ENCYCLICAL LETTER
LAUDATO SI’
OF THE HOLY FATHER
FRANCIS
ON CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME
“LAUDATO
SI’, mi’ Signore” – “Praise be to you, my Lord”. In the words of this beautiful
canticle, Saint Francis of Assisi reminds us that our common home is like a
sister with whom we share our life and a beautiful mother who opens her arms to
embrace us. “Praise be to you, my Lord, through our Sister, Mother Earth, who
sustains and governs us, and who produces various fruit with colored flowers
and herbs.”
This
sister now cries out to us because of the harm we have inflicted on her by our
irresponsible use and abuse of the goods with which God has endowed her. We
have come to see ourselves as her lords and masters, entitled to plunder her at
will. The violence present in our hearts, wounded by sin, is also reflected in
the symptoms of sickness evident in the soil, in the water, in the air and in
all forms of life. This is why the earth herself, burdened and laid waste, is
among the most abandoned and maltreated of our poor; she “groans in travail” (Rom
8:22). We have forgotten that we ourselves are dust of the earth (cf. Gen
2:7); our very bodies are made up of her elements, we breathe her air and
we receive life and refreshment from her waters.
I urgently
appeal, then, for a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of our
planet. We need a conversation which includes everyone, since the environmental
challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all.
The worldwide ecological movement has already made considerable progress and
led to the establishment of numerous organizations committed to raising
awareness of these challenges. Regrettably, many efforts to seek concrete
solutions to the environmental crisis have proved ineffective, not only because
of powerful opposition but also because of a more general lack of interest.
Obstructionist attitudes, even on the part of believers, can range from denial
of the problem to indifference, nonchalant resignation or blind confidence in
technical solutions. We require a new and universal solidarity. As the bishops
of Southern Africa have stated: “Everyone’s talents and involvement are needed
to redress the damage caused by human abuse of God’s creation.” All of us can cooperate as instruments of God
for the care of creation, each according to his or her own culture, experience,
involvements and talents.
Pollution and Climate Change
The Earth,
our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth. In
many parts of the planet, the elderly lament that once beautiful landscapes are
now covered with rubbish. Industrial waste and chemical products utilized in
cities and agricultural areas can lead to bioaccumulation in the organisms of
the local population, even when levels of toxins in those places are low.
Frequently no measures are taken until after people’s health has been
irreversibly affected.
These
problems are closely linked to a throwaway culture which affects the excluded
just as it quickly reduces things to rubbish. To cite one example, most of the
paper we produce is thrown away and not recycled. It is hard for us to accept
that the way natural ecosystems work is exemplary: plants synthesize nutrients
which feed herbivores; these in turn become food for carnivores, which produce
significant quantities of organic waste which give rise to new generations of
plants. But our industrial system, at the end of its cycle of production and
consumption, has not developed the capacity to absorb and reuse waste and
by-products. We have not yet managed to adopt a circular model of production
capable of preserving resources for present and future generations, while
limiting as much as possible the use of non-renewable resources, moderating
their consumption, maximizing their efficient use, reusing and recycling them.
A serious consideration of this issue would be one way of counteracting the
throwaway culture which affects the entire planet, but it must be said that
only limited progress has been made in this regard.
The
climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all. At the global
level, it is a complex system linked to many of the essential conditions for
human life. A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently
witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system. In recent decades this
warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in the sea level and, it would
appear, by an increase of extreme weather events, even if a scientifically
determinable cause cannot be assigned to each particular phenomenon. Humanity
is called to recognize the need for changes of lifestyle, production and
consumption, in order to combat this warming or at least the human causes which
produce or aggravate it. It is true that there are other factors (such as
volcanic activity, variations in the earth’s orbit and axis, the solar cycle),
yet a number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent
decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide,
methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human
activity. Concentrated in the atmosphere, these gases do not allow the warmth
of the sun’s rays reflected by the earth to be dispersed in space. The problem
is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of fossil
fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system. Another
determining factor has been an increase in changed uses of the soil,
principally deforestation for agricultural purposes.
Warming
has effects on the carbon cycle. It creates a vicious circle which aggravates
the situation even more, affecting the availability of essential resources like
drinking water, energy and agricultural production in warmer regions, and
leading to the extinction of part of the planet’s biodiversity. The melting in
the polar ice caps and in high altitude plains can lead to the dangerous
release of methane gas, while the decomposition of frozen organic material can
further increase the emission of carbon dioxide. Things are made worse by the
loss of tropical forests which would otherwise help to mitigate climate change.
Carbon dioxide pollution increases the acidification of the oceans and compromises
the marine food chain. If present trends continue, this century may well
witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented destruction of
ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. A rise in the sea level,
for example, can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a
quarter of the world’s population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the
majority of our megacities are situated in coastal areas.
Climate
change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social,
economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the
principal challenges facing humanity in our day. Its worst impact will probably
be felt by developing countries in coming decades. Many of the poor live in
areas particularly affected by phenomena related to warming, and their means of
subsistence are largely dependent on natural reserves and ecosystemic services
such as agriculture, fishing and forestry. They have no other financial
activities or resources which can enable them to adapt to climate change or to
face natural disasters, and their access to social services and protection is
very limited. For example, changes in climate, to which animals and plants
cannot adapt, lead them to migrate; this in turn affects the livelihood of the
poor, who are then forced to leave their homes, with great uncertainty for
their future and that of their children. There has been a tragic rise in the
number of migrants seeking to flee from the growing poverty caused by
environmental degradation. They are not recognized by international conventions
as refugees; they bear the loss of the lives they have left behind, without
enjoying any legal protection whatsoever. Sadly, there is widespread
indifference to such suffering, which is even now taking place throughout our
world. Our lack of response to these tragedies involving our brothers and
sisters points to the loss of that sense of responsibility for our fellow men
and women upon which all civil society is founded.
Many of
those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to
be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply
making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change.
However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to
worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption. There
is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the
emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically
reduced, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of
renewable energy. Worldwide there is minimal access to clean and renewable
energy. There is still a need to develop adequate storage technologies. Some
countries have made considerable progress, although it is far from constituting
a significant proportion. Investments have also been made in means of
production and transportation which consume less energy and require fewer raw
materials, as well as in methods of construction and renovating buildings which
improve their energy efficiency. But these good practices are still far from
widespread.
Loss of Biodiversity
The
earth’s resources are also being plundered because of short-sighted approaches
to the economy, commerce and production. The loss of forests and woodlands
entails the loss of species which may constitute extremely important resources
in the future, not only for food but also for curing disease and other uses.
Different species contain genes which could be key resources in years ahead for
meeting human needs and regulating environmental problems.
It is not
enough, however, to think of different species merely as potential “resources”
to be exploited, while overlooking the fact that they have value in themselves.
Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which
we will never know, which our children will never see, because they have been
lost forever. The great majority become extinct for reasons related to human
activity. Because of us, thousands of species will no longer give glory to God
by their very existence, nor convey their message to us. We have no such right.
It may
well disturb us to learn of the extinction of mammals or birds, since they are
more visible. But the good functioning of ecosystems also requires fungi,
algae, worms, insects, reptiles and an innumerable variety of microorganisms.
Some less numerous species, although generally unseen, nonetheless play a
critical role in maintaining the equilibrium of a particular place. Human
beings must intervene when a geosystem reaches a critical state. But nowadays,
such intervention in nature has become more and more frequent. As a
consequence, serious problems arise, leading to further interventions; human
activity becomes ubiquitous, with all the risks which this entails. Often a
vicious circle results, as human intervention to resolve a problem further
aggravates the situation. For example, many birds and insects which disappear
due to synthetic agrotoxins are helpful for agriculture: their disappearance
will have to be compensated for by yet other techniques which may well prove
harmful. We must be grateful for the praiseworthy efforts being made by
scientists and engineers dedicated to finding solutions to man-made problems.
But a sober look at our world shows that the degree of human intervention,
often in the service of business interests and consumerism, is actually making
our earth less rich and beautiful, ever more limited and grey, even as
technological advances and consumer goods continue to abound limitlessly. We
seem to think that we can substitute an irreplaceable and irretrievable beauty
with something which we have created ourselves.
Technology
and the Decline in Quality of Life
Human
beings too are creatures of this world, enjoying a right to life and happiness,
and endowed with unique dignity. So we cannot fail to consider the effects on
people’s lives of environmental deterioration, current models of development
and the throwaway culture.
Nowadays,
for example, we are conscious of the disproportionate and unruly growth of many
cities, which have become unhealthy to live in, not only because of pollution
caused by toxic emissions but also as a result of urban chaos, poor
transportation, and visual pollution and noise. Many cities are huge,
inefficient structures, excessively wasteful of energy and water.
Neighborhoods, even those recently built, are congested, chaotic and lacking in
sufficient green space. We were not meant to be inundated by cement, asphalt, glass
and metal, and deprived of physical contact with nature.
Furthermore,
when media and the digital world become omnipresent, their influence can stop
people from learning how to live wisely, to think deeply and to love
generously. In this context, the great sages of the past run the risk of going
unheard amid the noise and distractions of an information overload. Efforts
need to be made to help these media become sources of new cultural progress for
humanity and not a threat to our deepest riches. True wisdom, as the fruit of
self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter between persons, is not
acquired by a mere accumulation of data which eventually leads to overload and
confusion, a sort of mental pollution. Real relationships with others, with all
the challenges they entail, now tend to be replaced by a type of internet
communication which enables us to choose or eliminate relationships at whim,
thus giving rise to a new type of contrived emotion which has more to do with
devices and displays than with other people and with nature. Today’s media do
enable us to communicate and to share our knowledge and affections. Yet at
times they also shield us from direct contact with the pain, the fears and the
joys of others and the complexity of their personal experiences. For this
reason, we should be concerned that, alongside the exciting possibilities
offered by these media, a deep and melancholic dissatisfaction with
interpersonal relations, or a harmful sense of isolation, can also arise.
Humanity
has entered a new era in which our technical prowess has brought us to a
crossroads. We are the beneficiaries of two centuries of enormous waves of
change: steam engines, railways, the telegraph, electricity, automobiles,
airplanes, chemical industries, modern medicine, information technology and,
more recently, the digital revolution, robotics, biotechnologies and
nanotechnologies. It is right to rejoice in these advances and to be excited by
the immense possibilities which they continue to open up before us, for “science
and technology are wonderful products of a God-given human creativity.” The
modification of nature for useful purposes has distinguished the human family
from the beginning; technology itself “expresses the inner tension that impels
man gradually to overcome material limitations.” Technology has remedied
countless evils which used to harm and limit human beings. How can we not feel
gratitude and appreciation for this progress, especially in the fields of
medicine, engineering and communications? How could we not acknowledge the work
of many scientists and engineers who have provided alternatives to make
development sustainable?
Technoscience,
when well directed, can produce important means of improving the quality of
human life, from useful domestic appliances to great transportation systems,
bridges, buildings and public spaces. It can also produce art and enable men
and women immersed in the material world to “leap” into the world of beauty.
Who can deny the beauty of an aircraft or a skyscraper? Valuable works of art
and music now make use of new technologies. So, in the beauty intended by the
one who uses new technical instruments and in the contemplation of such beauty,
a quantum leap occurs, resulting in a fulfilment which is uniquely human.
Yet it
must also be recognized that nuclear energy, biotechnology, information
technology, knowledge of our DNA, and many other abilities which we have
acquired, have given us tremendous power. More precisely, they have given those
with the knowledge, and especially the economic resources to use them, an
impressive dominance over the whole of humanity and the entire world. Never has
humanity had such power over itself, yet nothing ensures that it will be used
wisely, particularly when we consider how it is currently being used. We need
but think of the nuclear bombs dropped in the middle of the twentieth century,
or the array of technology which Nazism, Communism and other totalitarian
regimes have employed to kill millions of people, to say nothing of the increasingly
deadly arsenal of weapons available for modern warfare. In whose hands does all
this power lie, or will it eventually end up? It is extremely risky for a small
part of humanity to have it.
There is
also the fact that people no longer seem to believe in a happy future; they no
longer have blind trust in a better tomorrow based on the present state of the
world and our technical abilities. There is a growing awareness that scientific
and technological progress cannot be equated with the progress of humanity and
history, a growing sense that the way to a better future lies elsewhere. This
is not to reject the possibilities which technology continues to offer us. But
humanity has changed profoundly, and the accumulation of constant novelties
exalts a superficiality which pulls us in one direction. It becomes difficult
to pause and recover depth in life. If architecture reflects the spirit of an
age, our megastructures and drab apartment blocks express the spirit of
globalized technology, where a constant flood of new products coexists with a
tedious monotony. Let us refuse to resign ourselves to this, and continue to
wonder about the purpose and meaning of everything. Otherwise we would simply
legitimate the present situation and need new forms of escapism to help us
endure the emptiness.
All of
this shows the urgent need for us to move forward in a bold cultural
revolution. Science and technology are not neutral; from the beginning to the
end of a process, various intentions and possibilities are in play and can take
on distinct shapes. Nobody is suggesting a return to the Stone Age, but we do
need to slow down and look at reality in a different way, to appropriate the
positive and sustainable progress which has been made, but also to recover the
values and the great goals swept away by our unrestrained delusions of
grandeur.
The
Crisis of Modern Anthropocentrism
Modernity
has been marked by an excessive anthropocentrism which today, under another
guise, continues to stand in the way of shared understanding and of any effort
to strengthen social bonds. The time has come to pay renewed attention to
reality and the limits it imposes; this in turn is the condition for a more
sound and fruitful development of individuals and society. An inadequate
presentation of Christian anthropology gave rise to a wrong understanding of
the relationship between human beings and the world. Often, what was handed on
was a Promethean vision of mastery over the world, which gave the impression
that the protection of nature was something that only the faint-hearted cared
about. Instead, our “dominion” over the universe should be understood more
properly in the sense of responsible stewardship.
Ecology
studies the relationship between living organisms and the environment in which they
develop. This necessarily entails reflection and debate about the conditions
required for the life and survival of society, and the honesty needed to
question certain models of development, production and consumption. It cannot
be emphasized enough how everything is interconnected. Time and space are not
independent of one another, and not even atoms or subatomic particles can be
considered in isolation. Just as the different aspects of the planet –
physical, chemical and biological – are interrelated, so too living species are
part of a network which we will never fully explore and understand. A good part
of our genetic code is shared by many living beings. It follows that the
fragmentation of knowledge and the isolation of bits of information can actually
become a form of ignorance, unless they are integrated into a broader vision of
reality.
When we
speak of the “environment”, what we really mean is a relationship existing
between nature and the society which lives in it. Nature cannot be regarded as something
separate from ourselves or as a mere setting in which we live. We are part of
nature, included in it and thus in constant interaction with it. Recognizing
the reasons why a given area is polluted requires a study of the workings of
society, its economy, its behavior patterns, and the ways it grasps reality.
Given the scale of change, it is no longer possible to find a specific,
discrete answer for each part of the problem. It is essential to seek
comprehensive solutions which consider the interactions within natural systems
themselves and with social systems. We are faced not with two separate crises,
one environmental and the other social, but rather with one complex crisis
which is both social and environmental. Strategies for a solution demand an
integrated approach to combating poverty, restoring dignity to the excluded,
and at the same time protecting nature.
At times
we see an obsession with denying any pre-eminence to the human person; more
zeal is shown in protecting other species than in defending the dignity which
all human beings share in equal measure. Certainly, we should be concerned lest
other living beings be treated irresponsibly. But we should be particularly
indignant at the enormous inequalities in our midst, whereby we continue to
tolerate some considering themselves more worthy than others. We fail to see
that some are mired in desperate and degrading poverty, with no way out, while
others have not the faintest idea of what to do with their possessions, vainly
showing off their supposed superiority and leaving behind them so much waste
which, if it were the case everywhere, would destroy the planet. In practice,
we continue to tolerate that some consider themselves more human than others,
as if they had been born with greater rights.
Global
Economic Inequality
The human
environment and the natural environment deteriorate together; we cannot
adequately combat environmental degradation unless we attend to causes related
to human and social degradation. In fact, the deterioration of the environment
and of society affects the most vulnerable people on the planet: “Both everyday
experience and scientific research show that the gravest effects of all attacks
on the environment are suffered by the poorest.” For example, the depletion of fishing
reserves especially hurts small fishing communities without the means to
replace those resources; water pollution particularly affects the poor who
cannot buy bottled water; and rises in the sea level mainly affect impoverished
coastal populations who have nowhere else to go. The impact of present
imbalances is also seen in the premature death of many of the poor, in
conflicts sparked by the shortage of resources, and in any number of other
problems which are insufficiently represented on global agendas.
It needs
to be said that, generally speaking, there is little in the way of clear
awareness of problems which especially affect the excluded. Yet they are the
majority of the planet’s population, billions of people. These days, they are
mentioned in international political and economic discussions, but one often
has the impression that their problems are brought up as an afterthought, a
question which gets added almost out of duty or in a tangential way, if not
treated merely as collateral damage. Indeed, when all is said and done, they
frequently remain at the bottom of the pile. This is due partly to the fact
that many professionals, opinion makers, communications media and centers of
power, being located in affluent urban areas, are far removed from the poor,
with little direct contact with their problems. They live and reason from the
comfortable position of a high level of development and a quality of life well
beyond the reach of the majority of the world’s population. This lack of
physical contact and encounter, encouraged at times by the disintegration of
our cities, can lead to a numbing of conscience and to tendentious analyses
which neglect parts of reality. At times this attitude exists side by side with
a “green” rhetoric. Today, however, we have to realize that a true ecological
approach always becomes a social approach; it must integrate questions
of justice in debates on the environment, so as to hear both the cry of the
earth and the cry of the poor.
Justice
between the Generations
The notion
of the common good also extends to future generations. The global economic
crises have made painfully obvious the detrimental effects of disregarding our
common destiny, which cannot exclude those who come after us. We can no longer
speak of sustainable development apart from intergenerational solidarity. Once
we start to think about the kind of world we are leaving to future generations,
we look at things differently; we realize that the world is a gift which we
have freely received and must share with others. Since the world has been given
to us, we can no longer view reality in a purely utilitarian way, in which
efficiency and productivity are entirely geared to our individual benefit.
Intergenerational solidarity is not optional, but rather a basic question of
justice, since the world we have received also belongs to those who will follow
us. The Portuguese bishops have called upon us to acknowledge this obligation
of justice: “The environment is part of a logic of receptivity. It is on loan
to each generation, which must then hand it on to the next.” An integral
ecology is marked by this broader vision.
Doomsday
predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain. We may well be leaving
to coming generations nothing but debris, desolation and filth. The pace of
consumption, waste and environmental change has so stretched the planet’s
capacity that our contemporary lifestyle, unsustainable as it is, can only
precipitate catastrophes, such as those which even now periodically occur in
different areas of the world. The effects of the present imbalance can only be
reduced by our decisive action, here and now. We need to reflect on our
accountability before those who will have to endure the dire consequences.
Our
difficulty in taking up this challenge seriously has much to do with an ethical
and cultural decline which has accompanied the deterioration of the
environment. Men and women of our postmodern world run the risk of rampant
individualism, and many problems of society are connected with today’s self-centered
culture of instant gratification. We see this in the crisis of family and
social ties and the difficulties of recognizing the other. Parents can be prone
to impulsive and wasteful consumption, which then affects their children who
find it increasingly difficult to acquire a home of their own and build a
family. Furthermore, our inability to think seriously about future generations
is linked to our inability to broaden the scope of our present interests and to
give consideration to those who remain excluded from development. Let us not
only keep the poor of the future in mind, but also today’s poor, whose life on
this earth is brief and who cannot keep on waiting. Hence, “in addition to a
fairer sense of intergenerational solidarity there is also an urgent moral need
for a renewed sense of intragenerational solidarity”.
Environmental
Education
An
awareness of the gravity of today’s cultural and ecological crisis must be
translated into new habits. Many people know that our current progress and the
mere amassing of things and pleasures are not enough to give meaning and joy to
the human heart, yet they feel unable to give up what the market sets before
them. In those countries which should be making the greatest changes in
consumer habits, young people have a new ecological sensitivity and a generous
spirit, and some of them are making admirable efforts to protect the
environment. At the same time, they have grown up in a milieu of extreme
consumerism and affluence which makes it difficult to develop other habits. We
are faced with an educational challenge.
Environmental
education has broadened its goals. Whereas in the beginning it was mainly
centered on scientific information, consciousness-raising and the prevention of
environmental risks, it tends now to include a critique of the “myths” of a
modernity grounded in a utilitarian mindset (individualism, unlimited progress,
competition, consumerism, the unregulated market). It seeks also to restore the
various levels of ecological equilibrium, establishing harmony within
ourselves, with others, with nature and other living creatures, and with God.
Environmental education should facilitate making the leap towards the
transcendent which gives ecological ethics its deepest meaning. It needs
educators capable of developing an ethics of ecology, and helping people,
through effective pedagogy, to grow in solidarity, responsibility and
compassionate care.
Yet this
education, aimed at creating an “ecological citizenship,” is at times limited
to providing information, and fails to instill good habits. The existence of
laws and regulations is insufficient in the long run to curb bad conduct, even
when effective means of enforcement are present. If the laws are to bring about
significant, long-lasting effects, the majority of the members of society must
be adequately motivated to accept them, and personally transformed to respond.
Only by cultivating sound virtues will people be able to make a selfless
ecological commitment. A person who could afford to spend and consume more but
regularly uses less heating and wears warmer clothes, shows the kind of
convictions and attitudes which help to protect the environment. There is a
nobility in the duty to care for creation through little daily actions, and it
is wonderful how education can bring about real changes in lifestyle.
Education
in environmental responsibility can encourage ways of acting which directly and
significantly affect the world around us, such as avoiding the use of plastic
and paper, reducing water consumption, separating refuse, cooking only what can
reasonably be consumed, showing care for other living beings, using public
transport or car-pooling, planting trees, turning off unnecessary lights, or
any number of other practices. All of these reflect a generous and worthy
creativity which brings out the best in human beings. Reusing something instead
of immediately discarding it, when done for the right reasons, can be an act of
love which expresses our own dignity.
Politics
and Economy in Dialogue
Politics
must not be subject to the economy, nor should the economy be subject to the
dictates of an efficiency-driven paradigm of technocracy. Today, in view of the
common good, there is urgent need for politics and economics to enter into a
frank dialogue in the service of life, especially human life. Saving banks at
any cost, making the public pay the price, foregoing a firm commitment to
reviewing and reforming the entire system, only reaffirms the absolute power of
a financial system, a power which has no future and will only give rise to new
crises after a slow, costly and only apparent recovery. The financial crisis of
2007-08 provided an opportunity to develop a new economy, more attentive to
ethical principles, and new ways of regulating speculative financial practices
and virtual wealth. But the response to the crisis did not include rethinking
the outdated criteria which continue to rule the world. Production is not
always rational, and is usually tied to economic variables which assign to
products a value that does not necessarily correspond to their real worth. This
frequently leads to an overproduction of some commodities, with unnecessary
impact on the environment and with negative results on regional economies. The
financial bubble also tends to be a productive bubble. The problem of the real
economy is not confronted with vigor, yet it is the real economy which makes
diversification and improvement in production possible, helps companies to
function well, and enables small and medium businesses to develop and create
employment.
Here too,
it should always be kept in mind that environmental protection cannot be
assured solely on the basis of financial calculations of costs and benefits.
The environment is one of those goods that cannot be adequately safeguarded or
promoted by market forces. Once more, we need to reject a magical conception of
the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an
increase in the profits of companies or individuals. Is it realistic to hope
that those who are obsessed with maximizing profits will stop to reflect on the
environmental damage which they will leave behind for future generations? Where
profits alone count, there can be no thinking about the rhythms of nature, its
phases of decay and regeneration, or the complexity of ecosystems which may be
gravely upset by human intervention. Moreover, biodiversity is considered at
most a deposit of economic resources available for exploitation, with no
serious thought for the real value of things, their significance for persons
and cultures, or the concerns and needs of the poor.
When
nature is viewed solely as a source of profit and gain, this has serious
consequences for society. This vision of
"might is right" has engendered immense inequality, injustice and
acts of violence against the majority of humanity, since resources end up in
the hands of the first comer or the most powerful: the winner takes all.
Completely at odds with this model are the ideals of harmony, justice,
fraternity and peace as proposed by Jesus.
As he said of the powers of his own age:
“You know that the rulers of the gentiles lord it over them, and their
great men exercise authority over them.
It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must
be your servant” (Mt 20: 25-26).
Whenever
these questions are raised, some react by accusing others of irrationally
attempting to stand in the way of progress and human development. But we need
to grow in the conviction that a decrease in the pace of production and consumption
can at times give rise to another form of progress and development. Efforts to
promote a sustainable use of natural resources are not a waste of money, but
rather an investment capable of providing other economic benefits in the medium
term. If we look at the larger picture, we can see that more diversified and
innovative forms of production which impact less on the environment can prove
very profitable. It is a matter of openness to different possibilities which do
not involve stifling human creativity and its ideals of progress, but rather
directing that energy along new channels.
It is not
enough to balance, in the medium term, the protection of nature with financial
gain, or the preservation of the environment with progress. Halfway measures simply
delay the inevitable disaster. Put simply, it is a matter of redefining our
notion of progress. A technological and economic development which does not
leave in its wake a better world and an integrally higher quality of life
cannot be considered progress. Frequently, in fact, people’s quality of life
actually diminishes – by the deterioration of the environment, the low quality
of food or the depletion of resources – in the midst of economic growth. In
this context, talk of sustainable growth usually becomes a way of distracting
attention and offering excuses. It absorbs the language and values of ecology
into the categories of finance and technocracy, and the social and
environmental responsibility of businesses often gets reduced to a series of marketing
and image-enhancing measures.
The
principle of the maximization of profits, frequently isolated from other
considerations, reflects a misunderstanding of the very concept of the economy.
As long as production is increased, little concern is given to whether it is at
the cost of future resources or the health of the environment; as long as the
clearing of a forest increases production, no one calculates the losses
entailed in the desertification of the land, the harm done to biodiversity or
the increased pollution. In a word, businesses profit by calculating and paying
only a fraction of the costs involved. Yet only when the economic and social
costs of using up shared environmental resources are recognized with
transparency and fully borne by those who incur them, not by other peoples or
future generations, can those actions be considered ethical. An instrumental
way of reasoning, which provides a purely static analysis of realities in the
service of present needs, is at work whether resources are allocated by the
market or by state central planning.
Today, it
is the case that some economic sectors exercise more power than states
themselves. But economics without politics cannot be justified, since this
would make it impossible to favor other ways of handling the various aspects of
the present crisis. The mindset which leaves no room for sincere concern for
the environment is the same mindset which lacks concern for the inclusion of
the most vulnerable members of society. For “the current model, with its
emphasis on success and self-reliance, does not appear to favor an investment
in efforts to help the slow, the weak or the less talented to find
opportunities in life.”
Politics
and the economy tend to blame each other when it comes to poverty and environmental
degradation. It is to be hoped that they can acknowledge their own mistakes and
find forms of interaction directed to the common good. While some are concerned
only with financial gain, and others with holding on to or increasing their
power, what we are left with are conflicts or spurious agreements where the
last thing either party is concerned about is caring for the environment and
protecting those who are most vulnerable. Here too, we see how true it is that
“unity is greater than conflict.”
Towards
a New Lifestyle
Since the
market tends to promote extreme consumerism in an effort to sell its products,
people can easily get caught up in a whirlwind of needless buying and spending.
Compulsive consumerism is one example of how the techno-economic paradigm
affects individuals. Romano Guardini had already foreseen this: “The gadgets
and technics forced upon him by the patterns of machine production and of
abstract planning mass man accepts quite simply; they are the forms of life
itself. To either a greater or lesser degree mass man is convinced that his
conformity is both reasonable and just”. This paradigm leads people to believe
that they are free as long as they have the supposed freedom to consume. But
those really free are the minority who wield economic and financial power. Amid
this confusion, postmodern humanity has not yet achieved a new self-awareness
capable of offering guidance and direction, and this lack of identity is a
source of anxiety. We have too many means and only a few insubstantial ends.
The
current global situation engenders a feeling of instability and uncertainty,
which in turn becomes “a seedbed for collective selfishness.” When people
become self-centered and self-enclosed, their greed increases. The emptier a
person’s heart is, the more he or she needs things to buy, own and consume. It
becomes almost impossible to accept the limits imposed by reality. In this
horizon, a genuine sense of the common good also disappears. As these attitudes
become more widespread, social norms are respected only to the extent that they
do not clash with personal needs. So our concern cannot be limited merely to
the threat of extreme weather events, but must also extend to the catastrophic
consequences of social unrest. Obsession with a consumerist lifestyle, above
all when few people are capable of maintaining it, can only lead to violence
and mutual destruction.
Yet all is
not lost. Human beings, while capable of the worst, are also capable of rising
above themselves, choosing again what is good, and making a new start, despite
their mental and social conditioning. We are able to take an honest look at
ourselves, to acknowledge our deep dissatisfaction, and to embark on new paths
to authentic freedom. No system can completely suppress our openness to what is
good, true and beautiful, or our God-given ability to respond to his grace at
work deep in our hearts. I appeal to everyone throughout the world not to
forget this dignity which is ours. No one has the right to take it from us.
A change
in lifestyle could bring healthy pressure to bear on those who wield political,
economic and social power. This is what consumer movements accomplish by
boycotting certain products. They prove successful in changing the way
businesses operate, forcing them to consider their environmental footprint and
their patterns of production. When social pressure affects their earnings,
businesses clearly have to find ways to produce differently. This shows us the
great need for a sense of social responsibility on the part of consumers.
“Purchasing is always a moral – and not simply economic – act.”
The Earth
Charter asked us to leave behind a period of self-destruction and make a new
start, but we have not as yet developed a universal awareness needed to achieve
this. Here, I would echo that courageous challenge: “As never before in
history, common destiny beckons us to seek a new beginning… Let ours be a time
remembered for the awakening of a new reverence for life, the firm resolve to
achieve sustainability, the quickening of the struggle for justice and peace,
and the joyful celebration of life.”
We are
always capable of going out of ourselves towards the other. Unless we do this,
other creatures will not be recognized for their true worth; we are unconcerned
about caring for things for the sake of others; we fail to set limits on
ourselves in order to avoid the suffering of others or the deterioration of our
surroundings. Disinterested concern for others, and the rejection of every form
of self-centeredness and self-absorption, are essential if we truly wish to
care for our brothers and sisters and for the natural environment. These
attitudes also attune us to the moral imperative of assessing the impact of our
every action and personal decision on the world around us. If we can overcome
individualism, we will truly be able to develop a different lifestyle and bring
about significant changes in society.
