Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (10) (remove)
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (4)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (2)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Contribution to Periodical (2)
Language
- English (10) (remove)
Division
- Präsidialbereich (2)
National welfare is no longer an effective frame of reference for enlightened foreign policy. Policy consideration must encompass the common welfare of a world society. Environmental and resource crises are inextricably tied to security and justice. Sixty years after the founding of the United Nations there should be a new effort to establish a genuinely sustainable global order - a "San Francisco 2.0".
At the time of the Rio Conference, it had already become clear that climate change is far from being just an ecological issue; it is also an issue of equity. In particular, climate change was identified as an issue of intergenerational equity. It became ominously clear to observers that global warming, since it modifies important parameters of the ecology of the planet, such as sea levels or weather patterns, will affect the relations between present and future generations. Today's generation, by filling up the absorptive capacity of the atmosphere, lives at the expense of tomorrow's generation. At the same time, it came to the fore that the use of fossil fuels not only affects inter-generational equity, but also intra-generational equity, i.e., the relations between nations and social groups within a generation. Who will be allowed to reap the benefits from fossil fuel combustion? Who will have to carry the burden of emission abatement? Equity within a generation has at least two dimensions (Wuppertal Institute, 2005). First, it implies the fair distribution of burdens and benefits of fossil fuel use among nations. Secondly, however, it also implies the universal protection of human dignity by securing the fundamental rights of every human person to water, food, housing, and health. The article will focus on the latter dimension; it will explore the links between human rights and climate change, without, however, losing sight of the broader framework of equity in climate politics.
Environment and human rights
(2003)
Globalization has a credible future only if the borderless economy does not overstretch the resilience of the biosphere and frustrate demands for greater justice in the world. But what means environmental justice in a transnational context? In general, justice may have three different senses: justice as fairness, justice as equitable distribution, and justice as human dignity. In the first it is a question of organized procedures for the allocation of advantages and disadvantages that are fair to everyone involved; this is the procedural conception of justice. In the second it is a question of proportionate distribution of goods and rights among individuals or groups; this is the relational conception of justice. And in the third it is a question of the minimum goods or rights necessary for a dignified existence; this is the absolute or substantive conception of justice. This paper develops the theme of international environmental justice in the third sense, as a human rights issue. First, it outlines six typical situations in which patterns of resource use come into conflict with subsistence rights: namely, extraction of raw materials, alteration of ecosystems, reprogramming of organisms, destabilization as a result of climate change, pollution of urban living space, and effects of resource prices. It then introduces the debate on human rights and locates respect for subsistence rights as a component of economic, social and cultural human rights. Finally, it offers some markers for an environmental policy geared to human rights, the aim of which is to guarantee civil rights for all in a world with a finite biosphere. Neither power play between states nor economic competition, but the realization of human rights and respect for the biosphere, should be the defining feature of the emergent world society.
Which of Pope Francis' countless appearances will posterity consider truly iconic? Probably neither his journey to the shipwrecked in Lampedusa nor his encounter with the indigenous peoples of the Amazon, although both are characteristic of the pontificate - rather, it will be his appearance in the deserted St. Peter's Square during the coronavirus pandemic. A single figure in white, alone, laboriously climbing the steps to St. Peter's Basilica, then offering the Urbi et Orbi blessing with the monstrance - that image will be in the history books. This view undoubtedly thrives on contrast: the image of the Pope standing alone in the rain at nightfall in contrast to the image familiar to television viewers from all over the world where the Pope appears in St Peter's Square amidst the cheering of tens or hundreds of thousands under Bernini's colonnades. And then, in March 2020, a formidable showing of vulnerability that touched even non-believers.
Wolfgang Sachs wrote a seminal series of essays for the New Internationalist in 1992 called "Development: a guide to the ruins". The concept of development lives on - and takes on new shapes as it is reframed by the UN, reinterpreted by the Vatican or hijacked by authoritarian populists to serve their own nationalist agenda. But, he argues now, we need to move beyond its misguided assumptions into a new post-development era based on eco-solidarity.
Comparing the Agenda 2030 of the United Nations and the Laudato si' by the Pope, both authored in 2015, one point stands out: the Development enthusiasm of the twentieth century is gone. In its place, we are now dealing with the demise of expansive modernity. The motto of the previous century (playing on words of the Lord's Prayer), "on Earth as in the West", now seems like a threat. The world is in crisis roundabout: the biosphere is being shattered and, in more ways than one, the gap between the rich and the poor is widening. While both publications agree that the global economic model can now be considered old iron, there are equally significant differences. While the Agenda 2030 seeks to repair the existing global economic model significantly, the encyclical calls for a pushing back of economic hegemony and for more ethical responsibility on all levels. While the Agenda 2030 envisions a green economy with social democratic hues, the encyclical foresees a post capitalist-era, based on a cultural shift towards eco-solidarity.