Keywords

10.1 Introduction

Now, perhaps more than ever, hope is important to human well-being (Counted et al., 2022; Gallagher et al., 2021; Yıldırım & Arslan, 2022). We find ourselves at a time in history when people across the globe are experiencing many challenges and hardships. How is it possible to remain hopeful and work towards a better future when we may feel overwhelmed by the crises of the world? This volume proposed an integrated, interdisciplinary hope model to shed light on this question and add to a more multifaceted understanding of hope. Further, we examined elements of this model in various studies across several countries.

10.2 An Integrated Model of Hope

A key theme of this book is that hope extends beyond individual agency and includes affective, behavioural, relational, value-based, and spiritual elements. In addition, we proposed that how people hope, and what they hope for, will differ depending on the context, especially cultural context. Accordingly, we defined hope as consisting of three main elements:(1) a wish or desire for something that is valuable; (2) the belief that it may be possible for this wish to be fulfilled, although it remains uncertain or even unlikely; and (3) the trust that we have the necessary internal or external resources that can facilitate the fulfillment of the wish in the face of obstacles and setbacks (see Chap. 2). These resources may be available now, or may become available in the future. The universal elements of hope, namely wish, belief, and trust, may differ across cultures and contexts based on cognitive, affective, behavioral, relational, religious, and value dimensions relevant to the context. We operationalized this understanding of hope as perceived hope (Krafft et al., 2019, 2021; Marujo et al., 2021; Slezackova et al., 2020).

10.3 Exploring Hope Across Cultures

Utilizing datasets from various countries obtained with the International Hope Barometer Programme from 2017–2021, we examined hope along several dimensions. First, across all samples, levels of hope were moderate to high and above midpoint. This suggests that, across time and context, people remained hopeful that they would attain important hoped-for goods, despite setbacks (Chap. 3). This finding underscores the importance of hope as a universal human need. However, samples from less affluent, developing countries, and to some extent those characterized as more collectivistic, seemed to display higher levels of hope than richer, more individualistic countries (Chaps. 3, 4, 8 and 9). Our findings thus seem to point to the importance of relational and affective dimensions (Braun-Lewensohn et al., 2021; Cohn & Fredrickson, 2009; Jacoby & Goldzweig, 2014) of hope.

Next, our findings indicated that values (Schwartz, 2012), especially values of self-transcendence (caring for the well-being of others) and of openness to change (self-mastery, looking for new challenges and novel experiences), are associated with hope. In addition, tradition, religious experiences, and achievement could also act as hope-related values. When we examined what people are hoping for (hope targets), we found that people seemed to be wishing for similar goods (Chap. 3). These were good health, a happy relationship, family or marriage, and harmony in life. Hoping for these targets aligned with domains that nurture eudaimonic well-being (Ryff, 2014) and were positively related to hope. However, wishing for hedonic and materialistic goods was unrelated to hope. These findings support the notion of hope as a transcendent virtue (Peterson & Seligman, 2004), associated with eudaimonic facets of well-being.

Third, we aimed to extend our understanding of individual hope and examined collective hope and future expectations across 12 countries (Chap. 4). We defined the broader concept of collective hope as a wish or desire for a better common future, the belief that the realization of a better future for all is possible (although not necessarily probable), and trust in the availability of personal, social, and other resources to deal with current challenges and to overcome obstacles and setbacks. Further, we considered people’s long-term expectations concerning future quality of life as well as their outlooks regarding probable and desirable long-term future scenarios (Eckersley, 1999; Eckersley et al., 2007). While our findings pointed to a strong universal wish for a sustainable, harmonious, just, and cooperative human community, people expected the future to be characterized by crises such as environmental destruction, new diseases, and ethnic and regional conflicts. However, participants from less affluent countries such as Nigeria and Colombia held expectations of a more flourishing future scenario, expecting the world to enter a new age of sustainability, peace, and prosperity. Overall, and surprisingly, the desire for a better future had only a small impact on hope and well-being. These findings provide further evidence for context-specific manifestations of hope and future expectancies. It also points to the importance of finding ways to strengthen collective hope and positive future expectancies, as these collective resources could serve to sustain hope in challenging times (Braithwaite, 2004; Kelsey, 2016).

Since one of the central elements of our model of hope involves the belief that what we wish for might possibly (but not inevitably) be attained, it can be expected that beliefs and assumptions of the world would be related to our experiences of hope. Therefore, we further set out to examine the role of basic beliefs and worldviews in sustaining hope across six samples (Chap. 5). The results suggest that our basic beliefs indeed have a significant effect on levels of hope, however, with diverse magnitude. The strongest predictors of hope were pathways (the belief in one’s ability to overcome difficulties and find many ways to attain a goal), positive emotions, the belief in the benevolence of the world, one’s own agency to achieve goals, the belief of luck in life, and to a lesser but still significant extent, the readiness to help other people, and religiosity. However, there were also pronounced differences among some countries. Specifically, the two countries with the highest levels of perceived hope in the study, South Africa and Israel, endorsed different worldviews. Whereas, for the South African sample, hope seemed to be very much anchored in positive emotions, social relationships, the willingness to help other people, religious faith, and the connection to a Higher Power, as well as the general belief in the good, for the Israeli sample individualistic assumptions such as self-worth and belief in luck were stronger predictors. Our findings thus provide support for the notion that context-specific cognitions, affect, and behaviours may influence people’s experiences of hope (Averill et al., 1990; Averill & Sundararajan, 2005; Scioli & Biller, 2009).

Fifth, we explored sources and activities generating hope across several countries to elucidate the third element of our model, i.e., trust. Analyzing data from 12 countries, we found that several sources and activities contributed to perceived hope, rooted in interpersonal trust and influenced by social attachment and support (Scioli et al., 1997). We referred to this as “trustful hope”, which especially comes into play in situations when people cease to be optimistic and cannot foresee a positive outcome anymore, yet, they do not want to give up their hopes (Chap. 6). Based on the results, we identified three groups of countries, which differed with regard to the importance assigned to several hope sources: Social resources and activities such as supporting each other emotionally and talking with family and friends were especially important for people in some Latin countries (Spain, Portugal, and Colombia). People in African countries (Nigeria and South Africa) and India obtained and nurtured hope particularly through religious sources and practices (trusting God, praying, meditating, etc.). Finally, people in more individualistic countries like Switzerland and Czechia primarily relied on self-centered, performance, and mastery-oriented sources and activities, but also acknowledged the importance of external factors such as social support, luck, and inspiring experiences in nature. People in different countries and cultures thus seem to differ in the way they hope and in the activities they perform in order to see their hopes come true. This supports our premise that the universal elements of hope (having a wish, believing in its possibility of being attained, and trust) will play out differently in different contexts and cultures, as reported in existing research (Braun-Lewensohn et al., 2021).

More detailed comparisons between specific countries further expanded our understanding of hope, its correlates, and mechanisms. Comparing samples from Czechia and Poland, which experienced similar macro-social changes since the 1980s (Chap. 7), the results indicated that Czech participants generally showed higher levels of hope and other positive indicators than their Polish counterparts. Alarmingly, the youngest respondents in both countries reported lower levels of perceived hope, positive mental health, and satisfaction with the climate and environment, as well as greater loneliness, anxiety, and depression; they also reported more pessimistic expectations for the national economy. Yet, religious participants in both countries exhibited higher levels of perceived hope, which aligns with our premise that hope included spiritual and religious dimensions. In addition to supporting culture-specific manifestations of hope, the findings highlight the importance of examining hope among young adults (Booker et al., 2021), and finding ways to mobilize resources to strengthen hope. The second study compared hope and flourishing among samples from Spain and South Africa and revealed that the South African sample experienced higher levels of hope than the Spanish sample, but levels of flourishing were similar (Chap. 8). Both samples believed that taking responsibility for generating hope as individuals was the most important source of hope. Agentic activities such as having a job and motivating friends were strong predictors of hope for both groups. For the South African sample, religious activities were important in generating hope. These results point to the universality of hope in terms of the behavioral dimension (see Chap. 2), but also suggest that hope may be sustained in different ways in different cultural contexts, and that religious/spiritual as well as relational dimensions may serve as resources to strengthen hope (thus reflecting the element of trust in having resources available). This may be particularly important in countries where resources are limited (Counted et al., 2022).

Finally, we reported on the role of hope during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also investigated levels of perceived stress, posttraumatic growth, and ways of coping during the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021, reported by participants in 11 countries (Chap. 9). Most reported moderate to high levels of hope, but simultaneously moderate levels of perceived stress characterized by feelings of unpredictability, uncontrollability, and overload. Moreover, despite the crisis, participants reported moderate to high levels of well-being and were able to display positive coping styles such as accepting the new reality by simultaneously adopting a positive stance and actively coping with the challenging situation. Hope and well-being were primarily related to the possibility of reframing negative events in a positive manner, the capacity of accepting and actively coping with everyday challenges, but also to finding relief and comfort in religious faith and practices. In some countries, levels of well-being were also positively related to the availability of social support. These findings align with our proposed hope model, where a wish for a positive outcome to the pandemic was probably sustained by coping behaviors and attitudes (beliefs) with religious faith and social support as resources (trust). Samples from countries characterized as more collectivistic and/or religious (Nigeria, South Africa, India, Portugal) showed higher levels of hope than those from countries seen as more individualistic (Spain, Poland, France, Switzerland). Possibly, with the exception of Australia, participants in countries with higher levels of hope had more relational and spiritual resources to nourish their hopes (Counted et al., 2022).

Overall, the findings in this volume support the premise that hope is multifaceted and culturally influenced, and that an interdisciplinary approach to studying hope can broaden our understanding of this vital resource. It was evident that hope is not only about individual goals, but also about sustained beliefs and actions when it is not certain whether what we are hoping for will be attained. In particular, hope needs to be nourished and nurtured by mobilizing individual and collective resources, which will materialize differently in different cultures and contexts.

10.4 Designing and Implementing Interdisciplinary Interventions

One of the most crucial tasks in the coming years is to design and implement interventions that incorporate insights from several disciplines, fostering hope and encouraging people to act not only to achieve individual goals but also for a better common future of society. For this, Krafft (2022) has developed and implemented a program for students in secondary schools called “Positive Futures—Hope for a Better Life”. The program integrates methods and interventions from positive psychology with those of futures studies in education. The program has five basic aims: (1) a change of mindset to recognize and cultivate positive things, experiences, and emotions in life; (2) fostering self-worth and self-esteem by identifying and developing character strengths; (3) developing desirable long-term future scenarios at the individual and the collective level; (4) learning to hope and to engage together with others, promoting hope through voluntary and meaningful projects; and (5) experiencing the main drivers for a purposeful and thriving life for oneself and the community.

“Positive Futures” combines individual hopes and future expectations with visions of a good life in an economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable world, supporting young people in developing a more fundamental hope for joined happiness and fulfillment. By integrating the basic elements of a flourishing life with the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, the program encourages young people to wish for a better future, to believe that a good life not only for oneself but for all in a healthy planet is possible (although not at all guaranteed), and to trust each other in order to contributing together to its realization. Figure 10.1 presents the integration of the individual and the social level, focusing on visions and hopes for positive futures, and participating in meaningful projects for the common good. At the core of the model resides the belief that the individual can flourish in an environment where all others and the entire nature can flourish too.

Fig. 10.1
An illustration has individual and collective flourishing in the center, and 3 circles around it. The 3 circles have positive futures, society, and person. Between the 3 there are societal hopes and expectations, voluntary and meaningful projects, and personal hopes and expectations, respectively.

Positive futures. Source: Adapted from Krafft (2022)

Full size image

Major changes and profound transformations usually cannot take place overnight. They require a long-term vision and common endeavor where the role of individual and collective hope is decisive in persevering and working together. The main task is to guide young people in taking a global perspective and in developing their character strengths, virtues, and potentials to shape a socially and ecologically sustainable world. This does not always mean that everyone must trigger a major social revolution. In one way or another, every person can experience change by acting in the immediate environment (family, social institutions, environmental projects, etc.) through an empathic, caring, and virtuous behavior. In this form, personal well-being and flourishing go hand in hand with a caring social and ecologically sustainable development.

10.5 Future Directions for Research and Practice

This volume is a step forward in broadening our views on hope. Yet, as always, research findings often lead to more research questions that need to be answered. First, currently most of our results are descriptive, identifying differences in hope, its correlates and predictors, between samples from various countries. This needs to be further examined to identify possible mechanisms and factors that could explain these differences beyond collectivism/individualism. Could social class, levels of socioeconomic development, or a need to improve existing living conditions contribute to hope in poorer countries? What is the role of religious practices and communities from different cultures in sustaining hope?

Second, qualitative research and mixed-method studies could expand on our broad findings by examining subjective aspects of the proposed model of hope. For example, what do people subjectively perceive as hope resources? How do they actively keep hoping in challenging times? How is hope sustained despite people’s endorsements of catastrophic future scenarios? And, can hope be transmitted within a family, from generation to generation?

Since most of the presented studies are correlational studies, more information on the dynamics and the direction of causality of the relations between hope and other investigated variables could be obtained by conducting a longitudinal study that would include personality traits and other psychosocial variables capable of providing a deeper insight into the investigated phenomena.

In addition, the proposed integrated hope model needs to be tested in various contexts and with various groups, using techniques such as structural equation modelling or multilevel analyses. It is further important to examine how to mobilize hope and facilitate action in the context of concerns about climate change and the environment (Kelsey, 2016; Li & Monroe, 2019; Ojala, 2012).

Finally, since hope is about the future, it is particularly important to explore how (and if) this integrated model is relevant to young people. They are the ones who will inherit the future, and it may be useful to extend the Hope Barometer Program to adolescent samples in different countries in the future.

In terms of practice, our findings underscored the importance of hope to well-being. The evidence of the protective role of hope in various contexts can be beneficial in clinical settings and in education, public policy, and prevention (both primary, secondary, and tertiary). Fostering a hopeful attitude in vulnerable individuals and assisting them in developing feelings of hope, trust, and a sense of connectedness will help the clients cope with difficult life situations more effectively.

Therefore, developing and evaluating interventions to strengthen hope and hope resources, beyond cognitive-motivational dimensions, is important to support well-being in the face of possible future crises. In particular, there is a need to strengthen hope among youth, who are faced with concerns about the world and environment they will inherit (see also Ojala, 2022). It will further be useful to examine the feasibility and effectiveness of interventions based on our model of hope across different countries and cultures.

10.6 Conclusion

As the world becomes increasingly complex and challenging, our research suggests that there are indeed beacons of hope. These are not only located in the individual, but also in communities of hopers. We have remained hopeful in one of the most challenging times in recent history through mobilizing individual, communal, and spiritual resources. It is our hope that we can continue to refine our understanding of hope and contribute to well-being for all.