More on Ethical Implications of Global Warming

David Miliband, the U.K. Minister of Environment recently gave an interesting talk about the ethical and moral implications of climate change in Rome this week at a seminar on climate change organised by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. I am impressed--especially since the Minister focuses on the implications of climate change on the world's poor as well as God's call to stewardship. Here are some highlights:


Climate change is not just an environmental or economic issue, it is a moral and ethical one. It is not just an issue for politicians or businesses, it is also an issue for the world's faith communities. The common thread that underpins my speech today is a belief that it is our moral duty to protect future generations, particularly those in the poorest countries who will experience the most acute suffering, from the effects of environmental degradation.


Across the world, we are now beginning to see a shift in attitudes to climate change. But well before climate change gained the profile it currently holds, the Catholic Church was warning of its consequences. In 1990, Pope John Paul II in his address to celebrate the World Day of Peace warned us of the dangers of irreversible damage caused by the greenhouse effect.


"In our day, there is a growing awareness that world peace is threatened not only by the arms race, regional conflicts and continued injustices among peoples and nations, but also by a lack of due respect for nature, by the plundering of natural resources ... Today the ecological crisis has assumed such proportions as to be the responsibility of everyone ... its various aspects demonstrate the need for concerted efforts aimed at establishing the duties and obligations that belong to individuals, states and the international community."


Seventeen years on, the warnings are reaching a crescendo. A chorus of scientists and economists, entrepreneurs and politicians are voicing their concerns. Our challenge now is to translate the growing awareness of global warming into a sustained movement that changes the way we live, work and travel.

. . .

While we have underestimated the scale, urgency and impact of climate change, so too have we underestimated our capacity to address it. The technologies, policies and institutions exist or are emerging. The public support to sustain political change is also rising. Global warming can be addressed.


We must ensure that global emissions peak and then decline within the next 10 to 15 years, if we are to avoid warming of above 2 degrees centigrade. Above this threshold, the impact on people and nature is dangerous. Rising temperatures will see entire regions experience major declines in crop yields, up to one third in Africa, with rising numbers of people at risk from hunger. Rising temperatures will mean significant changes in water availability, with some areas seeing major water shortages, and sea-level rises threatening major world cities. Whole eco-systems from coral reefs to the rainforests face collapse and many species will face extinction. Storms, droughts, forest fires and flooding will have a major impact on human life. The poorest countries will suffer the most from the effects of climate change. The costs will fall on the countries who have done least to cause climate change, and are least able to adapt to its effects.


The wealth of evidence on the scale and impact of climate change has produced a major shift over the last 12 months. Paradoxically, the most urgent environmental challenge facing the planet has stopped being primarily an environmental issue. Climate change is not just, as Al Gore puts it, "a planetary emergency" but a humanitarian one. Climate change has also become an economic issue, a national security and foreign policy issue (triggering the possibility of unprecedented migration), and an international development issue.


But we must also recognise that climate change is an issue that raises profound moral and ethical questions. Economic or scientific analysis cannot tell us what value to place on the lives of future generations, or how far the developing world should help the poorest nations to adapt to the effects of climate change, and develop low-carbon energy. These are questions that must be guided by values, or principles, as well as facts.


Read it all. Hat tip to Kendall Harmon for the link.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Giles Fraser on Gay Marriage

Image
The Rev. Gileas Fraser offers thoughtful piece on gay marriage on BBC Radio this morning: Back in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, as the Book of Common Prayer was being put together, marriage was said to be for three purposes: First, It was ordained for the procreation of children … Secondly, It was ordained for a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication .. Thirdly, It was ordained for the mutual society, help, and comfort, that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity. How do these three concerns relate to the prospect of gay marriage? The third priority insists that marriage is designed to bring human beings into loving and supportive relationships. Surely no one can deny that homosexual men and women are in as much need of loving and supportive relationships as anybody else. And equally deserving of them too. This one seems pretty clear. The second priority relates to the encouragement of monogamy. The Archbishop of Canterbury himself has rig...
Read more

Religious Map of United States

Image
This map shows which of eight major Christian denominations has a plurality in the United States, county by county. the map obviously does not capture the full story given the rich diversity of Christian denominations in the United States, but it does show much of the regionalization of the major denominations. The map and analysis can be found here . Hat Tip to my friend Jim .
Read more

Faith, Reason and Science, Part X: Some Humor and Serious Ponderings By A Thoughtful Atheist

Update : Welcome Digg visitors. For more of my posts on Science (including my Science and Faith series), go here .Interested in my take on atheism? Then try here . For my comments about the experience of being dugg, so here . Original Post : Eric Michael Johnson is a primatologist and endocrinologist completing a PhD at Duke University, and he blogs at the Primate Diaries . He has two recent posts that are worth reading. First, some provocative humor: Fundamentalists: believe 2+2 =5 because It Is Written. Somewhere. They have a lot of trouble on their tax returns. "Moderate" believers: live their lives on the basis that 2+2=4. but go regularly to church to be told that 2+2 once made 5, or will one day make 5, or in a very real and spiritual sense should make 5. "Moderate" atheists: know that 2+2 =4 but think it impolite to say so too loudly as people who think 2+2=5 might be offended. "Militant" atheists: "Oh for pity's sake. HERE. Two pebbles...
Read more