Managing the Future

Managing the Future

Challenges to Society and Business from Science, Ethics and Religious Belief

A conference held at the Royal Society of Arts (RSA), 24th February 2004

The John Ray Initiative (JRI) with the London Institute of Contemporary Christianity, and supported by the John Templeton Foundation, the Shell Foundation and the RSA brought together experts from a range of disciplines to discuss how society should manage the future in the light of environmental, social, ethical and religious concerns. This paper outlines their conclusions. It does not attempt to provide a complete analysis or report entire contributions from individuals, rather to document briefly the main themes of the presentations and discussions that occurred.

The Big Picture

Whether in our own lives or beyond, we are faced with a multitude of issues that are shaping every part of the future. At the local level, the challenges are daunting; globally, they are immense. A complex web of issues that threaten many of our assumptions about the way we live on this planet have developed as the human race has proliferated. We face repeated warnings about environmental degradation, dire predictions from climate change experts, a widening gap between rich and poor, and between the developed and the developing world. How can we make decisions about managing our future on planet earth that are equitable and sustainable – as well as plausible?

Many of the problems we face are inter-linked and hard to dissect. But it is clear that we need to act. Yet there is an even more insidious complication: we live in a culture of denial about the size of the problems. We find it difficult to look into the future and so we take the easy way out and carry on as if nothing is wrong. Even for Christian communities who understand that a Biblical calling to live distinctively in this world extends to every aspect of their lives, there is also often a denial and disconnection. How do we deal with denial and move to decision-making? What is the way forward?

In attempting to answer these questions the issues turned on the nature of our democracies; that each side, politicians and people, are looking to the other to move first. The ethical dimension could help to break this logjam - individual consciences matter.

Approaching sustainability: the challenges

Growing out of control

A fundamental barrier to sustainable development is that the current assumptions about economic growth are wholly incompatible with sustainability. An economy that follows an exponential growth function and relies on exploiting non-renewable resources without any limitations can never be sustainable.

‘No responsible business would borrow unsustainably, or steal from its shareholders or employees, in order to provide an artificial short-term boost in salaries… Equally there is no economic sense in an approach to wealth creation today that squanders the stock of ecological or social resources we need in order to be able to create wealth tomorrow.’ John Ashton (LEAD International).

Another problem comes from the use of traditional economic measures such as GNP (Gross National Product), which is only a measure of money spent. It does not take into account the value of changes on any externality (e.g. resources on which the economy relies) and is totally inadequate in terms of measuring sustainability.

As a result of connections through trade, travel and electronic communication, the world is inter-linked as never before; consequently choices at all levels have increasingly wider knock-on effects. For example we are now seeing how the behaviour of certain nations (in relation to use of resources) is having effects on other nations – particularly in aggravating the effects of climate change. But despite moves towards a single global community, there is little commitment to sustainability and governments have not developed the reflexes of such a community to address these major issues. The lack of action regarding climate change is an affront to most notions of equity, and in this respect and so many other ways, poorer nations continue to suffer at the expense of the rich.

Urgency undermined

Political agendas tend to be set by the frequency of elections and hence are often short-termist. This means that they do not deal with long-term issues such as those concerning the environment, where investment is needed now to mitigate effects in a non-certain future. Such behaviour reinforces the assumption that we can continue as we are – a belief deeply embedded in politics – and which shows in the absence of urgency in addressing the issues of sustainability.

Political or administrative challenges about the nature and number of complex cross-cutting issues are not even faced. They are not easy to define and the nature of the problems makes them appear overwhelming. The result is a lack of political pressure. But this is no excuse for lack of action. Inaction by government leads to a lack of public awareness and commitment to addressing such issues.

Trying to make a difference

The challenges in the corporate and voluntary sectors are no less. The development and environment sectors have traditionally been suspicious of business, arguing that business not only causes problems to the biosphere but that they also exploit poor communities. Kurt Hoffman of the Shell Foundation challenges this view. Whilst recognising the positive efforts of the development community in helping poor communities, he points out that the traditional development approach has largely failed to achieve viable economic development amongst poor people. If poverty is to be substantially alleviated it must be recognised that poverty is not simply about a lack of money, but a lack of sustainable economic development.

‘There’s a growing sense that the private sector and market mechanisms should play in future a much more important role in getting basic services to the poorest groups…in catalysing sustainable development among them.’ Kurt Hoffman (Director, Shell Foundation)

Foundations of concern

Ethics and religion are concerned with the establishment and the application of values, which can’t be determined from science alone. Values such as stewardship and care for the natural world, fairness and justice in society, and intergenerational equity underpin ‘sustainable living’, but the broadest ethical principle underlying sustainability is the respect for life.

‘Humans have to be moral in order to make our ecology work. There can be no intelligent human ecology except that which invokes us to use land justly and charitably.’ Holmes Rolston III (Colorado State University).

But such values are often submerged by a world dominated by economic growth and free market dynamics, with the sort of consequences already presented. They tend to be dismissed as ‘religious’, but the foundation for such values is often religion. The Christian motivation in caring for the earth is that it is part of God’s creation. In the creation accounts early in the Judeo-Christian scriptures, humans were given responsibility for it as God’s stewards, to manage and nurture the earth with respect. Yet even within the Christian community there is a level of indifference in facing up to environmental problems, and a reluctance to acknowledge our responsibility to do something about them. Denial again prevails.

‘We must confront this history of Christian indifference and unawareness.’ Right Reverend John Oliver (former Bishop of Hereford).

Positive contributions from…

Science

‘Sustainable consumption has an attraction because it suggests that consumption could be non-threatening if only we reach towards equilibrium between use and renewal, one of the greatest challenges of this new century’ Sir Brian Heap FRS (Master of St. Edmund’s College Cambridge)

Sustainable consumption is a vital component of the concept of sustainable development. It is about consuming differently and consuming efficiently, while at the same time having an improved quality of life. It has started to rise up the political agenda since the Earth Summit in 1992, but it has still not made much impact.

Brian Heap suggests a ‘blueprint’ for achieving sustainable consumption, which includes:

-  New remedies e.g. in healthcare through biotechnology

-  Dematerialisation e.g. increased resource productivity

-  Optimisation e.g. adoption of different consumption patterns usually through the influence of government actions and investment

Science can help in both the analysis of the problems of sustainability, and to find solutions. But science and technology alone are insufficient to resolve the challenges at the heart of the issue of over-consumption. For this we need to address the values we hold.

‘…whilst science may inform and limit our choices, it doesn’t teach us about nature and, most importantly, how to value it.’ Holmes Rolston III

Ethics

We should be under no illusion that the difficulties faced in shifting towards a sustainable lifestyle of appropriate consumption are formidable, particularly in wealthy nations. But individuals do seem to be thinking more about their lifestyles and the impact of them. During the last decade 25% of British adults aged 30-59 have chosen to downshift their lifestyles, with an average reduction in income of 40%. The main reason for this behaviour was because the excessive pursuit of money and materialism comes at a substantial cost to people’s lives and those of their families. It is increasingly being shown that the more materialistic values are at the centre of life, the worse quality of life is.

Many of the solutions to the problems we now face will emerge, most creatively and powerfully, not from political or secular authorities, but from the way we see ourselves.’ Jonathon Porritt (Chairman, Sustainable Development Commission)

Religion

Is altruism necessary to underpin sustainable consumption? Living sustainably may well require self-discipline and agape love (selfless love for all people), and that is not the norm in our society. Religion offers a solution here. Indeed Christianity strikes at the heart of this, fundamentally addressing the issue of human selfishness and requiring a response of self-sacrifice. Love for fellow humans and a commitment to be stewards of creation - and to be good stewards - motivates Christian believers to care about what is happening to the earth. This may not always be evident (as mentioned earlier) but Christianity provides a human ecology that calls us to use air, land and water, and all other resources, justly and charitably.

Finding a way forward

How do we learn from these failings and opportunities towards making more responsible decisions in the future? Denial of the problems and commitment to true sustainability exist at all levels. The challenge lies in recognising and overcoming denial, and joining up commitments. We can talk about top-down or bottom-up approaches but a clear commitment to sustainability is needed at all levels and areas of society, and the response needs to be integrated for it to have lasting impact. Effective leadership is required.

Political will

These challenges regarding leadership and commitment are particularly acute for government, both national and local. Our leaders must use political imagination to create the agenda for international pressure, to establish consensus through a strong knowledge base. To enable this, government institutions need to be strong and directed to meeting tangible goals through sustainable management. Programme implementation needs to be accountable and transparent, with effective monitoring and reporting. Government must be held to account.

There needs to be a much stronger commitment to the pursuit of equity across the global community than we have so far achieved, and we must build this into the way we conduct diplomacy, design institutions, frame politics. For example, dealing with climate change equitably means taking responsibility. Different countries are responsible for different levels of emissions, so there are different degrees of obligation for tackling the problem. And different countries have different capacities to deal with the consequences.

Opinion-formers and policy-makers potentially have a crucial role in speaking out and advising on solutions to the problems, and making the most of the many ‘catastrophes’ we face as incentives for change. We also need effective institutions for policy analysis.

Motivation to change

Governments need to face the reality that they cannot rely solely on self-denial and altruism. Individuals and businesses need guidance to see the benefits of sustainability in tangible ways. Governments need to recognise this and through incentives and other methods do more to emphasise that sustainability is a moral responsibility of all.

People will need incentives – carrots and sticks! Government is good at exhortation. When sustainable lifestyles benefit people in tangible ways – in securing employment, putting money in their products, bringing relief or benefit through the council tax then we will see the commitment and have sustainable communities as the norm. I believe it is possible. The alternative is unthinkable. Graham Ashworth (former Chief Executive, Going for Green)

Government needs to take the lead in sustainability education, particularly engaging progressively to encourage individuals to live more sustainably. For instance, different consumption patterns could be created through the influence of government actions and investment: conscious consumption by consumers who choose more wisely because of the availability of better information, and appropriate consumption that depends on the involvement of citizens in a deeper debate about whether the quality of life in civic, cultural and religious terms is enhanced or diminished by consumption behaviour. There is a massive challenge in developing education in schools for all ages. The Eco-school Programme is one example of attempts to get young people engaged and active in these issues.

Industry must be involved. Policy makers and industry together need to provide a vision for sustainable consumption policy, and then they need to make the blueprint visible. So far this has not progressed very far, locally or globally. It does not obviously win votes, even if it is at the heart of sustainable development and conflict avoidance.

Political leaders can’t deliver all the answers, but they are key, and they need to be courageous. And all of this should be done through allies at community level, local groups that already exist, recognising their strengths and the key role that they can play, building and developing active citizenship.

Do not underestimate the strength of communities and local groups, as well as international alliances. Derek Osborn CB (Chairman, UN Environment & Development Committee)