biodiversity Archives

By Anil Singh

Anil Singh has a MSc in Social-Ecological Resilience for Sustainable Development from the Stockholm Resilience Centre at Stockholm University. His research has investigated the links between biodiversity and ecosystem services at the Global Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere project at the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences. He is currently focused on understanding how sustainability transformations occur in social-ecological systems.

“Endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.”¹ —Charles Darwin

One of the most astonishing aspects of our planet is the diversity of life that has evolved over millions of years. Scientists estimate that 8.7 million species inhabit the Earth. Our knowledge of this diversity is still at an early stage; 14% of terrestrial species and 9% of marine species have been documented. This enormous gap in knowledge about the diversity of life is surpassed by an even greater gap in how we might preserve and protect it.²

The rich tapestry of life on Earth has been referred to as “the library of life.” Today, this wondrous library is on fire. Biodiversity loss is proceeding at rates unprecedented in human history. Geological records reveal that there have been five mass extinctions of life on Earth, each driven by natural, catastrophic events. For decades evidence has been mounting that we are currently in a sixth mass extinction, mainly driven by anthropogenic influences.³ We are witnessing the unraveling of the tapestry of life through the loss of species, the decline in genetic diversity, and the compromising of essential ecosystem functions.

Many who are aware of this crisis are trying to rescue as many “books” as possible from the library of life and in most cases are, at best, only able to take a cursory glance at the titles on the covers before they are lost forever. Species that evolved over millions of years are becoming extinct before science can account for or study them.⁴ That the planet’s biodiversity and ecosystems are in a state of crisis calls for an unprecedented, monumental transformation. Turning the tide will require the confluence of an array of factors.

Interconnectedness and Complexity

The dominant understanding of humanity’s relationship to nature undergirds its collective behavior towards the natural world. With regard to the mutualism of existence, the Bahá’í writings encourage us:

Reflect upon the inner realities of the universe, the secret wisdoms involved, the enigmas, the interrelationships, the rules that govern all. For every part of the universe is connected with every other part by ties that are very powerful and admit of no imbalance.⁵

Ecology, the study of relationships, connections, and interactions among organisms and their environment, confirms that biodiversity underpins the functioning of ecosystems and the production of ecosystem services, such as crop production, pollination, water purification, coastal protection, and climate regulation—services that are essential for human well-being and flourishing.

Social, cultural, economic, technological, institutional, and ecological variables interact in complex ways that drive global declines in nature. Given the complexity of the interactions of these social-ecological systems, it is difficult to predict, plan for, and manage the repercussions of biodiversity loss and the degradation of natural systems. Consider, for example, the problem of ecological cascades in which the loss of a keystone species can disrupt an entire ecosystem and can lead to the loss of other species and, at times, the breakdown of an entire ecosystem, in ways that are often poorly understood. For instance, the removal of wolves from Yellowstone National Park in the early twentieth century led to an overpopulation of elk, which in turn overgrazed young trees and vegetation. This overgrazing caused a significant decline in beaver populations, which rely on trees for building dams, and even altered the flow of rivers. The reintroduction of wolves decades later was one of a web of factors that contributed to the restoration of balance, demonstrating the intricate connections within ecosystems that can unravel when key species are lost.⁶

Once cascades are set in motion, there are usually time lags before tipping points are reached and the related effects are felt. Symptoms of transgressing such tipping points often manifest themselves in the effects on the economies that depend on the healthy functioning of ecosystems to ensure a sustained flow of goods and services. Individuals, institutions, and communities need to develop the capacity to navigate the inherent unpredictability of these systems in ways that are good for nature and people.

A recognition of these interactions and relationships raises many questions: How can our individual relationship with nature be rethought to create a more sustainable future? How can collective volition be harnessed towards preserving and restoring natural systems? And, recognizing that local, regional, and global governance are all needed to address the challenges of biodiversity and ecosystem degradation, how can interactions between these three levels become coherent, integrated, and harmonious?

Economies within Ecosystems

Economic systems are embedded in social systems, which are in turn embedded in the ecosystems that constitute the biosphere of our planet. The compartmentalization of these systems has greatly influenced the way in which we consume and produce. A much deeper consciousness of our interdependence with each other and the biosphere that supports all life is needed if we are to create a sustainable future. The Universal House of Justice has highlighted the seriousness of the problem, saying, “The deepening environmental crisis, driven by a system that condones the pillage of natural resources to satisfy an insatiable thirst for more, suggests how entirely inadequate is the present conception of humanity’s relationship with nature.”⁷

This inadequate conception of our relationship with the natural world plays out in our patterns of consumption that have negative impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems. For example, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has estimated that fish stocks are in decline with two-thirds being fished to the limit or overfished and that 70% of the fish population is fully used, overused, or in crisis.⁸ Food production systems are the main drivers of biodiversity loss globally and threaten 86% of the species at risk for extinction.⁹ The Universal House of Justice has pointed out that “every choice…as employee or employer, producer or consumer, borrower or lender, benefactor or beneficiary—leaves a trace, and the moral duty to lead a coherent life demands that one’s economic decisions be in accordance with lofty ideals, that the purity of one’s aims be matched by the purity of one’s actions to fulfill those aims.”¹⁰

Human Nature

The reductive and limiting view of human nature as self-interested, coldly rational, and driven by the desire to maximize consumption and profit has been devastating to humanity’s relationship with nature. Our natural systems have come to be seen as the repositories of seemingly infinite resources from which products and services can be derived to fulfill unchecked human needs and wants. The situation is further exacerbated by the “distancing” of consumers from the sources of these products and services. Species extinctions and ecological degradation are often out of sight and out of mind. This seemingly invisible ecosystem degradation and loss of biodiversity are often considered as externalities to the economic system and are not reflected in the costs incurred in harvesting and exploiting natural resources. The disconnection between the consequences of our actions and their effects on nature is especially pronounced in urban centers, where most of humanity now resides.

Growing consciousness about the consequences of our choices on the natural world coupled with an awareness of human capacity to mitigate these negative impacts has led, in some cases, to a deeper reflection on human nature and how our understanding of it affects our sense of self, our relationship with nature, and our purpose in life. A growing number of voices are casting doubt on the notion that we are purely self-interested beings bent solely on consumption and exploitation.

The Bahá’í writings assert that human beings possess a dual nature. While our lower nature inclines us to selfishness, greed, and exploitation, our higher nature, when cultivated, seeks transcendence and is inclined toward stewardship, altruism, self-restraint, and reciprocity. Neglect of this higher nature has led to an inaccurate view of the human being’s relationship to others and to the physical world and a neglect of an essential part of human development and fulfillment.

The Role of Religion

Bahá’ís view true religion as a system of knowledge and practice that, like science, evolves as humanity advances from one stage of collective development to the next. Conceptions and practices of religion that are rooted in the distant past cannot release the system’s potential to address contemporary environmental challenges, just as science as it was conceived and practiced in earlier stages of civilizational development is not adequate for the challenges humanity faces today.

In its purest form, religion seeks to nurture and develop the higher nature in human beings, fostering ethical behavior through spiritual education and the application of spiritual principles in service to society. As the Universal House of Justice has written, religion “reaches to the roots of motivation”:

When it has been faithful to the spirit and example of the transcendent Figures who gave the world its great belief systems, it has awakened in whole populations capacities to love, to forgive, to create, to dare greatly, to overcome prejudice, to sacrifice for the common good and to discipline the impulses of animal instinct.¹¹

Today, to serve as a force for civilization building, religion must cultivate in humanity a consciousness of its oneness and wholeness and the critical need for a harmonious relationship with the natural world. Bahá’í communities around the world are dedicated to discovering this potential, in collaboration with like-minded individuals and groups.

One of the ways it is learning to release this potential is through the development of an evolving system of spiritual education that aims to awaken in populations requisite qualities and capacities.

For example, among its wide-ranging educational endeavors is the Bahá’í community’s junior youth spiritual empowerment program, which “encourages thoughtful discernment at an age when the call of materialism grows more insistent.”¹² The study of thought-provoking texts nurtures in junior youth spiritual qualities and attitudes, enhances their knowledge and understanding, and cultivates their skills. Study is complemented with service projects, often in relation to safeguarding the local habitat, that help youth translate what they learn into meaningful action. In this way their higher nature is nurtured, and they begin to see how their efforts can contribute to stewardship of the natural world. As their capacity for collective action grows, they are able to engage in projects with greater levels of complexity.

While the experience of the Bahá’í world is as yet modest across the planet, there are now countless initiatives undertaken by adolescents inspired and prepared to contribute to the betterment of the world. Among these was a service project devised by a group of junior youth in Okcheay, Cambodia. They planted trees along a stretch of road to improve air quality and provide shelter from the heat, but the community witnessed a further impact later in the year when the trees protected the road from severe soil erosion caused by a flood.¹³

Tree planting along a section of road in Okcheay, Cambodia

Nature as a Reflection of the Sacred

The human-nature relationship is fundamentally spiritual and cannot be described purely in material or economic terms. Reconceptualizing this relationship influences how we view nature and how we choose to interact with it.

The Bahá’í writings describe nature as a reflection of the sacred and imply that meditation on various aspects of the natural world can serve as a means for drawing closer to the Divine: “When…thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of all things, and the individuality of each, thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord’s mercy in every created thing.”¹⁴

The growth in spiritual consciousness engendered by such contemplation inspires humility in the human soul and strengthens a spiritual connection with the natural world. Bahá’u’lláh has written that every person conscious of the sacredness of nature cannot “while walking upon the earth” but feel abashed, “inasmuch as” we are “fully aware that the thing which is the source of” our “prosperity,” “wealth,” “might,” “exaltation,” our “advancement and power is, as ordained by God, the very earth which is trodden beneath the feet of all…. There can be no doubt that whoever is cognizant of this truth, is cleansed and sanctified from all pride, arrogance, and vainglory.”¹⁵

Harnessing Collective Will

Intimately connected to our relationship with nature is our relationship with each other. Maintaining healthy ecosystems requires that communities and indeed whole societies act together based on a consciousness of the oneness of humankind. Religion can inspire such collective consciousness and foster collective will and action.

In the village of Agua Azul in Norte del Cauca, Colombia, for instance, thousands of people connected to the Bahá’í community started consulting about the revival of the natural habitat when plans to build a local House of Worship were initiated in 2012. A series of community consultations gave “rise to an acute awareness about the physical environment and its relationship to the spiritual and social well-being of the population.”¹⁶

Artistic depiction of the House of Worship in Norte del Cauca, Colombia

Over decades the region’s lush native forest, teeming with life and land cultivated by local farmers, had been taken over by sugar cane farms. After 2012, however, communities began to restore the land’s rich ecological diversity through a reforestation project. From near and far, local inhabitants contributed seeds and plants to a collective initiative that they viewed as belonging to the whole population.

In addition to restoring the biophysical aspects of the region, the project restored the equally important biocultural aspects. “This native forest that we are going to grow should be a school, should be a place of learning,” said one of the remaining local farmers in the early days of the project. His longing for knowledge of the ecology of the region to be passed down to the younger generations would be fulfilled.¹⁷ Students now gather regularly on the grounds of the Bahá’í House of Worship and the native forest, called the “Bosca Nativa,” to study and plan projects together.

One project by participants in the Preparation for Social Action (PSA) program was to plant and nurture 10,000 trees. As a step towards this goal, a call was made to the communities of Jamundí and Cali to come together for a community meeting, or “minga,” to consult about engaging in a project called “Transforming the Environment,” with the goal of planting 600 trees. In response, in just one day, more than 500 individuals planted 565 saplings—a practical expression of the participants’ heightened consciousness that ties of integration are fortified in their communities through a strong connection with nature. Given that forests operate on much longer timescales than human lives, an important aspect of this initiative is that children and adolescents are engaged in a process of learning and teaching. As they gain insights and skills in regenerating the native forest and strengthening community ties, they can pass this knowledge on to future generations, ensuring the long-term sustainability of the endeavor.

Photos of local farmers and children engaged in a reforestation project near the House of Worship

From Tragedy of the Commons to Stewardship of the Commons

These examples illustrate how communities can begin to overcome an issue that often lies at the heart of managing biodiversity and ecosystems, namely, the collective management of common pool resources and the ecosystems from which they are derived, such as fish from coral reefs and timber from forests.

Common pool resources are often shared among diverse groups with varying interests and needs. Over time, such resources are overused and may become depleted. Theoretically, if all users cease to exploit the common pool resource, the sustainability of the resource is ensured. However, such a situation introduces a dilemma: if one group desists from harvesting and another does not, the group that desisted stands to lose any short-term gains that it potentially would have received. Further, the group that persisted benefits from those short-term gains and the resource still eventually collapses. This is referred to as “The Tragedy of the Commons” and has been a persistent problem in ecology and environmental management that has led to proposals of various solutions for managing the resources derived from biodiversity and ecosystems.¹⁸

Such solutions often include advocating either for privatization of ownership or for government control of the resource, in the conviction that because local users will inevitably deplete a resource, some form of external intervention is needed. Underpinning such negative assumptions is belief in the inherent competitive nature of groups, the dominance of self-interest over collective interest, and the oversimplification of complex social-ecological interactions. And these ideas, in turn, shape the formulaic models that outside entities promote to solve the problems of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation at the local level. Such simplistic approaches often involve attempts to isolate a specific part of the local or regional system without due consideration to its interconnectedness to the whole.

Decades of research by Elinor Ostrom and other economists and scientists have shown that the “Tragedy of the Commons” is not inevitable—and, indeed, that local communities have, in many cases, managed common pool resources in ways that conserve and protect the resource and ensure that there is equitable distribution of rights and access to it.¹⁹

Such stewardship of the commons is more likely when certain elements are in place. For example, face to face communication as opposed to computer-mediated communication often leads to higher levels of cooperation and collaboration, leading to higher returns for the parties involved.

In contrast, overreliance on top-down interventions reduces reciprocity, stymies local collective action, and overlooks the ability of communities to self-regulate and comply with clearly stated regulations when their rationale is understood. There is also evidence that local indigenous knowledge, complemented by scientific insights, is an important factor in restoring and protecting common pool resources. The importance of social learning and adaptation is also emphasized in many of these case studies.²⁰

While there has been significant progress in both the theory and practice of environmental management, garnering the combined will of communities, societies, and humanity as a whole requires agreement about shared fundamental principles and values that serve as a compass for diverse stakeholders and help mobilize them in pursuit of common aspirations and goals. Alas, too often, human affairs are characterized by competition and conflict, which do not enable diverse groups to identify such common aspirations and the principles that underlie them, handicapping endeavors that seek environmental stewardship and conservation.

In this context, the Bahá’í community sees religion as a source of universal principles around which communities organize themselves and a potent force for harnessing collective action and channeling it towards addressing the complex issues facing our societies.

Over the last twenty-five years the Bahá’í community has striven to systematically engage in a collective process of capacity building aimed at applying spiritual principles—such as justice, the equality of women and men, the harmony of science and religion, universal education, and the oneness of humanity—to address both social and environmental issues. A prominent feature of this process entails bringing together increasing numbers of people in regular, periodic reflection spaces to learn about how to address the challenges facing their local, regional, and national communities. In such spaces, participants seek to consult together in an atmosphere of unity and cooperation. Given the complex nature of the issues under consideration and the long-term, sustained action needed to address them, participants strive to operate in a mode of learning, seeking increasing levels of unity of thought and action, and refining such action through reflection on experience.

In such spaces dichotomous notions such as “us” vs. “them”, “top down” vs. “bottom up”, “individual rights” vs. “collective rights” etc., yield to more mature conceptions of the relationships that form the foundation of a community’s approach to collective action. These reflection spaces are complemented and bolstered by educational programs aimed at improving both the spiritual and material dimensions of society and, in so doing, nurture relationships based on cooperation and reciprocity, mutual aid and assistance, and a growing recognition of the interconnectedness of humanity and of its relationship to the planet’s biosphere.

Zambia provides an illustrative example of how such a process is unfolding in areas where the PSA program is focusing on the interconnectedness of ecosystems. The insights gained from the educational materials in the program and from the community consultations they inspire, has led to an assessment of and plans to restore some of the ecosystems in the area. For instance, the program has worked with a community whose fish stocks in small ponds have been depleted. Along with efforts to revive the ponds, the participants have engaged in community outreach aimed at raising awareness among the residents about how to fish in more sustainable ways to prevent further depletion of this resource.²¹

In other parts of Africa, the PSA program is assisting participants to approach agriculture in a manner coherent with the spiritual insights and approaches underlying community development. Participants engage in action-research based on scientific approaches and the experience of farmers in other parts of the world. The adaptation of technology is weighed in terms of its effect on community life. Further, participants learn about organic fertilizers, composting, and managing a seed bank. All these topics have implications for biodiversity and ecosystem management: when practiced without due regard to the adaptation of technology and other inputs, agriculture can contribute greatly to biodiversity loss and to compromising ecosystem integrity, while seed banks play a vital role in maintaining crop diversity in an area. And beyond the practical elements of the program, participants gain greater consciousness about the land, learning to see it as a living thing with which humans have a reciprocal relationship.

Participants of a Program for Social Action (PSA) group in Uganda making organic fertilizers and pesticides

These fledgling endeavors provide glimpses into the capacity of local communities to take charge of their own efforts to restore, protect, and conserve common pool resources. They illustrate how insights generated by spiritual and scientific knowledge can crystallize into collective action, showing that the “Tragedy of the Commons” need not be the inevitable fate of communities seeking to manage common pool resources; rather, by creating environments in which religion and science can inspire and guide people, stewardship of the commons can become a tangible reality.

Regional and Global Governance of the Biosphere

Consideration, of course, must also be given to biodiversity, ecosystems, and ecosystem functions that exist at regional and global scales and operate beyond the purview of national jurisdictions. Examples include coral reefs, the atmosphere, the deep ocean, and the polar regions, particularly Antarctica. The Amazon rainforest ecosystem operates within a national jurisdiction, Brazil, but has supranational effects. Coral reefs, while spatially spread out in terms of geographic location, nevertheless form a network of nurseries that sustain regional and global fish stocks. Social, ecological, and economic systems operating at the local, regional, and global levels are interdependent and often linked in ways that are not well understood. These systems are described as being “teleconnected” or “tele-coupled”. Greater coordination and collaboration among institutions and entities across scales will allow regional and global governance structures to manage and regulate these systems.

In the absence of such regional and global governance structures, scientific advances and access to lavish funds in many countries and within some private companies allow for unsustainable and inequitable management. Several examples illustrate this point well:

The patenting and harvesting of marine genetic resources contribute to the development of important medicines.²² This genetic material is arguably the common heritage of all humanity, but without regional and international governance to ensure equal access to the potential benefits of these resources, the risk of the more privileged members of the human family having exclusive access to them looms large.
The management of fish stocks in the open ocean can ensure sustainability, but while laws and conventions exist for national maritime boundaries, there is great ambiguity in terms of the legislative frameworks governing fisheries operating in these regions of the ocean. This has contributed greatly to the unsustainable harvesting of fish stocks and has led to their current decline and, in some cases, their total collapse.
Due regard to the role and protection of pollinators contributes greatly to food production. However, there is growing evidence of a significant global decline in pollinators. Since the majority of crops depend on some form of pollination, this could lead to a crisis in the global food production system and has the potential to negatively impact the food supply of billions of people.

Over the past century, a rising consciousness about the critical role biodiversity plays in the functioning of the biosphere has led to the development of a host of international conventions and treaties aimed at protecting the earth’s library of life. These include the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on Conservation of Migratory Species, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, the World Heritage Convention, the International Plant Protection Convention, and the International Whaling Commission. These treaties and conventions play an important role in assisting nation states to understand the interdependence of the global biosphere and in many cases attempt to include countries in binding agreements to protect and conserve biodiversity and ecosystems. Supporting these efforts, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) strives to ensure that governments and policymakers have access to essential scientific knowledge for the “conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human well-being and sustainable development.”

As promising as these developments have been, their many shortcomings need to be addressed if the global community is to take serious steps to bend the curve of biodiversity loss and restore decimated ecosystems. Voluntary commitments by nation states, while laudable, do not ensure compliance. Once a species is lost, it cannot be recovered. In an interdependent and interconnected world in which intertwined economies and ecosystems are threatened, the risk of non-compliance is too great, and time is ticking.

The Bahá’í writings are unequivocal about what humanity needs today: the current structure of global governance needs to evolve. Yet the Bahá’í community recognizes that the path to harvesting the fruits of this evolution is fraught with setbacks, struggle, and conflict. As the Universal House of Justice has observed:

Certain shared ethical principles, which seemed to be in the ascendant at the start of this century, are eroded, threatening the prevailing consensus about right and wrong that, in various arenas, had succeeded in holding humanity’s basest tendencies in check. And the will to engage in international collective action, which twenty years ago represented a powerful strain of thinking among world leaders, has been cowed, assailed by resurgent forces of racism, nationalism, and factionalism.²³

Despite this retrogression, there is also the recognition that such crises have, in the past, opened the way for change and transformation. Whatever the next step in the evolution of global governance, it must be bolder and more decisive than anything humanity has established to date. The urgency of the threats to our planet demands such audacity.

Ultimately, Bahá’ís believe that the realization of such a vision will require a “historic feat of statesmanship from the leaders of the world.”²⁴ It is apparent that such conditions do not yet exist. Religious leadership is also challenged to reflect deeply on its role in addressing the existential threat before us: “Great possibilities to cultivate fellowship and concord are open to religious leaders,” wrote the Universal House of Justice in 2019.²⁵

It is against such a backdrop that Bahá’ís strive to contribute to discourses in their national communities and internationally. They make efforts to contribute to and advance thought around a host of societal concerns, including environmental issues;²⁶ they seek to learn from the ongoing discourses and, when opportunities arise, strive to identify the root causes and relate them to the relevant spiritual principles. Bahá’ís are also focused, in collaboration with others, on how to garner collective thought and action to address the root issues of our time, often through emphasizing the need for applying the principles of consultation in collective decision-making, and of the oneness of mankind and of justice as essential elements of advancing thought and action at regional and global levels.

The statement One Planet, One Habitation is one of the contributions of the BIC to the international discourse on the environment.

The Bahá’í writings point toward a future in which local, regional, and global governance will be appropriately coordinated and strengthened to ensure the safeguarding of humanity’s natural resources while protecting the rights and autonomy of each distinct population.

Conclusion

Over a century ago, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá offered the following reflection in a talk at Stanford University: “The elements and lower organisms are synchronized in the great plan of life. Shall man, infinitely above them in degree, be antagonistic and a destroyer of that perfection?”²⁷ In many ways, that question is more relevant today than ever before, and the current state and future projections of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation can invite feelings of despair. Yet the Bahá’í writings provide a more hopeful perspective, asserting that humanity is in a state of transition, moving painfully through the period of adolescence towards maturity. Navigating this critical period in the development of mankind and the planet is among the most critical challenges of our generation and those to come.

Ultimately, such a challenge calls for a common vision and collective will, and a reconceptualization of our relationship with nature and among ourselves. It demands courageous and bold leadership, and an evolution of our governance structures at all levels. It requires both tapping into our growing store of scientific knowledge and technological advances while also drawing on the system of religion to raise consciousness, cultivate our higher nature, and learn how to translate spiritual principles into reality.

By Arthur Lyon Dahl

In recent decades, scientific and technological discoveries have rapidly accelerated the dissolution of the traditional obstacles that long separated the nations and peoples of the world. At the same time, with the erosion of cultural barriers, society is undergoing a spiritual transition. The impact of improved educational standards and information technologies is increasing global awareness, and the fundamental unity of the human race is becoming increasingly apparent.

Bahá’u’lláh clearly anticipated these changes and provided an ethical framework in which to address them, but this has largely been ignored until now. However, as climate change accelerates and its implications for the future of humanity become clearer, it may become a driving force for unity since a massive world undertaking is now necessary to mitigate further global warming and to adapt to the climate change that is already underway.

What, then, are the ethical concepts and spiritual principles that are now necessary to transform society in order to make solutions to global warming possible?

The Science of Climate Change

For some time, science has predicted that the planet is vulnerable to global warming caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Those that live in cold regions might feel that a little global warming would be desirable, but any significant change in our climate will result in losers as well as winners. The regions which may benefit often have few inhabitants while many heavily-populated and highly-developed areas will suffer. Some may become completely uninhabitable. Change at this scale will be extremely stressful and expensive.¹

The problem has its origins in the way life evolved on Earth. The conditions necessary for life in the biosphere are the result of a complex set of delicately balanced systems which are still poorly understood. The atmospheric composition that permits life to exist was itself created in part by the action of the first living things. The earliest plants removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and added oxygen, making animal life possible. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, writing early in the 20th century, referred to this interdependence of the vegetable and animal kingdoms. “Each of these two maketh use of certain elements in the air on which its own life dependeth, while each increaseth the quantity of such elements as are essential for the life of the other.”² Dead plants, both the remains of marine plankton and terrestrial vegetation, were buried and their energy-containing carbon compounds fossilized to produce coal, oil, and gas, while their carbonate skeletons became layers of limestone, locking a significant part of the Earth’s carbon away in geological formations.

Carbon cycles through the biosphere, as plants take up carbon dioxide to make organic matter, while animals and decomposers oxidize organic compounds and return the carbon dioxide to the oceans and atmosphere. Today, the long-standing global balance between these processes has been upset by the extraction and combustion of fossil fuels—coal, oil, and gas—over the last 150 years, returning carbon to the atmosphere and oceans that has long been out of circulation.

The significance of this for the climate is that carbon dioxide, along with another carbon compound—methane, is among the most important greenhouse gases, trapping heat in the atmosphere in the same way as the glass in a greenhouse lets in light but prevents heat from escaping.

The climate has changed in past geological epochs, with both ice ages and much warmer periods associated with rises and falls in plant cover and carbon dioxide levels. These changes over hundreds of millions of years were due in part to the Earth’s orientation with respect to the sun and to the changing positions of the continents which affect the way the linked ocean-atmosphere system redistributes heat around the world. With the present configuration of continents, a global “conveyor belt” of ocean currents sees cold salty water flow along the bottom from the North Atlantic down to the Antarctic, looping through the Indian and Pacific Oceans and returning as a warm shallow current to the North Atlantic, where the freezing of Arctic ice in winter turns it back to cold water. The sinking of this water draws up the warm current from the Caribbean known as the Gulf Stream which maintains the relatively mild climate of northern Europe. Recent research has shown that these currents can alter quite quickly in correlation with abrupt changes between warm and cold climatic periods.

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution powered by fossil fuels, the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide has risen from 290 to 370 parts per million (ppm), and it could easily reach 550 ppm or more in mid-century. Every tonne of fuel oil burned produces 2.9 tonnes of carbon dioxide, while extracting the same energy from coal produces 3.8 tonnes of CO2. Deforestation and the loss of humus from degrading soils also release significant quantities of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, representing one third of the increase.

While the rising levels of greenhouse gases will trap more heat and change the air circulation patterns and climate, the effects will be highly variable around the world and are not easy to predict. Using various computer models of the global climate system, more than a thousand scientists contributing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have confirmed a significant human effect on the climate through global warming, and more is expected. While powerful political and economic interests have questioned the reality of any link between fossil fuel consumption and climate change, none of their arguments has withstood closer scientific scrutiny.

The evidence for accelerating global warming is accumulating rapidly. The global average surface temperature has risen markedly since the late 1970s. Nine of the ten warmest years on record have occurred since 1995. The models project an even faster rise in global temperature over the next century as greenhouse gas emissions continue. The greatest temperature changes are expected in polar areas. A rise of more than 2°C in the mean global temperature could trigger positive feedbacks that would make major climate change irreversible, and we could reach that point by 2035 if we continue business as usual, with a rise of up to 5°C possible by the end of the century. This is change at a speed and scale for which there is no planetary precedent.

The effects are already apparent. Many species in temperate areas are shifting their distributions, with cold-adapted forms retreating toward the poles, to be replaced by species from warmer climates. Similar shifts in altitude are occurring among mountain species. Arctic species like polar bears that are dependent on the ice are in great difficulty. Coral reefs around the world have bleached and died from unusually high water temperatures. The number of the most intense cyclones (hurricanes) has increased in all oceans over the last 30 years, driven by greater heat energy in tropical ocean waters.

Climate change on the predicted scale will profoundly affect the environment and human activity in many fundamental ways. Food insecurity will increase and many regions will experience water shortages as rainfall patterns shift and mountain glaciers disappear. Rich countries can probably afford to adapt their agriculture with changed crop varieties and new technology, but all scenarios show a severe decline in food production in developing countries. The greatest human impact of climate change will be on the poor, who are especially vulnerable to the predicted increase in extreme weather events such as floods, cyclones, and droughts—the latter particularly pertaining to Africa. Ocean fisheries will also be affected. Already fish stocks in the North Sea are shifting to other areas. As populations are displaced there will be increasing flows of environmental refugees, possibly reaching tens or hundreds of millions, and the related social disintegration could lead to increasing anarchy and terrorism. Natural, economic and social disasters will become more common and more severe.

Ecological systems and species will be severely impacted, greatly accelerating the loss of biodiversity. American scientists have calculated that climate change would cause conditions appropriate for the beech forests of the south-eastern United States to move to north-eastern Canada. Thus, whole ecosystems will shift over long distances if they can move fast enough. In the past, such changes happened more gradually. Birds can fly, but trees cannot get up and move to find a better temperature, and human transformations have blocked migration paths. We may have to replant the forests ourselves.

One effect of global warming is a rise in sea level, due both to the thermal expansion of water and to the melting of glaciers and ice caps. Sea level rise will flood low-lying areas and islands, including many port cities, creating millions of refugees. The projections for Bangladesh show a 1.5 meter rise will displace 17 million people from 16% of the country’s area. If the Greenland ice sheet is destabilised—which now appears to be likely—it will raise the sea level by more than 6 meters. Already some low-lying islands and coastal areas are being abandoned.

The costs of mitigation and adaptation will be enormous, but the cost of doing nothing is already very high and could rise astronomically. The insurance industry estimated a few years ago that the economic impact of natural disasters linked to global warming would reach an annual cost of $130 billion within 10 years, but hurricanes Katrina and Rita in the USA in 2005 alone caused damage reaching $204 billion. A recent report commissioned by the UK government estimated the annual cost of climate change if no action is taken at over $600 billion, or the equivalent of both World Wars and the Great Depression, while mitigating action would only amount to 1% of global GDP.3 Immediate action will be very cost effective, and any delay will raise the cost significantly.

The latest scientific evidence suggests that the worst predictions about climate change may be realized. The Gulf Stream has recently slowed by 30%. If the Gulf Stream stops, the temperature could decrease by seven degrees in northern Europe, limiting agriculture and raising energy consumption. Half of the permafrost in the Arctic is expected to melt by 2050 and 90% before 2100, releasing methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Major parts of the Arctic Ocean were ice-free in the summer of 2005 after 14% of the permanent sea ice was lost in one year, and oil companies are already planning for the drilling they can do in an ice free polar sea in the future. Greenland glaciers have doubled their rate of flow in the last three years. The rate of sea level rise had already doubled over the last 150 years to 2 mm per year, and melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet is now adding another 4 mm per year and Greenland 0.6 mm per year. We may be approaching a tipping point within a decade where runaway climate change would be catastrophic.

The Energy Challenge

Global warming is driven by our addiction to cheap fossil energy. Our industrial economy was built on cheap energy, mostly from fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas. Transportation, communications, trade, agriculture, heating and cooling, and our consumer lifestyle all depend on high inputs of energy. Energy demand is rising rapidly and the supply is shrinking. Global warming is just one more reason to address the energy challenge urgently. Given the enormous investment in present infrastructure, adaptation will be extremely expensive, with the required investment in energy alternatives estimated at $7 trillion.

Some governments have decided to control greenhouse gases. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, established the framework for international action. The Kyoto Protocol on reduction of greenhouse gases set a first target to return emissions to 1990 levels by 2012, a limited reduction of 5% when at least 60%–80% is necessary. However CO2 emissions rose 4.5% in 2004 to 27.5 billion tonnes, 26% higher than 1990. China and India have doubled CO2 production since 1990, while the USA has increased by 20% and Australia by 40%. The USA released 5.8, China 4.5, Europe 3.3, and India 1.1 billion tonnes of CO2 in 2004. Despite its good intentions, humanity is rapidly going in the wrong direction.

Fossil energy consumption is still growing. World oil use is rising at 1.1% per year, with Latin America increasing 2.8%, India 5.4%, and China 7.5%. From 2001—2020, world oil consumption is expected to rise 56%, with OPEC production doubling, but non-OPEC production has already peaked. Oil provides 40% of the world’s primary energy. Two thirds of future energy demand will come from developing countries where 1.6 billion people have no electricity. Energy demand and global warming are on a collision course.

The end of the fossil fuel era is coming anyway. At present consumption rates, reserves of oil are estimated to last about 40 years, gas 67 years and coal 164 years. Geologists estimate the recoverable oil reserve at 2000 Bb (billion barrels). Past production over the last 100 years has already consumed 980 Bb, while the known reserves total 827 Bb and another 153 Bb have yet to be found, so almost half the expected reserve has already been consumed. Production peaks and starts to decline at half of the recoverable resource, because we use the most accessible oil first, and it becomes harder and harder to get the remainder. We could reach peak production within the next decade, after which production will fall at about 2.7% per year, dropping 75% in 30 years. The heavy oil/tar reserves in Canada and Venezuela (600 Bb) equal only 22 years of current consumption. Even without global warming, energy sources and consumption patterns must soon be changed.

Coal also has a significant impact on global warming. The major coal producing and consuming countries (USA, Australia, Japan, South Korea, India, China) formed the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate in July 2005. Together they have 45% of the world’s population; they consume 45% of world energy and produce 52% of the CO2, with both expected to double by 2025. They have agreed to develop and share clean and more efficient technologies, especially for carbon sequestration, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to provide secure energy supplies. However these goals may appear contradictory when China is planning to build 560 new coal-fired power plants and India 213, although India’s coal reserves are expected to be exhausted in 40 years. Today, one quarter of global CO2 emissions come from coal-fired power stations.

Some hopes have been placed on nuclear power but, at least with present technologies, it is not a long-term option. Uranium reserves are expected to be exhausted in about 40 years. Economically and ethically, the technology is also doubtful. The research costs and development of nuclear technology have been highly subsidized, particularly for military uses. There is a high energy input in nuclear plant construction and fuel fabrication, so it is not entirely carbon free. The risks of accidents are so high as to be uninsurable. Decommissioning costs of old plants are not usually included in cost comparisons; decommissioning the Three Mile Island plant in the USA after a minor accident was estimated to cost $3–4 billion. The UK was unable to privatise its nuclear power industry, suggesting it is uneconomic without heavy government subsidies. No country has yet completed a safe long-term disposal site for high-level nuclear wastes which must be secure for at least 10,000 years, so the high continuing waste disposal costs are being imposed on future generations, which is unethical. While research continues, generating electricity from nuclear fusion is still “40 years” away, as it has been for many years.

Our globalized world has become overly dependent on fossil fuels for road transport, shipping, aviation, tourism and therefore global trade. The energy and raw materials for industrial production, including chemical feed-stocks, plastics and synthetics, come largely from oil, gas and coal. Most electricity generation for lighting, heating and cooling is similarly dependent, as are modern cities and the suburban lifestyle. Fossil energy is behind our mechanized agriculture, fertilizers and pesticides, and the whole system of food processing and distribution. What happens when these become much more expensive? The business community is so concerned that the Carbon Disclosure Project representing more than half the world’s invested assets has invited 2,100 companies to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.

More worryingly, the world’s population has increased six-fold, exactly in parallel with oil production. Can we maintain such a high world population without the subsidy represented by cheap fossil energy? What will happen if we cannot?

There is also the question that energy planners never ask: even if we could exploit every fossil fuel reserve, can we really afford to cause so much global warming? Burning all extractable fossil fuels would raise CO2 in the atmosphere to well over 750 ppm. The ethical challenges of this situation are profound. On the one hand, the selfish desire of a minority of the world population to maintain a materially excessive civilization despite the enormous damage it is causing and the threat this represents for future generations is contrary to basic principles of justice and equity. The poor have every right to demand the same standard of living as the rich, but the planet cannot support present consumption, not to mention any increase. On the other hand, if a reduction in fossil fuel availability and use causes food production and distribution to collapse or become unaffordable, pushing many to starvation, this is equally unthinkable.

Energy is so fundamental to human welfare and civilization that we clearly cannot do without it, but there could be much more moderation and efficiency in its utilization. Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Bahá’í Faith, wrote in 1936 that the world federal system anticipated in the Bahá’í teachings, will “consist of a world legislature, whose members will, as the trustees of the whole of mankind, ultimately control the entire resources of all the component nations. . . The economic resources of the world will be organized, its sources of raw materials will be tapped and fully utilized. . .” This system will exploit “all the available sources of energy on the surface of the planet.”³ It will clearly be an aim of such a civilization to develop forms of renewable energy, in environmentally appropriate ways. These energy sources are mostly low density and widely distributed, which would suggest that future communities will be smaller and more wide-spread, unlike the urban concentrations of today. Given the moral unacceptability of the alternatives, the only responsible approach to the energy challenge is to replace fossil fuels with alternative renewable energy sources as rapidly as is humanly possible. The United Kingdom’s Meteorological Office has said that “the biggest obstacles to the take up of technologies such as renewable sources of energy and “clean coal” lie in vested interests, cultural barriers to change and simple lack of awareness.”⁴

With the present size of the global population, the consequences of going back to the world as it was before fossil fuels are unacceptable. The urgent challenge is to rethink civilization in a new and more sustainable way, and to begin the transition as rapidly as possible. This is where the principles of the Bahá’í Faith can suggest some ways forward.

The Ethical Implications of Climate Change

The world’s present institutions have failed to address adequately the threat of climate change. No politician has been willing to sacrifice the short-term economic welfare of his or her country, even while agreeing that sustainability is essential in the long term. Furthermore, the deep social, economic, and political divisions within societies and between countries prevent united action in the common interest. Global warming is just one symptom of the fundamental imbalances in our world and of the failure of our systems of governance to resolve the most critical challenges of our age.

We must recognize the failure of our present economic system to address global long-term issues like global warming. Economic thinking is challenged by the environmental crisis—including global warming. The belief that there is no limit to nature’s capacity to fulfil any demand made on it is demonstrably false. A culture which attaches absolute value to expansion, to acquisition, and to the satisfaction of people’s wants must recognise that such goals are not, by themselves, realistic guides to policy. Economic decision-making tools cannot deal with the fact that most of the major challenges are global.⁵

Climate change is a consequence of the present self-centred materialism of our economic paradigm. The materialistic view became the dominant interpretation of reality in the early 20th century. Through rational experimentation and discourse, humanity thought it had solved all issues related to human governance and development. Dogmatic materialism captured all significant centres of power and information at the global level, ensuring that no competing voices could challenge projects of world wide economic exploitation. Yet not even the most idealistic motives can correct materialism’s fundamental flaws. Since World War II, development has been our largest collective undertaking, with a humanitarian motivation matched by enormous material and technological investment. While it has brought impressive benefits, it has nevertheless failed to narrow the gap between the small segment of modern society and the vast populations of the poor. The gap has widened into an abyss.

Consumerism drives much of the emission of greenhouse gases. Materialism’s gospel of human betterment has produced today’s consumer culture in pursuit of ephemeral goals. For the small minority of people who can afford them, the benefits it offers are immediate, and the rationale unapologetic. The breakdown of traditional morality has led to the triumph of animal impulse, as instinctive and blind as appetite. Selfishness has become a prized commercial resource; falsehood reinvents itself as public information; greed, lust, indolence, pride—even violence—acquire not merely broad acceptance but social and economic value. Yet material comforts and acquisitions have been drained of meaning. In the USA the indicators of human welfare and satisfaction have been diminishing since the 1960s. The economy may be richer, but people are not happier. This self-centred, hedonistic culture of the rich, now spreading around the world, refuses to acknowledge its primary responsibility for global warming. The challenge, then, is fundamentally a spiritual one, necessitating a change in the understanding of humanity’s nature and purpose.

What role can religion play in the challenges of today, including global warming? We used to be relatively content living within the limited perspective of our own communities, but now we can closely observe developments all around the world. We know about the extreme differences and injustices and we can no longer tolerate them. This progressive globalizing of human experience increases the stresses of modern life. There is a loss of faith in the certainties of materialism as its negative impacts become apparent. At the same time there is a lack of faith in traditional religion and a failure to find guidance within them for living with modernity. Yet, it would appear that it is an inherent characteristic of the human experience to understand the purpose of existence. This has led to an unexpected resurgence of religion, built upon a groundswell of anxiety and discontent with spiritual emptiness. People lacking in hope are readily attracted to radical, intolerant, fanatical movements. As a result, the world is in the grip of irreconcilable religious antipathies, a situation which paralyses our ability to address global challenges including climate change.

Humanity can choose to conduct “business as usual” in its materialistic way, ignoring the future. The consequences however will soon catch up with us. We can retreat into a fortress of old values, but the pressures of globalization will make this untenable. The alternative is to make the effort to transition towards a unified world civilization based on equity and sustainability, drawing on the complementary strengths of both science and religion. This is the approach that the Bahá’í Faith has championed for more than a hundred years.

Unity is the essential prerequisite for action to remove the barriers to collaboration on global warming. In its 1995 statement, The Prosperity of Humankind, the Bahá’í International Community observed:

“The bedrock of a strategy that can engage the world’s population in assuming responsibility for its collective destiny must be the consciousness of the oneness of humankind. Deceptively simple in popular discourse, the concept that humanity constitutes a single people presents fundamental challenges to the way that most of the institutions of contemporary society carry out their functions. Whether in the form of the adversarial structure of civil government, the advocacy principle informing most of civil law, a glorification of the struggle between classes and other social groups, or the competitive spirit dominating so much of modern life, conflict is accepted as the mainspring of human interaction. It represents yet another expression in social organisation of the materialistic interpretation of life that has progressively consolidated itself over the past two centuries. . .. Only so fundamental a reorientation can protect them, too, from the age-old demons of ethnic and religious strife. Only through the dawning consciousness that they constitute a single people will the inhabitants of the planet be enabled to turn away from the patterns of conflict that have dominated social organisation in the past and begin to learn the ways of collaboration and conciliation. “The well-being of mankind,” Bahá’u’lláh writes, “its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established.”⁶

Only by agreeing that we are a single human race and live on one planet can we create the ethical and moral basis for addressing a challenge such as climate change.

Some governments have already agreed. They promote the concept of sustainable development as one that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.⁷ The nations of the world have repeatedly accepted this as a goal and priority. This is precisely the challenge of climate change. With high fossil energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, we are precipitating damage to our planetary system that will compromise future generations. Governments have agreed they have to act but, faced with a paralysis of will, they do not.

Expressed by the Bahá’í International Community, sustainability is fundamentally an ethical concept. We, the human race, are trustees, or stewards, of the planet’s vast resources and biological diversity. We must learn to make use of the earth’s natural resources, both renewable and non-renewable, in a manner that ensures sustainability and equity into the distant reaches of time. This requires full consideration of the potential environmental consequences of all development activities. We must temper our actions with moderation and humility, and recognize that the true value of nature cannot be expressed in economic terms. This requires a deep understanding of the natural world and its role in humanity’s collective development both material and spiritual. Sustainable environmental management is not a discretionary commitment we can weigh against other competing interests. It is a fundamental responsibility that must be shouldered, a pre-requisite for spiritual development as well as our physical survival.⁸

Sustainability requires the rethinking of economics. The present economic system is unsustainable and not meeting human needs or able to respond adequately to global warming. Fifty years of economic development, despite some progress, has failed to meet its objectives. The global economic system lacks the supra-national governance necessary to address such global issues. It is not the mechanisms of economics that are at fault, but its values. Economics has ignored the broader context of humanity’s social and spiritual existence, resulting in corrosive materialism in the world’s more economically advantaged regions (driving global warming), and persistent conditions of deprivation among the masses of the world’s peoples. Economics should serve people’s needs; societies should not be expected to reformulate themselves to fit economic models. The ultimate function of economic systems should be to equip the peoples and institutions of the world with the means to achieve the real purpose of development: that is, the cultivation of the limitless potentialities latent in human consciousness.

What values do we need for an economic system able to accept responsibility for and address global warming? The goal of wealth creation should be to make everyone wealthy. Society needs new value-based economic models that aim to create a dynamic, just and thriving social order which should be strongly altruistic and cooperative in nature. It should provide meaningful employment and help to eradicate poverty in the world.

All religions teach the “Golden Rule,” namely, to do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Should a minority of high energy consumers have the right to cause such damage to others and to future generations? Many faith-based organisations are drawing increasing attention to the ethical implications of excessive consumerism and one of its impacts, climate change.

Justice and equity will be essential to achieve unity of action at the global level. It is unjust to sacrifice the well-being of the generality of humankind—and even of the planet itself—to the advantages which technological breakthroughs can make available to privileged minorities. Only development programmes that are perceived as meeting their needs and as being just and equitable in objective can hope to engage the commitment of the masses of humanity, upon whom implementation depends. The same is true of action to reduce global warming.

Solidarity is another essential value in times of rapid change, when many will become victims of climate perturbations and natural disasters. The poor are the most vulnerable to climate change and the least able to protect themselves. We should consider every human being as a trust of the whole, and recognize that both governments and individuals share this responsibility. Voluntary giving is more meaningful and effective than forced redistribution.

Trustworthiness will also become increasingly important. Trust is the basis for all economic and social interaction. Public opinion surveys show little trust in politicians and business, key actors in this area. The repeated failure of governments to respect the commitments that they have made has not helped. Re-establishing trust will have to be part of the solution to global warming, a solution in which everyone will have to make sacrifices.