15 Sep 2015: Forum

What Pope Francis Should Say
In His Upcoming UN Address

Pope Francis will speak to the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25 about poverty, the environment, and sustainable development. In a Yale Environment 360 forum, seven leading thinkers on the environment and religion describe what they would like to hear the pope say.


In his groundbreaking June encyclical, Pope Francis issued a call for robust individual action and a sweeping transformation of global economic and political systems to deal with the dual threats of climate change and
Pope Francis

Pope Francis
environmental degradation. On Sept. 25, he will bring aspects of that message to the United Nations. Yale Environment 360 asked experts on the environment and religion what they would like the pope to say before the U.N. While many said the pope’s encyclical was a potentially transformative moment for stewardship of the planet, others would like Pope Francis to speak out about issues he overlooked or dismissed, including the role of population growth in environmental problems and the vital part that the private sector must play in combating global warming.


Bill McKibben
Bill McKibben is a scholar in residence at Middlebury College and a founder of 350.org, a campaign to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to 350 parts per million worldwide.

I think the pope has already done more than anyone could possibly ask: beautifully framed climate change for what it is, which is less an ‘environmental issue’ than an existential problem requiring a new/old way of looking at the planet. In concrete terms, the Roman Catholic Church does have large financial assets, which it uses to underwrite its many missions. It would be sweet if the pope said they were being divested from the fossil fuel industry, but really that work is up to the rest of us — in parishes, at Catholic colleges and universities, and so on. Because he's given us all that we need to work with: an encyclical that describes our recent past as a civilization in unflinching terms, and lays out a straightforward (if daunting) prescription for transformation.


Katharine Hayhoe
Katharine Hayhoe is an atmospheric scientist and associate professor of political science at Texas Tech University, where she is director of the Climate Science Center. She has worked at Texas Tech since 2005.

The pope gets what we scientists have known for a long time: Science doesn’t hold all the answers. Not for life, and certainly not for such a difficult and polarized issue as climate change.

There is a lot science can tell us. It can tell us that climate is changing; that — for the first time in the history of this planet — humans are responsible; and that our choices matter. The more carbon we produce today, the greater the risks and even the dangers we will face tomorrow.

But science can’t tell us what to do; that’s where our values come in. And for more than 80 percent of Americans, at least some of their values come from their faith. That’s why it's so important that the pope gets it.

The pope is crystal clear on the connection between Christian values and climate change. He’s laid out in detail the relationship between God, people, and the planet. He’s connected the dots between poverty, vulnerability, and climate impacts. He’s left nothing to the imagination when describing the challenge we face today, and the attitudes we’ll need to conquer this challenge in the future.

There’s just one thing he hasn’t said — yet. He hasn’t called out those who are using God’s name as a cover for greedy, short-term thinking, for actions and attitudes that reflect love of self more than love of others.

Will he do it? I don’t know. But I do know this: He’s the right person to make that call.


Robert N. Stavins
Robert N. Stavins is the Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and a lead author of reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

There is much in Pope Francis’ climate change encyclical that is commendable, but where it drifts into matters of public policy, it is less helpful. First, the pope neglects the causes of climate change. It is an unintended negative consequence of meritorious economic activity by producers producing the goods and services people want, and consumers using those goods and services. That’s why the problem exists, and hence it’s important to work through the market to solve the problem. Because of its global commons nature, international cooperation is necessary. Without properly recognizing this, it is difficult to identify meaningful solutions.

The pope rejects the use of carbon credits, because they “could give rise to a new form of speculation” and would “support the super-consumption of certain countries and sectors.” This rhetoric is straight from the playbook of the ALBA nations, the small set of socialist Latin American countries that are fearful of free markets and uncooperative in climate negotiations.

If the pope intended to refer only to offset systems and not cap-and-trade, the rhetoric might be less objectionable, but no distinction is made. Such an attack on market-based climate policies is out of step with the thinking of policy analysts around the world, who recognize that we can do more, faster, and better with the use of carbon taxes and/or cap-and-trade systems. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has been outspoken in this regard.

Sadly, parts of the encyclical could ultimately work against effective climate policy at the international, regional, national, and sub-national levels. I hope these mistakes are not repeated in the pope’s U.N. speech.


Robert Bullard
Robert Bullard is Dean of the Barbara Jordan-Mickey Leland School of Public Affairs at Texas Southern University.

Climate change is the number one global environmental justice issue of our time. No nation will be immune to this problem. We need Pope Francis to be the world’s number one climate justice champion, since the people least responsible for this global climate calamity will feel the hurt first, worst and longest — with the most damaging impacts felt by people who are already socially, economically, culturally, politically, and institutionally marginalized.

We urge him to use his bully pulpit to advocate for a just global climate action plan, including rich nations paying climate reparations to poor nations. We need him to use the world stage and his moral authority to insist government plans meet the highest ethical standards — standards best distilled in a quote by Mahatma Gandhi: “A nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members.” We urge him to speak for the billions of voiceless — even when their leaders are silent or deny the existence of climate change. And finally, we urge him to challenge world leaders to rid their nations of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance which drive social inequality, fuel inter-group violence, cross-border conflict, and create millions of forced migrants and climate refugees.


Robert Engelman
Robert Engelman is a senior fellow at the Worldwatch Institute, where he directs a project assessing research on family planning, population, and environmental sustainability.

Considering humanity’s long future on earth, the most environmentally beneficial statement Francis could make would be to reverse the Catholic Church’s ban on effective modern contraception. That’s unlikely, of course. But the pope could at least acknowledge that his much-noted respect for science failed him when he dismissed reductions in birth rates as helpful to the preservation of climate and “Mother Earth” that his encyclical aims to encourage.

Francis asserted that “extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some” is to blame for climate change, with no contribution from population growth. Yet the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has identified population and economic growth as tandem drivers of rising greenhouse gas emissions since the Industrial Revolution began. Dozens of peer-reviewed scientific papers published in the past decade affirm that population growth contributes, as well, to other environmental problems that worry the pope, particularly those that most threaten the poor.

At the United Nations, I would like to see Francis recognize not just the importance of population but the right of women to decide for themselves if and when to bear a child. I would like to hear him call for education and empowerment of women. I would like to hear him endorse couples’ use of family planning methods the Church can support. Few words he could say would more effectively point humanity toward a sustainable relationship with the earth and its climate.


Mary Evelyn Tucker
Mary Evelyn Tucker, is a senior lecturer and research scholar at Yale University, where she teaches in a joint master’s degree program between the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and the Divinity School.

The Papal Encyclical and Pope Francis’s upcoming speech at the U.N. provide an opportunity for us to rethink the interconnection of ecology, economics, and equity. Pope Francis proposes an "integral ecology" whereby issues of poverty, social justice, and environmental degradation are seen as one set of challenges.

This is an important moment for the environmental movement, which until recently has kept these issues rather separate. But now, with an invitation to integration, the pope is setting the stage for something fresh and path-breaking.

This is what I would like to see him carry forward at his speech at the U.N. What are the implications of this integrative perspective for how we live on a planet with diminishing resources and growing population? Or another way of saying it is, “What does it mean to envision ourselves as part of a common home?”

These are big picture questions, for the encyclical represents a transformative moment for our planetary awakening. It is a call to consciousness regarding our interdependence and a call to conscience regarding our responsibility for the Earth community.

How, then, can we break through the rhetoric of politics, the models of science, the limits of economics, the prescription of law, and the ambiguity of technology to see ourselves as part of a shared planetary future? While all of these disciplines are necessary to solve our looming environmental/social crisis, they are not sufficient without an even more integral approach.

This will be the challenge for Pope Francis, to deepen the call of St Francis to a shared kinship with all creatures by inviting us into the perspective of a vast unfolding universe out of which all life has emerged. Will this not elicit from many the wonder and awe for sustained transformative action for the flourishing of our common home? Is this not the ultimate source of renewable energy for our times?


Evan Berry
Evan Berry is an associate professor of philosophy and religion at American University and Co-Director of the Ethics, Peace, and Global Affairs master's program.

Pope Francis’ encyclical, Laudato Si, offered a lucid, engaging application of Catholic social teaching to questions of global sustainability. The Holy See has done a remarkable job publicizing this document and using it to engage policy makers, civil society groups, and various public constituencies, both inside and outside the Church.

Although many of the encyclical’s critics are broadly dismissive of the threats posed by climate change, others raise more concrete objections. Most notably, there are those who worry that Laudato Si is anti-technological, expressing concern that it does not strike the right balance between solidarity with impoverished communities and the embrace of technological changes that will be required to implement a post-carbon economy.

Many experts agree that urbanization and continued innovation in energy production are essential to global efforts to sustain the more that seven billion people who now inhabit the planet. Efforts to combat climate change cannot rely on any large-scale return to subsistence agriculture without a substantial reduction of the human population. I would like to hear Pope Francis speak to this question and to address the under-appreciated tension between technophilic and traditionalist means of implementing sustainable development.



POSTED ON 15 Sep 2015 IN Climate Energy Policy & Politics Sustainability 

COMMENTS


Maybe academics should look at all facts before pontificating (no pun intended).

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/15/no_sea_level_danger_from_antarctic_this_century_even_if_all_coal_and_oil_burned/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/14/us-climatechange-summit-britain-idUSKCN0RD0YN20150914

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/20th-century-death/

Posted by David K. on 15 Sep 2015


"Efforts to combat climate change cannot rely on
any large-scale return to subsistence agriculture
without a substantial reduction of the human
population." Evan Berry does not spell out
exactly what he means by "subsistence
agriculture," but ever so slightly implies that
modern industrial (GMO) agriculture is what is
necessary to make sure everyone gets to eat.

However the UN disagrees
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?
NewsID=41904#.VfmR7RFVhHw
with that and says that organic and integrative
methods of agriculture at once new and old are
far more productive and sustainable and
economically sound. While GMO technologies are
innovative, I consider them extraordinary
dangerous and a boon to oligarchy and
monopoly as they are a way of patenting life and
controlling farmers and the ag industry as a
whole. They also require inputs derived from
carbon substances. The whole idea of combining
animal and plant genetics is arrogant as well and
it is that arrogance that has put humanity in the
position we are currently in. I believe we should
move away from it as fast and far as possible.
Posted by Danna on 16 Sep 2015


What we have done in this economy is systematically privileged and encouraged one narrow part of what it means to be human - our selfish, materialistic, pleasure seeking nature. This is the part that makes the consumer machine work. Why have we done that? We have done it because those are the kinds of people we need to keep this kind of perpetual growth system going. Why do we want to do that? Because we haven’t yet figured out how to make an economy work without growth. That is our single biggest task. Forget whether we are doing it for good reasons or bad reasons. Let us just keep in our hearts and minds the poverty of Africa, the quality of the human spirit, and the huge intellectual task of an creating an economic system that addresses the abject poverty of billions of human beings and elevates the human spirit.
The center of the argument is do we really have any model in nature for a system that grows and grows and grows indefinitely? And the only thing you can think of are perpetual growth systems that destroy the organisms that they depend on - we call them cancers. There is no other model. There is no other model in nature for the kinds of economies we are trying to create. And the way we have created these economies is beginning to undermine the quality of the natural environment that supports our lives and it is beginning to do no justice at all to what it means to be human beings. The task of rethinking and transforming our economic systems calls on us to engage with this task in a really open and meaningful way. To get beyond the simple differences of opinion and ask what is the real challenge of an economic transformation that would deliver us a meaningful prosperity. And that is the task where we should leave no question unasked, we should engage with all our efforts because in that task it is not any specific vision about what society is going to look like, but it is in that task itself that hope resides. A meaningful prosperity is about hope.

Excerpts from Tim Jackson author of Prosperity Without Growth. "One of the best books of the year." Financial Times

Posted by Jerry Silbert, M.D. on 17 Sep 2015


It is so fascinating to see that the pope has gotten the attention of The Green Movement. I wonder whether you are aware that the Green Movement endorses lowering individual "carbon footprints" by population control i.e., abortion? Do you know that the pope does not endorse this?
Posted by Roberta Siena on 18 Sep 2015


Addressing poverty in America must be a first priority. The founders of the United States of America (as well as the first members of We the People) fully understood Pope Francis I’s description of the hardships caused by unfettered capitalism and markets without any limits. America’s founders rejected the notion that the few who possessed extraordinary amounts of money should rule. Rather, they entered into an agreement among all Americans that money should serve We the People. In other words, all Americans have already agreed with Pope Francis: “Money must serve, not rule!”

The Agreement among We the People already mandates that wealth must serve to fulfill the human rights of all Americans and that the few who have extraordinary wealth shall not rule the many. The Declaration of Independence evidences all Americans’ agreement to Human Rights Capitalism. See https://goo.gl/AgAc2a
Posted by Life Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness on 22 Sep 2015


The world including particularly NGOs are so
desperate for good news on climate change that they
are beside themselves hearing the Pope's watery weak
kneed speeches. I doubt reiterated messages of hope
and change is going to cut it. I dont see energy
companies getting religion. I dont see world leaders
stepping up their climate change rhetoric let alone
making zero carbon a goal. This Pope has condemed
"air pollution", as he put it recently, but he hasnt
advocated anything even remotely close to what we
need for the upcoming Paris talks, ie "zero carbon by
2030 !!".

Posted by robert dresdner on 24 Sep 2015


POST A COMMENT

Comments are moderated and will be reviewed before they are posted to ensure they are on topic, relevant, and not abusive. They may be edited for length and clarity. By filling out this form, you give Yale Environment 360 permission to publish this comment.

Name 
Email address 
Comment 
 
Please type the text shown in the graphic.



 
 

RELATED ARTICLES


Can We Reduce CO2 Emissions
And Grow the Global Economy?

Surprising new statistics show that the world economy is expanding while global carbon emissions remain at the same level. Is it possible that the elusive “decoupling” of emissions and economic growth could be happening?
READ MORE

Why Supreme Court’s Action
Creates Opportunity on Climate

The U.S. Supreme Court order blocking the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan may have a silver lining: It provides an opportunity for the U.S. to show other nations it has a flexible, multi-faceted approach to cutting emissions.
READ MORE

With Court Action, Obama’s
Climate Policies in Jeopardy

The U.S. Supreme Court order blocking President Obama’s plan to cut emissions from coal-burning power plants is an unprecedented step and one of the most environmentally harmful decisions ever made by the nation’s highest court.
READ MORE

El Niño and Climate Change:
Wild Weather May Get Wilder

This year’s El Niño phenomenon is spawning extreme weather around the planet. Now scientists are working to understand if global warming will lead to more powerful El Niños that will make droughts, floods, snowstorms, and hurricanes more intense.
READ MORE

Beyond the Oregon Protests:
The Search for Common Ground

Thrust into the spotlight by a group of anti-government militants as a place of confrontation, the Malheur wildlife refuge is actually a highly successful example of a new collaboration in the West between local residents and the federal government.
READ MORE

 

MORE IN Forum


Top Climate Scientists Assess
Latest Report from U.N. Panel

Yale Environment 360 asked some leading climate scientists to discuss what they consider to be the most noteworthy or surprising findings in the recently released report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s working group on the physical science of a warming world.
READ MORE

Forum: How Daring is
Obama's New Climate Plan?

President Obama has unveiled a proposal to combat global warming that would, for the first time, regulate carbon dioxide emissions from all U.S. coal-fired power plants. Yale Environment 360 asked a group of experts to assess the president’s climate strategy.
READ MORE

Forum: Assessing Obama’s
Record on the Environment

When Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008, environmentalists were optimistic that their issues would finally become a priority at the White House. So how is Obama doing? Yale Environment 360 asked a group of environmentalists and energy experts for their verdicts on the president's performance.
READ MORE

Forum: Just How Safe
Is ‘Fracking’ of Natural Gas?


New technologies for freeing natural gas from underground shale formations have led to a hydraulic fracturing boom across the U.S. that is now spreading to other countries. In a Yale Environment 360 forum, eight experts discuss whether “fracking” can be done without serious harm to water and air quality and what environmental safeguards may be needed.

READ MORE

Forum: Is Extreme Weather
Linked to Global Warming?


In the past year, the world has seen a large number of extreme weather events, from the Russian heat wave last summer, to the severe flooding in Pakistan, to the recent tornadoes in the U.S. In a Yale Environment 360 forum, a panel of experts weighs in on whether the wild weather may be tied to increasing global temperatures.

READ MORE

As Copenhagen Talks Near,
What Are Prospects for Success?

For months, hopes that a climate treaty would be signed at the upcoming Copenhagen conference have been raised, then dashed, then raised again. Now, with prospects waning that a binding accord on reducing greenhouse gas emissions can be reached this year, ten environmental leaders and climate experts outline for Yale Environment 360 what they believe can still be accomplished at Copenhagen.
READ MORE

The Waxman-Markey Bill:
A Good Start or a Non-Starter?

As carbon cap-and-trade legislation works it way through Congress, the environmental community is intensely debating whether the Waxman-Markey bill is the best possible compromise or a fatally flawed initiative. Yale Environment 360 asked 11 prominent people in the environmental and energy fields for their views on this controversial legislation.
READ MORE

Putting a Price on Carbon:
An Emissions Cap or a Tax?

The days of freely dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere are coming to an end, but how best to price carbon emissions remains in dispute. As the U.S. Congress debates the issue, Yale Environment 360 asked eight experts to discuss the merits of a cap-and-trade system versus a carbon tax.
READ MORE

A Green Agenda for the
President’s First 100 Days

Environmentalists – from Bill McKibben and Paul Hawken, to Fred Krupp and Frances Beinecke – offer President Obama their advice on the priorities he should set for the first 100 days of his administration.
READ MORE


e360 digest
Yale
Yale Environment 360 is
a publication of the
Yale School of Forestry
& Environmental Studies
.

SEARCH e360



Donate to Yale Environment 360
Yale Environment 360 Newsletter


CONNECT


ABOUT

About e360
Contact
Submission Guidelines
Reprints

E360 en Español

Universia partnership
Yale Environment 360 articles are now available in Spanish and Portuguese on Universia, the online educational network.
Visit the site.


DEPARTMENTS

Opinion
Reports
Analysis
Interviews
Forums
e360 Digest
Podcasts
Video Reports

TOPICS

Biodiversity
Business & Innovation
Climate
Energy
Forests
Oceans
Policy & Politics
Pollution & Health
Science & Technology
Sustainability
Urbanization
Water

REGIONS

Antarctica and the Arctic
Africa
Asia
Australia
Central & South America
Europe
Middle East
North America

e360 VIDEO

“video
Tribal people and ranchers join together to stop a project that would haul coal across their Montana land.
Watch the video.

e360 MOBILE

Mobile
The latest
from Yale
Environment 360
is now available for mobile devices at e360.yale.edu/mobile.

e360 PHOTO ESSAY

“Alaska
An aerial view of why Europe’s per capita carbon emissions are less than 50 percent of those in the U.S.
View the photos.

e360 VIDEO

“Battle
The 2015 Yale e360 Video Contest winner documents a Northeastern town's bitter battle over a wind farm.
Watch the video.

e360 VIDEO

Food waste
An e360 video series looks at the staggering amount of food wasted in the U.S. – a problem with major human and environmental costs.
Watch the video.

e360 VIDEO

Colorado wildfires
An e360 video goes onto the front lines with Colorado firefighters confronting deadly blazes fueled by a hotter, drier climate.
Watch the video.

e360 SPECIAL REPORT

“Tainted
A three-part series Tainted Harvest looks at the soil pollution crisis in China, the threat it poses to the food supply, and the complexity of any cleanup.
Read the series.

OF INTEREST



Yale