Senior Management Understanding of and Response to Climate Goals in Healthcare

28 Apr 20264 min read0 viewsJournal Feed

GIST

Background Healthcare is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, and sector-specific policies and goals are recommended as governance tools. Despite leadership playing a critical role in reducing emissions, there is limited empirical research on how healthcare managers perceive and navigate climate goals and actions.

Objective To explore how members of a hospital's senior management team understand and respond to climate goals. Design Qualitative study design, semi-structured interviews were conducted, and data were analysed thematically.

Setting A hospital in Sweden. Participants Members (n=15) of the hospital's senior management team.

Results Five themes were identified. Senior managers recognised the importance of climate goals (theme 1), but their understanding of these varied - from perceiving them as concrete and actionable to abstract and irrelevant at the departmental level (theme 2).

Climate goals were described as both visible and invisible (theme 3), and as both in alignment and in competition with other organisational goals (eg, patient safety, budget constraints) (theme 4).

Clinical Editorial

Context and aims

The study investigates how members of a hospital’s senior management team perceive and respond to climate goals within a Swedish healthcare setting.
It employs qualitative methods, using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis to explore leadership perspectives on governance for emissions reduction.

Study design and setting

Qualitative study conducted at a single hospital in Sweden.
Participants were 15 senior managers representing upper-level leadership within the institution.
Data collection relied on semi-structured interviews, with findings synthesized through thematic analysis.

Key themes shaping leadership perception and action

Importance attributed to climate goals:
Senior managers acknowledged the relevance of climate objectives for the hospital.
Varied interpretive stance on actionability:
Some leaders viewed climate goals as concrete and amenable to direct action.
Others framed them as abstract or lacking resonance at the departmental level, potentially limiting practical uptake.
Visibility of climate goals:
Climate targets were described as both visible and hidden within the organizational process, influencing awareness and prioritization.
Alignment with competing priorities:
Emissions reduction was seen as intersecting with, and sometimes competing against, other goals such as patient safety and budgetary considerations.
Barriers to progress:
Commonly cited factors included knowledge gaps, finite resources, monitoring difficulties, and broader systemic constraints.

Consequences for action

Two concurrent response patterns emerged:
A virtuous cycle of climate action where clarity and operationalization of goals foster progress.
A vicious cycle of climate inaction driven by uncertainty and structural barriers.
Uncertainty was a recurrent theme that appeared to constrain proactive interventions at the senior-management level.