Today, we see another post-it note in our Earth Watch calendar, a reminder to take care of our planet. Earth Day is turning 39 this year; it began in 1970 (actually the idea was hatched in 1962), as a campaign to draw attention to environment issues and to campaign for activism for Mother Earth. Almost 40 years of celebrating Earth Day, and yet, the problems that prompted the Earth Day pioneers have become even more dire today. We need to catch up with environmental degradation now before it completely beats us to the finish line.

I am reminded of the Shakertown Pledge I first read almost two decades ago in a book entitled No More Plastic Jesus written by Adam Daniel Finnerty. Named after the place in Lexington, Kentucky where the group of religious retreat center directors gathered and drew the pledge in April 30, 1973, it was crafted not around environmental issues that time but in response to the maldistribution of wealth and resources, and the realization that, according to Finnerty himself, “our nation was guilty of overconsuming the world’s resources and that our own lifestyles were part of the problem.” The pledge goes:

Recognizing that Earth and the fullness thereof is a gift from our gracious God, and that we are called to cherish, nurture, and provide loving stewardship for Earth’s resources, and recognizing that life itself is a gift, and a call to responsibility, joy, and celebration, I make the following declarations:

1. I declare myself a world citizen
2. I commit myself to lead an ecologically sound life.
3. I commit myself to lead a life of creative simplicity and to share my personal wealth with the world’s poor.
4. I commit myself to join with others in the reshaping of institutions in order to bring about a more just global society in which all people have full access to the needed resources for their physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual growth.
5. I commit myself to occupational accountability, and so doing I will seek to avoid the creation of products which cause harm to others.
6. I affirm the gift of my body and commit myself to its proper nourishment and physical wellbeing.
7. I commit myself to examine continually my relations with others and to attempt to relate honestly, morally, and lovingly to those around me.
8. I commit myself to personal renewal through prayer, meditation, and study.
9. I commit myself to responsible participation in a community of faith.

It may not have been intended as a response to issues about the environment, but the pledge touches on many of the problems that contributed (and continue to do so) to the present environmental crisis: emphasis on the economy and production of goods to the detriment of the environment; excessive consumption by those who can afford, resulting to too much waste; poverty (as a result of unequal distribution of wealth and resources) driving the poor to resort to environmentally unsound activities like slash-and-burn farming, logging and mining concessions granted by third-world governments just to generate jobs resulting to deforestation and pollution of rivers with mine tailing, respectively; exploiting natural resources to unsustainable levels to supply the ever-increasing demand for goods and the need for jobs.

The pledge advocates simplicity of life, which is completely the opposite of the present lifestyles of the world’s wealthy. World Bank indicators show that in 2005, “the poorest 10% accounted for just 0.5% and the wealthiest 10% accounted for 59% of all the consumption” while the UN’s World Institute for Development Economics Research reported in 2006 that rich countries such as “North America, Europe and some countries in the Asia Pacific Region, such as Japan and Australia” are hogging “90% of household wealth.” The pledge calls for an ecologically sound life, yet our environment footprints are so large they are crowding out other living creatures in the planet. Occupational accountability? We need to perform better in that department, too. The pledge was written nearly 40 years ago, it was an apt and conscientious response to social issues then. It is even more meaningful now.

Filed under: April 2009, Economics, Environment | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.