) Effects of land use and climate change on functional and phylogenetic diversity of terrestrial vertebrates in a Himalayan biodiversity hotspot. Divers Distribut. 10.1111/ddi.13613. Penjore D (2008) GNH Screening Tool: Frameworks for Integrating Gross National Happiness into Planning Process. Centre for Bhutan Studies. Phanchung, Gyeltshen N, Wangdi T, Yangzom K (2022) Resilience of traditional ritual practices in Bhutanese mountain farming systems amid climate change and anthropogenic activities. Mountain Res Dev 42(4). 10.1659/mrd-journal-d-22-00005. Phillips M, Lu J (2018) A quick look at NVivo. J Electron Resour Librariansh 30(2):104–106. 10.1080/1941126x.2018.1465535. [ Google Scholar ] Ravenscroft J, Liakata M, Clare A, Duma D (2017) Measuring scientific impact beyond academia: An assessment of existing impact metrics and proposed improvements. PLoS One 12(3):e0173152. 10.1371/journal.pone.0173152. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Rifkin DI, Long MW, Perry MJ (2018) Climate change and sleep: a systematic review of the literature and conceptual framework. Sleep Med Rev 42:3–9. 10.1016/j.smrv.2018.07.007. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Ruby R, Dimple D, Giri A (2025) Suitability of the Himalayan water quality for domestic and irrigation use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Chemosphere 382: 144410. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2025.144410. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Ruggerio CA (2021) Sustainability and sustainable development: a review of principles and definitions. Sci Total Environ 786(1):1–11. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147481. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Sánchez RA, Fernández LR (2024) Climate-resilient development in developing countries. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 66:101391–101391. 10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101391. [ Google Scholar ] Schipper E, Revi A, Preston B, Carr E, Eriksen S, Fernandez-Carril L, Glavovic B, Hilmi N, Ley D, Mukerji R, Muylaert De Araujo R, Perez S, Rose P, Singh Pörtner O, Roberts D, Tignor M, Poloczanska E, Mintenbeck K, Alegría A (2022). SPM 2655 18 Climate Resilient Development Pathways. 2655–2807. 10.1017/9781009325844.027. Sharma P, Chettri N, Uddin K, Wangchuk K, Joshi R, Tandin T, Pandey A, Gaira KS, Basnet K, Wangdi S, Dorji T, Wangchuk N, Chitale VS, Uprety Y, Sharma E (2020) Mapping human‒wildlife conflict hotspots in a transboundary landscape, Eastern Himalaya. Glob Ecol Conserv 24: e01284. 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01284. [ Google Scholar ] Thapa R (2024) The preparedness of schools in responding to emerging climate change impacts and risks in Bhutan. Figshare. 10.25439/rmt.27598701. Thompson RM, Beardall J, Beringer J, Grace M, Sardina P (2013) Means and extremes: building variability into community-level climate change experiments. Ecol Lett 16(6):799–806. 10.1111/ele.12095. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ] Thinley JY, Hartz-Karp J (2019) National progress, sustainability and higher goals: the case of Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness. Sustain Earth Rev 2(1). 10.1186/s42055-019-0022-9. Turner S, Ahuja N (2021) The Relationship between Bhutan’s GNH pillars and the Environmental Rule of Law - Research Repository. Essex.ac.uk. https://repository.essex.ac.uk/31538/ . Ugyel L, Givel M, Chophel D (2023) Punctuating “Happiness”: punctuated equilibrium theory and the agenda-setting of the Gross National Happiness (GNH) policy in Bhutan. Rev Policy Res 41(3):491–507. 10.1111/ropr.12559. [ Google Scholar ] Ura K (2022) GNH-Led Development in Bhutan. Perspectives on the History of Global Development,243–250. 10.1515/9783110730234-013. Ura K, Alkire S, Zangmo T, Wangdi K (2012) An extensive analysis of GNH index. Uni-Heidelberg.de. 10.11588/xarep.00002733. Wahlund M, Hansen T (2022) Exploring alternative economic pathways: a comparison of foundational economy and Doughnut economics. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 18(1):171–186. 10.1080/15487733.2022.2030280. [ Google Scholar ] Wenger SJ, Olden JD (2012) Assessing transferability of ecological models: an underappreciated aspect of statistical validation. Methods Ecol Evol 3(2):260–267. 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00170.x. [ Google Scholar ] Wouters JJP, Dema T (2024) Lakes in Life. Himalayan Climes and Multispecies Encounters, 48–70. 10.4324/9781003484394-3. Yangka D, Rauland V, Newman P (2018) Carbon neutral policy in action: the case of Bhutan. Clim Policy 19(6):672–687. 10.1080/14693062.2018.1551187. [ Google Scholar ] Yangzom D, Wouters JJP (2024) Encountering climate change. Himalayan Climes and Multispecies Encounters, 174–196. 10.4324/9781003484394-10. Averchenkova, A., Fankhauser, S.,Nachmany, M., Neuweg, I., & Averchenkova, A. (2017). Trends in ClimateChange Legislation. Edward Elgar Publishing Bhattarai, H. (2021). Policy intervention and its consequences on the environment to combat climate change– A case from Bhutan. International Journal of Energy Applications and Technologies, 8(3), 132–142. 10.31593/ijeat.941741. Munaretto, S., Siciliano, G., & Turvani, M. E. (2014). Integrating adaptive governance and participatory multicriteria methods: a framework for climate adaptation governance. Ecology and Society, 19(2). 10.5751/es-06381-190274. Thinley, J. Y., & Hartz-Karp, J. (2019). National progress, sustainability and higher goals: the case of Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness. Sustainable Earth, 2(1). 10.1186/s42055-019-0022-9. Walsh-Dilley, M., Wolford, W., & McCarthy, J. (2016). Rights for resilience: food sovereignty, power, and resilience in development practice. Ecology and Society, 21(1). 10.5751/es-07981-210111. Associated Data This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article. Data Availability Statement All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article. Articles from Environmental Management are provided here courtesy of Springer ACTIONS View on publisher site PDF (1.4 MB) Cite Collections Permalink RESOURCES Similar articles Cited by other articles Links to NCBI Databases Follow NCBI NCBI on X (formerly known as Twitter) NCBI on Facebook NCBI on LinkedIn NCBI on GitHub NCBI RSS feed Connect with NLM NLM on X (formerly known as Twitter) NLM on Facebook NLM on YouTube National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894 Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure Help Accessibility Careers NLM NIH HHS USA.gov Back to Top

Related documents

• Understanding climate change and wellbeing through Bhutan's pursuit of Gross National Happiness#376271
• Exploring opportunities to integrate climate change into Gross National Happiness for Bhutan and its application for global wellbeing-centred Climate Resilient Development#331531
• A Comprehensive Taxonomy of the Psychology of Climate Resilience: Affective Regulation, Collective Efficacy, and Community Adaptation#157481
• Managing Beyond Water: Utilizing Community Well-Being Interviews in the Upper Yakima River Basin, USA, for Climate Change Adaptation#259763
• Climate Change from a Criminological Perspective#1176134