Background documents;
The risk of global warming is one of the most serious threats to God's Creation. Human action is accelerating the increase of green house gas emissions into the atmosphere. This is leading to a greater "greenhouse effect" and therefore to global warming, bringing the risk of serious human, ecological and economic damage to many parts of the world. This is now generally accepted by the scientific community as well as by the political leadership of our world. At the UN Climate Change conference in Kyoto in December 1997, the fact that world leaders agreed on binding targets for reductions of greenhouse gases and specific timetables demonstrated a strong agreement on the seriousness of the issue. At the same time, however, the negotiations at Kyoto and the continuing post-Kyoto process have turned out to be a painful example of a weak political will, unwilling to put sufficient emphasis on long term strategies to combat serious threats to planet Earth before short term economic considerations.
As well as its vital ecological importance, the issue of climate change challenges large economic interests and the lifestyle of the rich. The global nature of the issue and its rather abstract features can make it a difficult problem to grasp, however. It is more difficult to mobilise ordinary people over this issue than for some of the more concrete ecological catastrophes. The political will also turns out to be weak when the time comes for agreeing the concrete actions, for example in taxes on energy, changes to legislation, and putting pressure on industries to conform. Instead, what mostly sets the real political agenda is the concern for continuous economic growth (measured as the gross national product per capita) and for quick solutions of the problem of unemployment.
To this is added political pressure from the fossil fuel producers and car manufacturers who have sought to discredit climate change, using weak arguments which are not accepted by the main scientific community. They say that we must not harm the economy as long as we do not know for sure that it is worthwhile reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These arguments have been promoted in expensive TV advertising campaigns and gained disproportionate attention in media. They play upon the fact that because science is partly based on hypotheses and models, we do not have a 100% assurance. Of course, uncertainty is always the nature of science, but in this case we cannot afford to put off acting until the catastrophe is a fact. A good comparison is the example of acidification from gaseous emissions. The issue was contested for a long time (and still is by some) until the forests in North and Central Europe started to die.
The guiding rule must be the precautionary principle. This means that in a situation of uncertainty, where the consequences would be very serious, one should not wait for final confirmation before taking action, but we should choose the alternative that is the least risky for human beings and nature. For global warming the threat is great, and we have no time to lose in starting to combat it.
Return to top of document
2.
Why should churches involve themselves in the issue of climate change?
There are two fundamental reasons why the churches should get involved in such a complex issue as the one of climate change :
a). The fact that the climate system of our planet is being disturbed by human activity is an indication that there are limits, which God the Creator has imposed on us, which are being transgressed. As Christians, taking our belief in God our Creator seriously, there is no way to justify neglecting this challenge. We have a responsibility in meeting the challenge both in terms of changing our daily life and in terms of mobilising pressure towards power holders.
b). The churches can contribute by bringing our holistic ethical perspective to this very special challenge. The issue of climate change highlights some fundamental problems about the question of development - for example in the lack of will of the rich to undertake a real metanoia (turn around) in terms of our lifestyle and our responsibility to weaker and poorer regions and their people. The issue of climate change is a deeply ethical issue because it is a problem caused by the polluting lifestyle of the rich industrialised countries but the consequences will be suffered disproportionately by the people of low-level island states and coastal regions, by poor developing countries in general, and by future generations.
Return to top of document
3.
The Situation after the Kyoto Climate Change Summit
3.1 The General Perspective
The Kyoto conference was the third conference of the parties under the United Nation Climate Change Convention. The convention was one of the results of the conference on sustainable development in Rio de Janeiro 1992. When the parties met for the first time in Berlin 1995, they agreed on a mandate and a process towards a protocol - a legally binding international agreement - on reductions of green house gases. This protocol was to be agreed upon in Kyoto. A protocol with binding reduction targets was indeed negotiated, but many subsidiary items remains to be solved. These may very well influence adversely the effects of what was agreed at Kyoto. One important question is the responsibility of the old industrialised countries in relations to the heterogeneous group of developing countries. Another question is how the reductions can be done. Should they be done by domestic actions in each individual country? Can the reductions be met instead by trading the amounts of emissions permitted with other conuntries, or by investing in various project in other countries? The negotiations are continuing leading to a fourth "Conference of the Parties" to be held in Buenos Aires in November 1998.
Following Kyoto, there is now, more than ever, a need for a massive pressure from the citizens of the world. This is crucial for example in the USA, there the Senate is very reluctant that USA should ratify the Kyoto protocol. The churches can play an important role here. The National Council of Churches is now working with a campaign to convince the Senate to ratify the prorocol. Recently the Council sent a letter, signed by 24 heads of the NCC member churches, for president Clinton (3).
3.2 In the European Context
In the family of the rich, EU has played the role of "the good guy", pushing for real reduction targets in contrast to countries like the US, Australia, Japan and some others. The EU has also been working seriously over the question of how to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases at home. It has also been more understanding of the attitude of the developing countries. They agree that the industrialised countries must take the lead in reducing the emissions, letting the poorer nations to have a space to develop their societies. There are many reasons why the EU has been more progressive. One important reason is the long and strong influence from NGOs towards the governments and the good understanding of cooperation and dialogue between the civil society and the power holders.
On the other hand, the EU has proved to be quite weak when USA has pushed for its own goals. One reason for the weakness of the EU is the internal discussions between the members states on who should take on what responsibility. Also, in practice, the CO2 emissions from the EU as a whole continue to increase. There are many decisions at stake on the future limitations of emissions of private cars, on energy systems, emissions from industries, etc. What are now needed in Europe are the practical actions which will bring about a progressive and real implementation of the political statements.
To be added : figures on the most important sources and a short text on what is at stake.
The European non-EU countries could be divided into two or possibly three groups - the rich West European countries, Norway, Iceland and Switzerland, and the former communist states, which could in turn be divided into a group on the EU-fast track and the others. For the former communist states the general trend is that, because of the break down of the old system, many of the countries have decreased their emissions. At the same time most of these countries are struggling with weak economies. There is not such a strong will to give priority for environmental issues in general and global warming in particular. In the climate change negotiations the Central European countries and the Baltic states sought to cooperate with the EU, while for example Russia played another game. Despite the fact that Russia has reduced its emissions of CO2 by 30% since 1990, it was able to negotiate a stabilisation target by 2008/2012 compared to 1990 in the Kyoto protocol. In reality this means that Russia is allowed to increase its emission by 30% during the coming ten-fifteen years - or sell parts of it for hard currency. An important task for central and eastern European churches and their environmental NGOs is to gain support for the importance of the ecological issues and to inform about the real threat of climate change.
Retutn to top of document
4. What have the churches done so far?
Church representatives have for a long time been involved in the discussions on climate change. The World Council of Churches closely followed the work leading up to the Kyoto convention and has taken part as NGO observers in the negotiations under the convention. In doing so the WCC has gained a deep respect from many governments (not the least from the countries of the South), the UN Climate Change Convention and also from the environmental NGOs. Here the WCC really stands for an ethical perspective with a focus on the weak and poor.
The WCC has published several study reports, especially the two reports produced as a result of consultations in Driebergen in 1993 and 1996, with delegates drawn from across the world. In 1996, the WCC also organised a climate change campaign, aiming to mobilise pressure from the church members from industrialised countries towards their governments, in the process towards Kyoto. It was aimed in particular at the sixth meeting of the ad hoc group of the Berlin Mandate (AGBM6) in Bonn in March 1997. The results of the campaign were presented at a special ceremony in connection with AGBM6, attended by senior UN negotiators and national representatives of the churches participating in the campaign. Many church members in Europe were involved in the WCC climate change campaign, which was supported by a broad spectra of churches and also from other parts of the civil society. In many of the ecumenical European meetings, for example at the second European Ecumencail Assembly in Graz in June 1997, the issue of climate change was one of the most discussed environmental issues. Climate change was also a very important factor in the critical report on sustainable development of the European Ecumenical Commission on Church and Society, which was addressed to the EU institutions, which has led to ongoing dialogue with key officials in Brussels on climate change and transport. There are now good opportunities to build on the WCC work and these other developments in the framework of the European Christian Environment Network, ECEN.
In a number of European countries, churches and ecumenical councils have been active in dialogue with their governments on the issue. In some countries the churches have also cooperated closely with some environmental NGOs. The work for WCC in the climate change negotiations also opened up good relations between the European network of environmental NGOs dealing with climate changeand some of the European councils and churches. These dialogies, contacts and relationships could be very useful and should be developed further by the ECEN.
Return to top of document
5.
Proposal on future work on climate change
A group of people consisting of official environmental officers and church related persons interested in the issue of climate change should preferably form a sub-network under the ECEN.
The issue of climate change is linked to many of the other fields that the network is to expected to be working with - for example the issues of Mobility, Agenda 21 and the work on Ecology and Economy. These links are important to keep in mind. We need to be effective with our resources, and avoid duplicating our work. Therefore it is a need to specify the tasks for the climate change work of the ECEN network. It is suggested that these could be as follows :
- To build up our competence in two areas - in understanding the science of climate change and the practical methods to combat it, and in understanding the political processes involved.
- To inform the churches about the seriousness of the matter and to mobilise pressure on the relevant power holders.
- To support each other in the work that is being done in each of our churches or countries in lobbying for progressive political change on the issue of climate change.
- To inform each other on national policies and implementation.
- To keep the network updated on what is happening, in the climate change negotiations, i e to stay in contact with the WCC, the environmental NGOs, the EU, and the UN secretariat. To provide analyses and interpretations of the information.
- To keep the network updated on current work on policies and measures on climate change within the European institutions, especially in liasion with any future environmental working group of the Commission for Church and Society of CEC.
- To formulate suggestions on European campaigns and actions, and to put these suggestions to the national churches, as well as to the Commission for Church and Society of CEC.
The network does not have the mandate to speak on behalf of the European churches, for example in dialogue with the European institutions. Therefore there is a need for a corresponding working group, mandated by the CEC and/or the CEC Commission of Church and Society, with the task to continue the dialogue with the institutions on the issue of climate change on behalf of the churches. Preferably these mandated persons should also take an active part in the ECEN climate change sub-network .
It is important that the churches develop their own church-related environmental network with its own activity. However it is crucial that he church climate change network develop close contacts with the European environmental NGOs, for example with the umbrella Climate Action Europe as well as separate movements like the WWF, Friends of the Earth etc. The nature of the links will differ from country to country. In some cases these NGOs can help with detailed information and analyses that might be difficult for the church environmental officers to gain because of lack of time and resources. Because the churches are able to reach wider groups than the environmental NGOs, most of the environmentalists look upon the churches as useful partners in the work for the changes necessary to combat climate change.
Karin Lexén, September 13
English changes by Donald Bruce 18 September 1998
|
Back to Top of the Page
|
european christian environmental network
|
