By Fr Seán McDonagh

The author, a Columban, came to the Philippines in 1969 and spent many years in Mindanao, including a long period with the T’bolis. He is now based in Ireland and has written a number of acclaimed books on environmental issues. The Higher Education and Training Awards Council (HETAC), the qualifications awarding body for third-level educational and training institutions outside the university sector in Ireland, awarded a Doctorate of Philosophy to Father McDonagh on the basis of his published work. His latest book, Climate Change: the Challenge to All of Us, was published by The Columba Press, <www.columba.ie>, Ireland, last year.

Climate change is one of the most serious ethical issues facing humanity in the 21st century. The facts speak for themselves. Global warming is melting glaciers in China’s Tibetan region at a rate of seven percent annually, triggering drought, desertification and sandstorms in other regions of China and beyond. If they disappear where will the 250 million people who depend on their melt-waters get water during the dry season? The water supply for the cities of Lima in Peru and Santiago in Chile also depends on melt waters from glaciers in the Andes. Australia is now in the midst of a 1000-year drought which is, most probably, due to global warming. Will there be enough water to support the population of Perth or Sydney? A rise of one meter in the sea level as a result of climate change would make it impossible for over 30 million Bangladeshis to live in the delta area. A significant rise in sea-levels will inundate many of the cities of the world and create a torrent of environment refugees.

What the scientists say

The chief scientist to the British government, Sir David King, believes that climate change is a greater threat to humanity and the earth than terrorism. Another scientist, Sir John Haughton, has characterized it as a weapon of mass destruction. In a report commissioned by the British government, Sir Nicholas Stern, a former chief economist with the World Bank, has stated that global warming is the greatest failure ever of market economics. According to him, if we tackle it now by lessening our dependence on fossil fuel, it will only cost about one percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP). If we leave it for another ten or fifteen years it could cost in the region of five percent to twenty percent of global GDP. Behind these figures lies not just the death of possibly hundreds of millions of people, but the fact that the earth will be a less hospitable place to live in for each succeeding generation of humans.

An ethical issue

Beyond the realm of science and economics, climate change is above all an ethical issue. For us missionaries, the Columban commitment to ecological justice springs from an ethical and religious base – the Gospel of Jesus. We are not scientists, though we try to use the best scientific information available when we discuss ecological issues as diverse as genetic engineering, patenting living organisms, nuclear power and now climate change. I was an observer at the UN Climate Change conference at Nairobi in November 2006. I noticed that almost all the negotiations around climate change quoted scientific, political and economic data but seldom mentioned the core ethical values involved in destructive human activities like emitting greenhouse gases. This is a shame because many profound ethical questions can be obscured by scientific and economic arguments about various climate change proposals. Unless ethical arguments are addressed, individual nations will continue to seek their short-term economic gain no matter how this affects the global common good, especially that of poorer countries.

Ethical principles involved

One of the first ethical principles that needs to be invoked is that those responsible for causing harm should be held responsible for their actions, and should take steps to undo the harm they had caused. If, for example, I made a habit of dumping all my waste into my neighbors’ garden which made it impossible for them to live there, I am sure that reasonable people would come to a number of conclusions very quickly. Firstly, that what I was doing was wrong. Secondly, that my excuse that it was necessary for my economic growth would be unacceptable. Thirdly, that I should desist immediately. Fourthly, that I should pay compensation for the wrong I had done.

In the case of those countries that are mainly responsible for the pollution caused by greenhouse gas emissions however, this simple ethical framework appears not to apply. The biggest polluters are loath to admit that what they are doing is either harmful or wrong; they continue to argue that even if some harm is done it is somehow necessary for economic growth; and even those who admit to a problem, like Ireland and Great Britain, think that it is acceptable to continue without radical change to our way of doing things by the simple expedient of paying poorer countries off through the carbon credit scheme. As regards the obligation to compensate for harm caused, in a spirit of global solidarity, polluting countries should make resources and new technologies available to poor communities so that those countries can achieve a decent standard of living without adopting the polluting Western model of development.

Promoting sustainable development

When it comes to allocating global emissions among nations, the polluter-pays principle is consistent with the demands of distributive justice. This means that there is an ethical imperative on every nation to reduce their carbon emissions and to promote sustainable development policies.

Some countries have claimed that the scientific causes of climate change are still uncertain; they use this as an excuse to avoid cutting their greenhouse gas emissions. Petrochemical corporations, especially Exxon-Mobile, have played a very negative role in trying to persuade people that climate change is not due to burning fossil fuel. At this point in time there is a great deal of scientific consensus about both the causes and the negative effects of global warming.

No Salvation in Technology

Listening to some of the delegates at the Nairobi conference, especially those from the USA, Australia and Russia, one would think that new technologies will solve all our problems. No adequate technology exists at present to contain or reverse climate change. The only way to proceed at the moment is to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel. The International Panel on Climate Change, which brings together the expertise of thousands of scientists from all over the world, believes that we need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 60 to 80 percent by the year 2030.

Our challenge as Christians

On the theological level, as Christians, we are called to care for God’s creation. Climate change is upsetting the natural cycles upon which God’s creation – animals, plants and humans – depends. Sometimes we forget that humans depend on the natural world for almost everything. Our faith calls us to care for others, especially those who are most vulnerable. We know that climate change will have a terrible impact on the poor, the very people who did least to cause the problem in the first place. Each generation is called to hand on to the next generation a world as fruitful and as beautiful as the one they inherited from their parents and grandparents. The full impact of climate change will take decades and maybe centuries to become fully apparent. But future generations will not thank us for making their world a less hospitable place for them to live in.

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church in its official statements and its development agencies has not shown adequate leadership in educating people about the moral implications of climate change up to the present time.

The Australian Church is an exception. The Bishops Committee for Justice, Development, Ecology and Peace published an excellent document called Climate Change: Our Responsibility to Sustain God’s Earth <www.catholicearthcareoz.net/POSITION_PAPER.html> in November 2005. The main drafter of that document was Columban Fr Charles Rue. The time has come for us to face up to climate change as among the most serious ethical issues that face us as Christians.

Climate change is one of the most serious ethical issues facing humanity in the 21st century. The facts speak for themselves. Global warming is melting glaciers in China’s Tibetan region at a rate of seven percent annually, triggering drought, desertification and sandstorms in other regions of China and beyond. If they disappear where will the 250 million people who depend on their melt-waters get water during the dry season? The water supply for the cities of Lima in Peru and Santiago in Chile also depends on melt waters from glaciers in the Andes. Australia is now in the midst of a 1000-year drought which is, most probably, due to global warming. Will there be enough water to support the population of Perth or Sydney? A rise of one meter in the sea level as a result of climate change would make it impossible for over 30 million Bangladeshis to live in the delta area. A significant rise in sea-levels will inundate many of the cities of the world and create a torrent of environment refugees.

What the scientists say

The chief scientist to the British government, Sir David King, believes that climate change is a greater threat to humanity and the earth than terrorism. Another scientist, Sir John Haughton, has characterized it as a weapon of mass destruction. In a report commissioned by the British government, Sir Nicholas Stern, a former chief economist with the World Bank, has stated that global warming is the greatest failure ever of market economics. According to him, if we tackle it now by lessening our dependence on fossil fuel, it will only cost about one percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP). If we leave it for another ten or fifteen years it could cost in the region of five percent to twenty percent of global GDP. Behind these figures lies not just the death of possibly hundreds of millions of people, but the fact that the earth will be a less hospitable place to live in for each succeeding generation of humans.

An ethical issue

Beyond the realm of science and economics, climate change is above all an ethical issue. For us missionaries, the Columban commitment to ecological justice springs from an ethical and religious base – the Gospel of Jesus. We are not scientists, though we try to use the best scientific information available when we discuss ecological issues as diverse as genetic engineering, patenting living organisms, nuclear power and now climate change. I was an observer at the UN Climate Change conference at Nairobi in November 2006. I noticed that almost all the negotiations around climate change quoted scientific, political and economic data but seldom mentioned the core ethical values involved in destructive human activities like emitting greenhouse gases. This is a shame because many profound ethical questions can be obscured by scientific and economic arguments about various climate change proposals. Unless ethical arguments are addressed, individual nations will continue to seek their short-term economic gain no matter how this affects the global common good, especially that of poorer countries.

Ethical principles involved

One of the first ethical principles that needs to be invoked is that those responsible for causing harm should be held responsible for their actions, and should take steps to undo the harm they had caused. If, for example, I made a habit of dumping all my waste into my neighbors’ garden which made it impossible for them to live there, I am sure that reasonable people would come to a number of conclusions very quickly. Firstly, that what I was doing was wrong. Secondly, that my excuse that it was necessary for my economic growth would be unacceptable. Thirdly, that I should desist immediately. Fourthly, that I should pay compensation for the wrong I had done.

In the case of those countries that are mainly responsible for the pollution caused by greenhouse gas emissions however, this simple ethical framework appears not to apply. The biggest polluters are loath to admit that what they are doing is either harmful or wrong; they continue to argue that even if some harm is done it is somehow necessary for economic growth; and even those who admit to a problem, like Ireland and Great Britain, think that it is acceptable to continue without radical change to our way of doing things by the simple expedient of paying poorer countries off through the carbon credit scheme. As regards the obligation to compensate for harm caused, in a spirit of global solidarity, polluting countries should make resources and new technologies available to poor communities so that those countries can achieve a decent standard of living without adopting the polluting Western model of development.

Promoting sustainable development

When it comes to allocating global emissions among nations, the polluter-pays principle is consistent with the demands of distributive justice. This means that there is an ethical imperative on every nation to reduce their carbon emissions and to promote sustainable development policies.

Some countries have claimed that the scientific causes of climate change are still uncertain; they use this as an excuse to avoid cutting their greenhouse gas emissions. Petrochemical corporations, especially Exxon-Mobile, have played a very negative role in trying to persuade people that climate change is not due to burning fossil fuel. At this point in time there is a great deal of scientific consensus about both the causes and the negative effects of global warming.

No Salvation in Technology

Listening to some of the delegates at the Nairobi conference, especially those from the USA, Australia and Russia, one would think that new technologies will solve all our problems. No adequate technology exists at present to contain or reverse climate change. The only way to proceed at the moment is to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel. The International Panel on Climate Change, which brings together the expertise of thousands of scientists from all over the world, believes that we need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 60 to 80 percent by the year 2030.

Our challenge as Christians

On the theological level, as Christians, we are called to care for God’s creation. Climate change is upsetting the natural cycles upon which God’s creation – animals, plants and humans – depends. Sometimes we forget that humans depend on the natural world for almost everything. Our faith calls us to care for others, especially those who are most vulnerable. We know that climate change will have a terrible impact on the poor, the very people who did least to cause the problem in the first place. Each generation is called to hand on to the next generation a world as fruitful and as beautiful as the one they inherited from their parents and grandparents. The full impact of climate change will take decades and maybe centuries to become fully apparent. But future generations will not thank us for making their world a less hospitable place for them to live in.

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church in its official statements and its development agencies has not shown adequate leadership in educating people about the moral implications of climate change up to the present time.

The Australian Church is an exception. The Bishops Committee for Justice, Development, Ecology and Peace published an excellent document called Climate Change: Our Responsibility to Sustain God’s Earth <www.catholicearthcareoz.net/POSITION_PAPER.html> in November 2005. The main drafter of that document was Columban Fr Charles Rue. The time has come for us to face up to climate change as among the most serious ethical issues that face us as Christians.