There has been much debate about the nature of climate change (whether it is man-made, a natural phenomenon, a combination of both or a denial of its existence). Regardless of the viewpoint as to its origin, there can be no rebuttal that the weather in the United Kingdom has changed in recent years.
After the disastrous foods of 2007, a review headed by the civil servant Sir Michael Pitt (who holds a first class degree in civil engineering) looked at how the flooding of 55,000 homes did not occur again (‘Have we learned our lessons on flooding?’ www.bbc.co.uk, 14 February 2014).
However, after looking at the issue historically, there appears to be a cycle of increased spending after a flooding incident but it tends to reduce almost in line with the receding of the flood waters.
The people that are most affected are those who are disadvantaged in our society (‘Climate change, justice and vulnerability,’ Sarah Lindley et al, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, November 2011). The authors have detailed that the areas least explored are social vulnerable and environmental factors which ‘render people more or less vulnerable to losses in wellbeing.’
The social areas that may be affected include the loss of communal space (either through flooding or heatwaves) particularly in declining neighbourhoods; the fear of crime as extreme weather causes others economic hardship; and inflexible institutional organisations. Low-income families will be less able to adapt to climate changes, such as making changes to their property to prepare for possible flooding and being unable to pay the prohibitively high insurance premiums (that is, if they can get an insurance company even to give them a quote). These factors lead to an increasing cycle of fears and insecurity.
In another report ‘Climate Change and Social Justice: An Evidence Review’ (Ian Preston et al, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, February 2014), the authors state: ‘Injustice is in part to the differential social impacts of climate change and uneven patterns of social vulnerability. Vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, such as flooding or heatwaves, is influenced by a mix of personal, environmental and social factors. Personal factors are individual characteristics, such as disability or age. Environmental factors are features of the physical environment, such as the elevation of housing or the ability of the natural environment to enhance or offset exposure. Social factors include aspects such as the strength of people’s social networks and levels of income. These factors affect the degree to which events, such as flooding, impact of individual welfare. When viewed in this way it is clear that vulnerability is not innate to some groups. Rather, it is determined by a mix of economic circumstances, social and cultural practices (such as the degree to which elderly people are kept close to the family unit), alongside institutional practices and service provision (such as referral networks established between social and health services to identify and support vulnerable households). This systems perspective suggest the need for policy responses which are cross sectoral and also highlights the needs for highly granular localised assessments of vulnerability.
‘Climate injustice is also found when examining the distribution of costs and benefits of policies to address climate change lower income groups tend to pay proportionately more for policy and to benefit less from measures introduced, for example through domestic energy policy, despite also contributing least to the problem through their carbon emissions.’ (p. 5)
An example of the last point is that the wealthiest 10 per cent of households are responsible for 16 per cent of UK household and personal transport emissions, whereas the poorest 10 per cent are responsible for 5 per cent. By 2010, the wealthiest 10 per cent of households should see a reduction of 12 per cent on their energy bills compared to the poorest 10 per cent will see a reduction of only 7 per cent.
One vulnerable group that was highlighted were tenants in either social or private rented housing as they were more likely to be affected by flooding than owner-occupiers.
In an event on climate change and human rights ‘Bridging the Gap: Faith and Ethics Perspectives’ in September 2011 (arranged by the World Council of Churches (WCC) and others), Nafisa D’Souza (a climate justice advocate from India) commented: ‘What we have taken from the earth has destroyed parts of it. Ethical concern means that responsibility for creation is to be taken by all of us.’
At the same event, Dr Guillermo Kerber (the WCC programme executive on climate change0 said: ‘Churches and faith-based organisations acknowledge the various dimensions of climate change. They are witnessing how climate change is affecting vulnerable communities on the ground, especially those who have a strong link to nature and those are extremely dependent on the environment. Being aware that these populations have contributed less to climate change, it becomes evident that climate change has an ethical dimension.’
The Biblical narrative tells of God putting a man and a woman in the Garden of Eden to tend it. Later, God saved creation alongside Noah and his family in an act of redemption.
We are told that creation also wait for the final redemption as sin is dealt with – ‘The creation waits in eager anticipation for the sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.’ (Romans 8: 19 – 21)
It can be seen through the threads of Biblical narratives that God has made people responsible for all that He has created, which includes (but not exclusively) our fellow men, women and children.
We are commanded to maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed (Psalm 82: 3), as indeed God does (Jeremiah 22: 16). It is seen as part of Christian duty (Galatians 2: 10) and there is the promise that it will be a positive approach: ‘He who is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and He will reward him for what he has done.’ (Proverbs 19: 17; cf. 28: 27; 14: 21 and Psalm 41: 1).
When we have the right attitude to other people and creation in the light of climate change, we will be living in the light of God’s word.
Comments