God and Global Warming

Today is the eighth day of the Copenhagen climate negotiations. Representatives from 190 countries have come together to try and craft a political solution to the problem of climate change. It is, in many respects, the high-water mark of the environmental movement. Copenhagen is not the first time that countries have come together to attempt to solve environmental issues—this has happened with varying degrees of success many times—but it has received the most attention. With this attention come the highest expectations of an environmental summit to date.

Yet this summit is primarily political. In fact, to date, the environmental movement as a whole has been primarily political. It has embraced command and control protections, opting to direct actions rather than to change outlooks. Many of the solutions being discussed at Copenhagen fit this model. However, some representatives at Copenhagen do not represent countries. Instead, they are there to represent the world’s major religions.

This is the second time in as many months that many of these figures have come together. The first was at a conference specifically for religious leaders in the beginning of November in preparation for Copenhagen. However, this conference had a twist. Participants were only invited if they had already begun to take concrete steps to improve the environment. These include the Jewish representative’s commitment to cut meat consumption among the Jewish community by 50 percent by 2015 and the Baptist plan to increase environmental education among youth in Baltimore. Each of these commitments is in some way related to the fundamental tenants of the respective religions. But what is important about these commitment—and what separates them from the commitments that may come out of Copenhagen—is that these are primarily commitments to change lifestyles. Not just to cap emissions from churches or to print Bibles on recycled paper (although they did commit to that), these commitments are more fundamental and involve every member of these respective religious communities—they are changes that people can participate in and that will make a real difference.

Command and control solutions to environmental problems may be necessary, but they will not be sufficient. As a result, the lifestyle changes that the religious leaders of the world are beginning to promote are just as important as anything that comes out of Copenhagen. Many of these religious leaders have recognized that their respective creeds place a religious obligation on their followers to take action to protect the environment. It is time that environmental leaders put aside their own religions—or, as may be the case, lack thereof—and embrace the potential of the religious world to protect the environment.

To some degree, as the conference in November demonstrates, this has already happened. But it will take more than just a single conference or participation at Copenhagen. For a very long time, the environmental movement has marginalized the religious world. But as environmental problems become increasingly complex and call for more and more solutions based in lifestyle changes, the need for help from world religions will continue to grow. Religion offers an avenue into people’s lives that the government simply cannot hope to match. For many, it may often be the case that, while the government controls what you can do, religion personally inspires and motivates you to act on behalf of certain causes. To solve the environmental problem facing the world, people must want to solve it, not be forced to solve it. Thus, the engagement of religious leaders is vital for the success of environmental protection.

The problems the environmental movement faces are not new. Martin Palmer, secretary general of the Alliance for Religion and Conservation, notes that, at its heart, climate change is an issue of “sin, greed, selfishness and foolishness.” In other words, an issue involving the same elements of humanity that religion has been dealing with for centuries. It is time for the environmental movement to put aside its lack of religion and embrace the support of religious leaders worldwide. It would be foolish not to. Yes, the hopes of the world’s environmental leaders are staked on Copenhagen, but, in the end, it will likely be the religious leaders there who make the greatest difference.

A. Patrick Behrer ’10 is an economics concentrator in Eliot House. His column appears regularly.