ECOJUSTICE: Past and Present

By Christopher Lind
published in THE ECUMENIST, Summer 2008

Ecojustice is a relatively new term in our lexicon, having emerged only in the last 40 years. Sometimes it is spelled with a hyphen (eco-justice) and sometimes without. It is widely used in environmental studies, education and religion. It is increasingly used in philosophy and law. In this article I trace the emergence of the term in ecumenical struggles among social and environmental activists. The struggles between these two justice oriented groups had a dialectical character and the term ecojustice emerged as a synthesis of their competing claims. The article goes on to show how the ecojustice principles of solidarity, sustainability, sufficiency and socially just participation have found expression in the reports of the World Council of Churches, the Earth Charter and the scholarly work of the Earth Bible Project.

The late 1960s was a time of great social and intellectual ferment. In North America the desire to address issues of social justice was strong and reflected in political campaigns with slogans like President Lyndon Johnson’s “The Great Society” and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s “The Just Society”. At the very same time there arose a movement we came to recognize as the ecological movement. This movement was concerned with pollution and the misuse of pesticides, as described for example in Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring [1]. It was also concerned with the rapid increase in the world’s population seen in the 20th century, and the strain this was putting on the Earth’s resources. One of the best examples of this concern was expressed by the Club of Rome, an international think tank whose report Limits to Growth [2] was published in 1972.

Activists who focused on issues of poverty and racial injustice often advocated for economic policies that would encourage industrial growth in order to generate increased wealth. Concern for the environment was sometimes absent from this agenda. Activists who focused on issues of smog, birth control and endangered species often advocated against industrial expansion in order to limit environmental damage. Concern for social inequality was sometimes absent from this agenda.

In the Christian Churches both concerns were present but the concern for social justice was much stronger. In 1970 an American Episcopal (Anglican) priest argued that “choosing [to work for] ecology instead of [against] poverty, or vice versa, is to make a bad choice,” the way ahead is to choose both [3]. Norman Faramelli was working at the time for the Boston Industrial Mission. About the same time, a staff person for the American Baptist Churches named Richard Jones coined the term ‘eco-justice’ “to mean both ecological wholeness and social justice”[4]. The Presbyterian ethicist William Gibson describes ecojustice as recognizing “in other creatures and natural systems the claim to be respected and valued and taken into account in societal arrangements … The concern for ecological soundness and sustainability includes but transcends the concern of humans for themselves.” [5]

Since that time the concept of ecojustice has been taken up by both religious and non-religious voices. In the World Council of Churches a focus on a “just, participatory and sustainable society” was initiated in 1975 at the Nairobi Assembly. From these discussions emerged the ethical norms of sustainability, sufficiency, participation and solidarity [6]. This was further developed at the Vancouver Assembly in 1983 with a focus on “Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation”. The American ethicist Dieter Hessel describes the basic norms of ecojustice as follows:

• solidarity with other people and creatures – companions, victims, and allies – in earth community, reflecting deep respect for diverse creation;
  
  
• ecological sustainability – environmentally fitting habits of living and working that enable life to flourish, and utilize ecologically and socially appropriate technology;
  
  
• sufficiency as a standard of organized sharing, which requires basic floors and definite ceilings for equitable or “fair” consumption;
  
  
• socially just participation in decisions about how to obtain sustenance and to manage community life for the good in common and the good of the commons. [7]

Other authors add the norm of equity to Hessel’s list in order to reinforce the idea that ecojustice is inclusive of social justice. Some of these themes have been developed by the Lutheran theologian Larry Rasmussen in his Earth Community, Earth Ethics [8]. Several denominations have begun making explicit reference to the norms of sustainability, sufficiency, participation, and solidarity [9]. In the Roman Catholic tradition, Pope John Paul II has called for an “ecological conversion” [10]. The development of ecojustice in other religious traditions has been chronicled in a multi volume book series World Religions and Ecology (edited by Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim) published by the Center for the Study of World Religions at Harvard Divinity School and distributed by Harvard University Press.

On the non-religious side, the United Nations was key in promoting a series of events and reports that advanced the issue. In 1972 there was a UN conference in Stockholm on Environment and Development. Then in 1983 the UN convened the World Commission on Environment and Development. It issued a report in 1987 by which time it had become known as the Brundtland Commission after its Chair, Gro Harlem Brundtland. The report was titled Our Common Future [11] and it focused on the concept of sustainable development which it defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

This was followed by a conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 that became known as the Earth Summit and followed again by a conference in Johannesburg in 2002 that became known as Rio after 10. The Earth Summit was significant for its Declaration but it was also significant for what was not agreed upon there. A draft declaration of Earth Rights had been prepared for Rio but there were not enough signatories to achieve this goal. In 1994 the former Soviet President Michail Gorbachev and the Canadian Secretary General of the Rio Earth Summit Maurice Strong revived this initiative with early support from the Government of the Netherlands. In 1997 they organized an independent Earth Charter Commission as a kind of People’s Movement. In 2000 the Earth Charter was officially launched, endorsed by non-governmental groups and popular organizations around the world. The Earth Charter effectively elaborates the four ecojustice norms listed above [12]. A summary of the 16 principles is attached in the appendix[link]

The tension between advocates of social justice and advocates for other communities of the Earth has not gone away. Campaigners for greater social equality remain concerned about what they see as attempts to restore ecological balance on the backs of the poorest people. At the same time, advocates for ecological integrity remain suspicious that any attempt to address social inequality before environmental destruction, rather than together, means that fundamentally, the rest of Creation remains outside our intellectual and moral universe. As the German protestant theologian Jurgen Moltmann put it, “What we call the environmental crisis is not merely a crisis in the natural environment of human beings. It is nothing less than a crisis in human beings themselves. It is a crisis of life on this planet …. As far as we can judge, it is the beginning of a life and death struggle for creation on this earth.” [13] As the Canadian Catholic Bishops put it “The cry of the earth and the cry of the poor are one.” [14]

For myself, I have become convinced that the developing concept of ecojustice can be a way forward, beyond the false dichotomy of social justice vs. ecological justice, as long as it is understood as a term that can include both human suffering and the groaning of the Earth. One of the projects that has helped lead me to this conviction is the Earth Bible project from Australia [15]. Under the leadership of Dr. Norman Habel, a biblical scholar from Flinders University in Adelaide, five volumes of essays have been published. These essays are by scholars the world over, all responding to six hermeneutical ecojustice principles. These are not ethical principles or principles of social organization. Rather these are principles for interpreting sacred texts. The use of these principles to guide biblical interpretation is an attempt to overcome the effect of other ideas, namely, the separation of humanity from nature that was embedded in the 18th century intellectual movement known as the Enlightenment.

Speaking as someone who comes to this debate after decades of involvement in issues of social justice, I can say that the movement to an Earth-centred conciousness [16] is as profound a challenge as I have encountered. Working with the ecojustice principles of the Earth Bible Project has been helpful in understanding just how profound a challenge that is. Of course, adopting the language of ecojustice does not end all debates. It signals a profound shift in thinking and makes new solutions possible. Instead of thinking the environment is merely the backdrop for the central human drama and a resource for its continuation, an ecojustice approach centres human life and activity within the web of all life and activity.

A formal secular definition of justice would be to give to everyone that which is their due. In contemporary Christian theology, another way of thinking about justice is to understand it as ‘right relationship’. An ecojustice approach understands right relationship in terms of all the communities of the Earth, giving all of them their due. It doesn’t automatically resolve the question about the nature of these relationships but it does claim that all life has moral value and therefore a claim on humans as moral agents [17]. Again, from a Christian point of view, all Creation comes from God and all Creation bears the marks of God. Creation gives witness to the Creator (Acts 14:17) and makes plain God’s power and nature (Rom 1:19-20). Right relationship is a foundational principle for all Creation, not just for humans. From this point on, no question of justice considered by humans can ignore the claims of the rest of Creation for right relationship.

Appendix 1: Earth Charter Principles

1. Respect Earth and life in all its diversity.

2. Care for the community of life with understanding, compassion, and love.

3. Build democratic societies that are just, participatory, sustainable, and peaceful.

4. Secure Earth's bounty and beauty for present and future generations.

5. Protect and restore the integrity of Earth's ecological systems, with special concern for biological diversity and the natural processes that sustain life.

6. Prevent harm as the best method of environmental protection and, when knowledge is limited, apply a precautionary approach.

7. Adopt patterns of production, consumption, and reproduction that safeguard Earth's regenerative capacities, human rights, and community well-being.

8. Advance the study of ecological sustainability and promote the open exchange and wide application of the knowledge acquired.

9. Eradicate poverty as an ethical, social, and environmental imperative.

10. Ensure that economic activities and institutions at all levels promote human development in an equitable and sustainable manner.

11. Affirm gender equality and equity as prerequisites to sustainable development and ensure universal access to education, health care, and economic opportunity

12. Uphold the right of all, without discrimination, to a natural and social environment supportive of human dignity, bodily health, and spiritual well-being, with special attention to the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities.

13. Strengthen democratic institutions at all levels, and provide transparency and accountability in governance, inclusive participation in decision making, and access to justice.

14. Integrate into formal education and life-long learning the knowledge, values, and skills needed for a sustainable way of life.

15. Treat all living beings with respect and consideration.

16. Promote a culture of tolerance, nonviolence, and peace.

1. The Principle of Intrinsic Worth
The universe, Earth and all its components have intrinsic worth/value.

2. The Principle of Interconnectedness
Earth is a community of interconnected living things that are mutually dependent on each other for life and survival.

3. The Principle of Voice
Earth is a subject capable of raising its voice in celebration and against injustice.

4. The Principle of Purpose
The universe, Earth and all its components are part of a dynamic cosmic design within which each piece has a place in the overall goal of that design.

5. The Principle of Mutual Custodianship
Earth is a balanced and diverse domain in which responsible custodians can function as partners, rather than rulers, to sustain a balanced and diverse Earth community.

6. The Principle of Resistance
Earth and its components not only suffer from injustices at the hands of humans, but actively resist them in the struggle for justice.

[1] Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1962.

[2] Meadows, Meadows, Randers & Behrens, Rome: Club of Rome, 1972.

[3] Norman Faramelli, “Ecological Responsibility and Economic Justice” Andover Newton Quarterly 11 (Nov. 1970) 81-93; reprinted in Richard E. Sherrell, Ecology: Crisis & New Vision Richmond: John Knox Press.

[4] William Gibson, “Introduction to the Journey” pg. 10, n.2, in Wm Gibson (ed.) Eco-justice – The Unfinished Journey, New York: SUNY Press, 2004.

[5] Gibson, p. 34.

[6] See Paul Abrecht (ed.) Faith, Science and the Future Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1978.

[7] Dieter T. Hessel, “Eco-Justice Ethics”, e-published by the Forum on Religion and Ecology, May 8, 2007, at http://environment.harvard.edu/religion/disciplines/ethics/eco-justice.html

[8] Larry Rasmussen, Earth Community, Earth Ethics, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1996; see also David Hallman’s Spiritual Values for Earth Community, Geneva: WCC Publications, 2000.

[9] See for example, Presbyterian Eco-Justice Task Force. Keeping and Healing the Creation. Louisville: Committee on Social Witness Policy, Presbyterian Church (USA), 1989; Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Caring for Creation: Vision, Hope, and Justice. Chicago: Division for Church and Society, 1993.  

[10] Pope John Paul II, General Audience, 17 January 2001, No. 4; Sister Marjorie Keenan, RSHM, From Stockholm to Johannesburg: An Historical Overview of the Concern of the Holy See for the Environment, 1972-2002, Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Vatican City, 2002, p. 75.

[11] World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.

[12] See www.earthcharter.org

[13] Jurgen Moltmann God in Creation, Mineapolic: Fortress Press 1993 [1985], p. xiii.

[14] Social Affairs Commission, Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Pastoral Letter on the Christian Ecological Imperative”, Ottawa: CCCB, 2003.

[15] www.webofcreation.org/Earthbible/earthbible.html

[16] Some theologians refer to this as an Earth centred pneumatology “that experiences God’s spirit immanent in creation as the power of life-giving breath (ruah), the Wisdom (logos) continually working to transform and renew all life and the love that sustains it. Biblical images portray the Spirit as “a healing and subversive life-form—as water, light, dove, mother, fire, breath . . . wind”. See Mark Wallace, “The Wounded Spirit as the Basis for Hope in an Age of Radical Ecology,” in Christianity and Ecology, eds., Dieter T. Hessel and Rosemary Radford Ruether (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard/CSWR, 2000), 51–72.

Download this article as MS Word .doc (53k) here »