Environment, Islam and the future
Recently we have become better aware of the Islamic role in European scientific and cultural history from the 8th century onwards. For me a recent book The House of Wisdom by Jonathan Lyons was something of a revelation. The same goes for the 1001 Inventions project about The Muslim Heritage in Our World. There has also been a television series on the subject bringing out the importance of Islamic mathematics, engineering and astronomy. Even the Chinese liked to use Arab navigators for their long ocean journeys.
It may be uncomfortable for many today, but at that time western Europe was regarded in the Islamic world as a barbaric outlier of civilization - poor, primitive, corrupt and credulous. The introduction of Islamic ideas and technology, drawing on civilization elsewhere, from Greece to China, was a propeller of the European renaissance in the 14th and 15th centuries.
The environment is the heritage of us all, and this has long been recognized in Islam. As has been well understood, notably in China, there is a paramount need to achieve harmony or balance between the human species and the rest of the natural world, of which we are a small but immodest part. Respect for the environment and conservation of natural resources, in particular water, is emphasized throughout the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
At present we are preoccupied with a global crisis over money and credit with all its social as well as economic implications. Many still talk as if the solution were to go back to where we were. But beyond and behind all this is a much bigger crisis over the condition of the global environment and its future prospects. In the last few years or even months, awareness of environmental, or green, issues has entered the world of politics as never before.
Before the industrial revolution some 250 years ago, the effects of human activity in all its variations were local, or at most regional, rather than global. Now the impact is indeed global. It falls to our generation to measure the impact on society, and work out what might be done to mitigate or adapt to it.
Little is more difficult than learning to think differently, yet it is hard even to define the principal problems without upsetting longstanding traditions, beliefs, attitudes and the often unspoken assumptions on which modern, including Islamic, society rests. It took a long time for previous generations to accept the antiquity of the Earth, the mechanisms of evolution, the movement of tectonic plates, the shared genetic inheritance of all living organisms, and the symbiotic and to some extent self-regulating relationships between the physical, chemical, biological and human components of the Earth system.
The truth is that in its long history the Earth has never been in this situation before. In my view there are six main factors which have driven this transformation. All are interlinked, and all represent pressure on the natural environment.
- Of these, population issues are often ignored as somehow embarrassing and difficult to discuss;
- most people are broadly aware of land resource and waste problems, although far from accepting the remedies necessary;
- water issues, both fresh and salt, have had a lot of publicity, and already affect most people on this planet;
- climate change with all its implications for atmospheric chemistry is also broadly understood, apart from by those who do not want to understand it;
- how we generate energy while fossil fuel resources diminish and demand increases is another conundrum, now at last under serious discussion;
- but so far damage to the diversity of life on which our species critically depends has somehow escaped most public attention. Here we mostly remain ignorant of our own ignorance. Yet in this area human destructiveness has been most evident over the last 10,000 years. Current rates of extinction could in the long run be the most important of all these factors for human welfare.
There is now a seventh factor recent in human experience. It arises from the introduction of new technologies. Some technologies have been beneficial, but others much less so. On a wide scale we still have to reckon with the effects of the internet on human behaviour and society. On a limited scale we have had to cope with the introduction of chlorofluorocarbons as a refrigerant. This was shown to damage the ozone layer which protects ecosystems from harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun. The law of unintended consequences has particular application in the field of technology.
What then are we to expect? How are we to recognize that the last 1,500 years, and still more so the last 250 years have been a bonanza of inventiveness, exploitation and consumption which may not continue? All successful species, whether bivalves, beetles or humans, multiply until they come up against the environmental stops, reach some accommodation with the rest of the environment, and willy nilly restore some balance.
In September 2009 the magazine Nature published an article by Johan Rockstrom and others identifying nine scientific boundaries or stops which humans would cross at their peril. Three had already been crossed: climate change; loss of biodiversity; and interference with nitrogen and phosphorus levels. The other six were stratospheric ozone depletion; ocean acidification; use of fresh water; changes in land use; chemical pollution; and atmospheric loading of aerosols. Obviously we could all have our own lists and calculations of the dangers we face, and I have already suggested some of the factors I think most important.
Many attempts have recently been made to look at what we should now do to prevent things from getting worse. But some issues still remain too difficult for people to confront, among them our own proliferation, the widening divisions between rich and poor, the high vulnerability of cities, the risks of war with unimaginably horrible weapons, and the exhaustion of often irreplaceable resources. Loss of biodiversity may not sound so important, but it could be one of the most dangerous factors of all.
I now turn to the specific vulnerabilities and hazards facing the Islamic world. Islamic societies as well as others have risen and fallen in the past. Attitudes towards the natural world have likewise changed: from the doubts about 'natural laws' of the Sufi philosopher Abu Hamid al-Ghazali in the 12th century to the emphasis on technology rather than science in our own times. But whatever the thinking about the environment and God's role in it, there are seven main hazards all with direct impacts on the Islamic world:
- supplies of fresh water, and dependence on water from aquifers which in many cases is irreplaceable;
- rising sea levels with effects on coastal states (eg Bangladesh);
- ocean warming, acidification and the effects on coral reefs and fish populations, and the economies dependent on them;
- changes in patterns in rain and drought with more storms, hurricanes and cyclones; and risks of desertification in some areas;
- new patterns of evolution involving all plant and animal species, including humans, with effects on their health;
- rapidity of change, and identification of tipping points between one system and another;
- character of cities, and buildings to cope with changing circumstances.
Few of these issues are unfamiliar to the Islamic world. Careful management of water resources and the need for conservation are already deeply rooted in Islam. According to Islamic teaching, humans have obligations of stewardship over the environment and the other species within it, and have a duty to look after resources, in particular water, with specific legal attitudes towards ownership.
At present neither national nor international institutions measure up to the scope and implications of environmental problems. This shortcoming was particularly evident at the Copenhagen conference last December, and is likely to bedevil the next climate conference at Cancun at the end of the year. Hence my own interest over the years in promoting the idea of a World Environment Organization to be a partner of other UN bodies, and bring together the many limited and often overlapping international agreements relating to the environment. This would be a world forum in which the particular hazards faced by Islamic communities could be more widely appreciated and action taken to avoid the worst results.
In looking further ahead it is vital that we should see the connexions between these various problems. In doing so it may be useful to jump a hundred years, and from this vantage look backwards. I shall assume, I hope correctly, that humans of all faiths, traditions and cultures will have faced up to and coped with at least some of these problems. People are not stupid. So what will the world look like?
First they are likely to be living in a more globalized world of rapid communication. Ideas, units of information - or memes - will pass almost instantaneously between countries, communities and individuals. The wiring of the planet with fibre optics, cellular wireless, satellites and digital television is already transforming human relationships. It may also be changing the structure and functioning of the human brain. For the first time there will be something like a single human civilization. More than ever humans can be regarded like certain species of ants as a super-organism.
Human numbers in cities and elsewhere will almost certainly be reduced, but some people will live longer, bringing its own train of problems. Their distribution will be different. It has been suggested that an optimum population of the Earth would be nearer 2.5 billion rather than - as now - almost 7 billion, or even 9 billion later this century.
Communities are likely to be more dispersed without the daily tides of people flowing in and out of cities for work. Agriculture will be more local and specialized with more reliance on hydroponics. Energy and transport systems will be decentralized. Archaeologists of the future may even wonder what all those roads were for.
Then there are developments in information technology, including the development of robotic intelligence. They raise the question of evolution itself. At present we can alter isolated genes while disregarding the complexity of what genes can do. Recently we heard about the invention of an artificial form of DNA. Already chips are being inserted into humans for a variety of purposes. We can even insert extra chromosomes in the knowledge that they would not be heritable. But the time could come when we want to make changes, particularly in the brain to be heritable, and thus to create a breed of super humans.
On the one hand humans may thereby be liberated from many current drudgeries. Soon houses may be able to clean themselves, robots may produce meals on demand, cars may drive under remote instruction, and evolution of desirable characteristics could even be automated. All this seems unimaginable when so many still have to trudge miles to collect fuel wood and water.
On the other hand humans could well become dangerously vulnerable to technological breakdown, and thereby lose an essential measure of self sufficiency. Already dependence on computers to run our complex systems, and reliance on electronic information transfer, are having worrying effects. Here industrial countries are far more vulnerable than others. Just look at the effects of single and temporary power cuts. More than ever individuals feel out of control of even the most elementary aspects of their lives.
Let us hope without total confidence that by 2100 humans will have worked out and will practice an ethical system in which the natural world has value not only for human welfare but also for and in itself. This should not be a point of contention between faiths. The human super-organism must take its place alongside other super-organisms.
For the very long term I hesitate to speculate. Tectonic plate movement will shift the relationship between land and sea. Changes in oxygen levels in the atmosphere may sooner or later affect the character of life itself. For example, given the evolutionary significance of our brains and the current hazards of childbirth, we might imagine a sort of human marsupial in which women gave birth earlier in the reproductive process, and developed a kangaroo-type pouch.
I sometimes wonder how long it would take for the Earth to recover from the human impact. Future visitors from outer space might well be puzzled by the fossil remains of ourselves and the agglomerations we call cities. They might also wonder at the fossils of other animals and plants we have adapted for our own purposes. By then there could be rats as big as dogs, giant pigeons like ostriches, rampant water hyacinths in every waterway, micro-organisms gone macro and macro-organisms gone micro. But they should know, as should we, that life itself from the bottom of the seas to the top of the atmosphere, is so robust that the dominance of any one species could be no more than a short episode in the history of life on Earth.
Before I conclude I want to mention a current enterprise which brings out the unique circumstances of today. In geological terms the Pleistocene epoch of intermittent ice ages was followed some 10,000 years ago by the relatively warm Holocene epoch. Now some geologists have proposed that the Holocene should be followed by an Anthropocene epoch beginning some 250 years ago to mark the extraordinary changes brought about by one animal species - our own - to the surface of the Earth: its land, sea and air.
We live in amazing and most challenging times. If there is such a thing as an Anthropocene epoch, let us make sure that the environment we know is not on any edge of disaster. Enjoy it if we can.