7.6: Principles, Strategies, and Tactics

Here are some suggestions, then, of principles, strategies, and tactics that the world’s religions and environmental ethicists could promote toward the flourishing of people and planet in the face of rapid and relentless climate change. This section is adapted from an article I wrote in Zygon in 2015. First I explain two foundational principles—valuing nature and honoring humans. Then I explore two key strategies—thinking consequentially and integrating solutions. Finally I examine two interrelated tactics—restraint and law.

First foundational principle: valuing nature as source, not resource

Intrinsic value of nature We are moving from viewing nature simply as a resource for our own use to seeing it as the source of life and creativity. Instead of valuing nature from a utilitarian perspective, we are learning to appreciate it for its intrinsic beauty and complexity. As Journey of the Universe makes evident, Earth is a source of dynamic change and transformation, bringing forth life over billions of years of evolution. Participating in the flourishing of life’s creativity is a major fulfillment of human destiny. Destroying that creativity is diminishing the possibility for life’s continuity, as Thomas Berry noted in The Dream of the Earth.

Environmental degradation as an ethical issue Until recently environmental degradation was seen as an inevitable consequence of economic growth and industrial progress. This view is being called into question in many circles, especially those of ecological economists. To stem the tide of destruction will require a new economics and the extension of ethical concerns to nature as a whole and to individual species in particular. The role of humans in causing climate change through greenhouse gases is finally being acknowledged as ethically problematic. Our emissions (especially in developed countries) have adversely affected ecosystems, caused biodiversity loss, contributed to species extinction, and affected millions of people around the globe. There have been moral responses to this by the US Catholic Bishops in 2001 and the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops in 2006. Canadian Bishop Luc Bouchard’s pastoral letter in 2009 is a unique example of a powerful critique of the problems caused by the extraction of oil in the tar sands in Alberta (Figure 7.6.1).

Figure 7.6.1 This photo shows the extraction of oil from the tar sands in Alberta, Canada, in 2008. Reproduced from Howl Arts Collective via Flickr.

Many other bishops’ conferences around the world have issued statements on the environment and climate change, calling for care for the poor and vulnerable, noting the need for a change in lifestyle among the wealthy, and holding corporations responsible for despoiling the Earth. Pope Francis refers to several of these documents in his landmark encyclical on the environment, Laudato Si’, issued in 2015.

Second foundational principle: honoring humans—our rights and responsibilities

Environmental rights: present and future generations It is necessary to expand the notion of human rights to include environmental rights to a healthy atmosphere and biosphere for present and future generations. To do this, we need to consider the rights to information, public participation, and justice regarding environmental issues. This was set forth in the Aarhaus Convention in 1994, which called for access to information, participation in decision-making, and access to justice in environmental issues. But clearly those families and individuals who are exposed to pollution from petrochemical and coal power plants and those who are affected by mountaintop removal mining were never given information to ensure their health and safety or to guarantee their environmental rights. Faith-based religious initiatives in Appalachia, in Flint, Michigan, in Baltimore, and in Mississippi are trying to help such communities by calling for creation care and for environmental justice. Moreover, a landmark climate lawsuit, Juliana v. United States, brought by 21 young people from across the United States, is making its way through federal court. The suit alleges that the US government, through actions that cause climate change, has violated young people’s constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property.

Box 7.6.1  From a Pastoral Letter on Fossil Fuel Extraction as a Moral Problem

In 2009, Bishop Luc Bouchard of Alberta, Canada, issued a pastoral letter, The Integrity of Creation & the Athabasca Oilsands. Here is an excerpt from his letter:

The moral problem does not lie in government and industry’s lack of a sincere desire to find a solution; the moral problem lies in their racing ahead and aggressively expanding the oilsands industry despite the fact that serious environmental problems remain unsolved after more than forty years of on-going research. The moral question has been left to market forces and self-regulation to resolve when what is urgently required is moral vision and leadership.

I am forced to conclude that the integrity of creation in the Athabasca oilsands is clearly being sacrificed for economic gain. The proposed future development of the oilsands constitutes a serious moral problem.

Environmentalists and members of First Nations and Metis communities who are challenging government and industry to adequately safeguard the air, water and boreal forest eco-systems of the Athabasca oilsands region present a very strong moral argument, which I support.

The present pace and scale of development in the Athabasca oilsands cannot be morally justified. Active steps to alleviate this environmental damage must be undertaken.

Figure 7.6.2 In India, the Yamuna River is considered sacred. Reproduced from Melenama via Flickr.

Figure 7.6.3 But the Yamuna River is also polluted with sewage and trash. This view of the Yamuna River at Agra was taken in 2008 during a trash cleanup event. Reproduced from India Water Portal via Flickr.

Figure 7.6.4 The Ganges is also both sacred and polluted. In this 2013 photo, pilgrims’ offerings of flowers and coconuts float together with plastic trash on the surface of the river. Photograph by Massimiliano Sticca via Flickr.

Box 7.6.2  Legal Personhood for Sacred Rivers

In India, a legal case on the rights of rivers suggests that new forms of Earth jurisprudence are emerging that are expanding the moral compass of the law to include nature and a sense of the sacred. Legal rights are often granted to entities and organizations that are not human individuals; in the United States, for example, corporations are considered legal persons. But recently, some nations, such as Bolivia, Ecuador, Australia, and New Zealand, have begun granting nature in general or specific natural entities legal personhood.

The state of Uttarakhand, India, contains part of the Himalayas and the headwaters of the Ganges River. In 2017, a high court there ruled that “the Rivers Ganga and Yamuna, all their tributaries, streams, every natural water flowing with flow continuously or intermittently of these rivers, are declared as juristic/legal persons/living entities having the status of a legal person with all corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a living person.” The court based its decision in part on the fact that these rivers are “sacred and revered... central to the existence of half the Indian population.” Because environmental damage threatens “their very existence... [this] requires extraordinary measures to be taken to preserve and conserve Rivers Ganga and Yamuna” (Figures 7.6.2, 7.6.3, and 7.6.4).

The court’s decision established the rivers as legal persons but as minors under the law, thereby recognizing that the rivers cannot speak for themselves. The court also designated specific positions in the Uttarakhand state government to act for the rivers. Though the ruling has been appealed and is still working its way through the courts, it shows not only how legal thought about the rights of nature is beginning to change, but also that religion and the sacredness of particular natural entities are central to that shift.

In 2011 the Forum on Religion and Ecology along with TERI University in Delhi and the Radha Raman temple in Vrindavan sponsored a conference in India titled Yamuna River: A Confluence of Waters, A Crisis of Need. It brought together scientists, hydrologists, political scientists, religious leaders, and scholars to find ways to meet the difficult challenges of pollution of this sacred river: fore.yale.edu/yamuna-river-conference/. The conference highlighted how climate change affects rivers in a variety of ways, including higher temperatures causing algae blooms and fish kills as well as unpredictable patterns of drought and flooding.

Environmental responsibilities: distributive justice With environmental rights come moral responsibilities toward those most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, such as the millions of impoverished people in the coastal region of Bangladesh, the thousands of African Americans in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, and those in Darfur and Syria suffering from climate-related drought and subsequent famine. The concept of distributive justice clearly requires further reflection regarding our moral obligation to people at a distance in space (in other countries) and time (in future generations).

As the oceans rise and their countries become endangered, the Alliance of Small Island States in the United Nations is considering suing developed countries for causing this catastrophe. Their citizens are becoming climate refugees; the population of Tuvalu is being relocated to New Zealand. Indigenous peoples in the Torres Strait of Australia have sued the government on the basis that climate change is threatening their traditional culture and religion. How many hundreds of thousands of people will have to be relocated from islands and coastal regions where most of the world’s largest cities are located and a quarter of the world’s population lives? Jakarta, a sinking city of over 10 million people on the world’s most populous island, is already making plans to evacuate and move.

Many religious leaders are now speaking out on the need for climate justice, especially for the poor and vulnerable most affected by climate change. Rabbi Arthur Waskow of the Shalom Center in Philadelphia and Reverend Dr. Gerald Durley of Providence Missionary Baptist Church are leaders here, while United Church of Christ minister Jim Antal and Episcopal priest Margaret Bullitt-Jonas have written books on the topic (Figure 7.6.5). The Evangelical Environmental Network is also working on climate justice. A leading evangelical scientist, Katherine Hayhoe, has been speaking out on the importance of understanding the science and responding to our growing climate crisis.

First key strategy: thinking consequentially, short term and long term

Precautionary principle In his 1971 book The Closing Circle, biologist Barry Commoner made the commonsensical point that we ought to stop pollution at its source. This can be seen as an early iteration of the precautionary principle or principle of prudence.

Figure 7.6.5 Rev. Dr. Gerald L. Durley, Rev. Margaret Bullitt-Jonas, and Rev. Dr. Jim Antal. Photograph by Robert A. Jonas. Reproduced with permission.

We should invoke this principle as a means of stemming climate change. We need to suggest that rather than argue about some of the details of the science or ask for further studies, the precautionary principle requires us to act now. Future generations and the future of life depend on various kinds of preventive action. Cap-and-trade or a carbon tax are no doubt necessary economic incentives for change, but we need to develop a deeper sensibility regarding cutting back emissions at the source and seeing this as a moral responsibility. The Keep it in the Ground movement, for example, maintains that a viable ethical position is restraint in extracting fossil fuels in the first place.

Unintended consequences We must not only reduce emissions now, but also consider the long-term effects of our decisions. We know we are already compromising the quality of life for many people—including our children and grandchildren. The consequences of our actions, intentional and unintentional, need to become more visible. This is especially true as the unintended outcomes of various proposed solutions to climate change are becoming evident. For example, geoengineering schemes, such as seeding the oceans with iron to increase phytoplankton and draw down carbon, may inadvertently disrupt the food web. A 2019 white paper by Gary Gardner and Forrest Clingerman highlights religious responses from Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism to geoengineering. This report recognizes that many people feel geoengineering may be necessary to halt climate change, but they call for precaution in light of the unknown consequences of these procedures. This is an example of religions contributing an ethics of long-term thinking about the health and well-being of future generations beyond uncertain “technological fixes.”

Box 7.6.3  Responding to Climate Change Locally

Religious communities in many parts of the world are responding to the particular challenges climate change is bringing to their area. For example, the Higher Ground Initiative of Temple Solel, a Jewish synagogue in Hollywood, Florida, is confronting the problem of rising seas. Members of the synagogue educated themselves on sea level rise, investigated local areas that flood during very high spring tides called king tides, took action to bring attention to the issue, made efforts to reduce their synagogue’s carbon footprint, and expanded their initiative to other Reform Jewish congregations.

There are many ways to take action on climate change. If you’re involved in a religious community, find out if it has a climate change committee; if not, see if you can start one. Here are some resources to draw on:

• Interfaith Power and Light (IPL) leads religious communities’ efforts to improve energy efficiency and conservation in the United States. IPL has worked for two decades to establish branches in over 40 states and focuses on several areas, including the reduction of carbon footprint in places of worship, educating congregants, environmental justice for the poor, liturgical renewal to include the environment, and work for policy changes in national and local governments: https://www.interfaithpower andlight.org.
• The Shalom Center, based in Philadelphia, leads many Jewish environmental efforts: https://theshalomcenter.org.
• Eco-Justice Ministries works with a range of Christian denominations in the United States on greening churches, taking action on climate change, and transformational ministry: www.eco-justice.org.
• Earth Ministry undertakes “faithful advocacy” on environmental issues in Washington state, where the organization is based, as well as on climate change: https://earthministry.org.
• Green the Church leads African American Christian churches to become more sustainable, develop green theology, and advocate for political change: greenthechurch.org/.
• GreenFaith is an interfaith coalition for the environment that works with houses of worship, religious schools, and people of all faiths to help them become better environmental stewards: https://greenfaith.org.
• Interreligious Eco-Justice Network has been working on the intersection of ecological understanding and social justice for many years, focusing on key issues such as climate change and pollution: irejn.org.

Second key strategy: integrating solutions—energy and technology

Renewable energy The development of safe renewable energies is of utmost importance as we shift from fossil fuels to energy from the sun, wind, water, and geothermal power. Indeed, many are suggesting we are in the midst of an energy revolution. While we have much of the technology to make this change, this shift needs to be scaled up so that it can be done without adversely affecting those most vulnerable. This will require making renewable energy economically viable and thus providing economic incentives and investing in more research and development. The shift from nonrenewable and polluting energy sources, such as coal and oil, to renewables is one of the largest transformations in human history, and is now a moral imperative. Fracking for natural gas is harming our ecosystems, polluting our waters, and causing social disruptions in the United States and around the world. Several European countries have outlawed fracking on environmental grounds.

Many religious communities, especially Native Americans in the United States and First Nations peoples in Canada, have rallied to stop pipelines, often joined by other religious communities. The most prominent example is the Lakota Sioux at Standing Rock in North Dakota and their many allies who tried to prevent a pipeline from passing under the Missouri River next to their reservation. This is an example of a precautionary principle being invoked to prevent pollution before it happens.

Figure 7.6.6 Stand with Standing Rock, November 14, 2016. Photograph by Leslie Peterson via Flickr.

The Lakota drew on their traditional belief that “water is life” and must not be put at risk of pollution. Native Americans and other Indigenous peoples embrace a cosmovision that considers all of life sacred, including the elements of earth, air, fire, and water (Figure 7.6.6). Humans are seen as kin to all other species who dwell in the living Earth community.

Technology transfer and efficiency Along with the large-scale move to renewable energy is an obligation to transfer appropriate technology to developing countries to assist with climate change mitigation and adaptation. As we improve alternative energy and green technology in the United States and the developed world, how can we find the economic means and political will to transfer this knowledge to developing countries? This is a justice issue, not simply an economic issue, as the developing world by and large does not have the capital to create or invest in these technologies without assistance. Large-scale funds need to be set aside to allow this to happen. Such help has been promised in the past but not delivered.

First tactic: ensuring restraint—curbing consumption and population

Consumption and affluence A key justice issue is that of overconsumption and the high levels of affluence in the developed world as factors that contribute to climate disruption. How can lifestyle change (using and consuming less) be seen as a moral issue? This will involve reexamining our carbon footprint, our building patterns, our transportation systems, our development plans, our clothing manufacturing, and most especially our agricultural processes, which depend on fossil fuels. The factory farming of animals and the destruction of rain forests to raise crops to feed animals is contributing to climate change (Figure 7.6.7). Many religious communities are suggesting that eating less meat will help reduce greenhouse gases. See, for example, CreatureKind: www.becreaturekind.org.

Figure 7.6.7 Raising livestock on a large scale in factory farms like this one contributes to climate change—both because pigs and cows emit methane and because rain forests are destroyed to grow crops to feed these animals. Reproduced from Wikimedia Commons.

Population growth How can the difficult topic of population growth be raised as a moral issue in relation to global warming? The planet clearly has limits to what it can support. By exploding from 2 billion to 7 billion people in one century, we have caused massive disruptions to Earth’s ecosystems and natural cycles. While China adopted a national policy to control population, this still remains controversial in some quarters. However, as UN agencies have observed, educating women for jobs and empowering women by providing birth control and reproductive health care are assured means of population reduction. These need to be seen as moral rights that will ensure that children are wanted, nourished, educated, and cared for. We cannot avoid focusing on this issue in conjunction with consumption, for a person in the developed world will consume considerably more than a person in the developing world. Again, invoking the principles of justice and equity is critical.

Second tactic: creating law—global governance and global ethics

Global governance To be able to draft and enforce binding treaties on climate change, we need to ensure democratic participation, accountability, and transparency. This requires the development of a new stage of global governance that will be bound by international law and enforced by institutions such as the World Court and the United Nations. While we are a long way from such global governance, the foundations of such a system are being established. This is sorely needed as environmental problems such as climate change transcend national boundaries and thus call for international cooperation that is binding, both legally and ethically.

Global ethics The Earth Charter, a comprehensive global ethics document, was initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev and Maurice Strong, who chaired the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. They felt that an ethical document of principles was needed to adjudicate the contentious issues of environmental protection and economic development. An Earth Charter drafting committee was established with a broad spectrum of representatives; Earth Charter commissioners, prominent global citizens, were named from every continent; and an Earth Charter Initiative Secretariat was established at the University for Peace in Costa Rica. The Charter was drafted in the decade following the Earth Summit in 1992 and released at the Hague in 2000 with the assistance of the Dutch government. I was a member of the drafting committee of 25 people from around the world, representing key sectors such as politics, economics, education, and religion. The committee included a wide range of nationalities, of women, and of nongovernmental organizations.

Box 7.6.4  From the Earth Charter

We stand at a critical moment in Earth’s history, a time when humanity must choose its future. As the world becomes increasingly interdependent and fragile, the future at once holds great peril and great promise. To move forward we must recognize that in the midst of a magnificent diversity of cultures and life forms we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.

Our question here is, How can the Earth Charter contribute to a more comprehensive ethical framework for envisioning solutions to climate change? The three sections of the Charter can be used as a context for refining moral responses to climate change. These sections include valuing (1) ecological integrity, (2) social and economic justice, and (3) democracy, nonviolence, and peace. This integrated framework of principles is critical to encouraging moral responses that are comprehensive enough to address the global nature of climate change and also to establish the conditions for the flourishing of local communities.

In addition, the 2010 Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth was drafted by Indigenous peoples at a gathering in Cochabamba, Bolivia. They contend that their rights and nature’s rights have been violated in many parts of the world. The rights-based approach to nature may gain some traction in circles that hope to force action on climate change and other environmental issues. It may also be resisted by those who are hesitant to grant nature rights but nonetheless wish to address climate disruption and the degradation of nature. It is increasingly clear, however, that a new Earth jurisprudence is needed. This is what Thomas Berry called for in a statement drafted as early as 2001 that was published in Evening Thoughts.

In this moment of great transition, science and religion need to work together as never before for the flourishing of the Earth community. Moral voices must respond to the “Cry of the Earth, the Cry of the Poor,” as does the Papal Encyclical Laudato Si’. While the challenges are great, the call to create the foundations for an integral ecology, including respect for both people and the planet, is growing. As Pope Francis writes:

The urgent challenge to protect our common home includes a concern to bring the whole human family together to seek a sustainable and integral development, for we know that things can change.... Humanity still has the ability to work together in building our common home. (Laudato Si’, Introduction, 13)