The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has transformed the landscape in which social development is pursued. Challenges and missteps notwithstanding, the body of humanity today is articulating the world it collectively desires to a degree unsurpassed in previous ages. The central task before the international community, then, is building capacity in increasing numbers of individuals, communities and institutions, with the ultimate objective of promoting universal participation in the construction of that world. Such an objective, the Bahá'í International Community believes, lies at the heart of the Commission’s current emphasis on rethinking and strengthening social development in the contemporary world.

Many have noted that the true test of the new global development agenda, in its social, economic and environmental aspects, will be its practical implementation. In this regard, there is no more appropriate place in the UN system to address the social dimension of sustainable development than in the Commission for Social Development. While the particular modalities needed will undoubtedly be refined over time, this space has the potential to serve as an important platform for the sharing of learning and accumulated experience from as wide a range of development actors as possible.   

To facilitate steps in this direction, the Bahá'í International Community would like to briefly explore two areas it sees as being particularly important in strengthening the ability of people to contribute to global development efforts:

Learning and capacity building – The generation, application, and diffusion of knowledge at all levels will be critical in unlocking the human capacity needed to advance social development at the grassroots – and meet the ambitious goals of the 2030 Agenda.

Motivation and volition –  If large numbers are to be mobilized into action for the common good, development efforts must concern themselves with the roots of motivation and the generation of individual and collective volition for the betterment of communities, nations and the world. 

Development as Learning

Understood broadly as one component among many contributing to effective action, learning is well regarded in UN circles. However, conceiving of development as learning – approaching it as a process of generating and applying knowledge about the dynamics of social change in specific settings – reframes many familiar aspects of traditional development practice. In the context of such a paradigm, participation in discrete development efforts serves not only as a mechanism to bring about particular outcomes, but also as a means by which the community learns to assess its own needs and mobilize its own resources.  Elements of process also assume critical importance, as the ongoing acquisition of knowledge can never be considered “complete”. Within a mode of learning, plans grow organically over time and exist to be modified in light of the ultimate goal of sustainable community development. Visions and strategies are re-examined time and again and modifications are made as tasks are accomplished, obstacles removed, resources multiplied, and lessons learned. Haphazard change is avoided and continuity of action is maintained.

Such an approach calls for the involvement of growing numbers of participants in a collective process of learning about the practical betterment of society. Efforts of this kind rely on the application of existing knowledge, but invariably involve the generation of new knowledge as well. Much of this takes the form of insights acquired through experience, and here the systematization of learning is crucial. As those working at the grassroots begin to gain experience, initial lessons learned may consist of little more than anecdotes or personal accounts. But over time, patterns emerge which can be documented, analysed, and used to shape subsequent efforts. Conceived in this way, learning concerns not only academic research and formal studies, but also experiential learning, personal insights, and increased capacity to take effective action.  

Patterns of learning at the local level, no matter how essential, will remain limited if they are not connected to global processes concerned with the prosperity of humanity as a whole. In this sense, UN bodies such as the Commission could well conceive of themselves as learning entities dedicated to the systematization of a growing worldwide experience made possible by the participation of increasing numbers of collaborators. Such an approach defies categorization as either “top-down” or “bottom-up”; rather, it is one of reciprocity and interconnectedness.

It is also important to note that while participation in processes of systematic learning builds capacity in individuals, it also does so in communities as a whole. Such collective capacity finds expression in the generation of common will and coordination of actions across real and sometimes challenging social differences. The ability to forge consensus around common values and priorities, to build a shared vision of the future and pursue it through acts of collective volition, to value differences of opinion and build on differences of background, to nurture collective ownership of the methods and direction of community advancement – these are powerful means by which progress can be achieved. Their appearance and strengthening stands as a sure sign of dependable social development.

Development as Volition

Development is a process that must benefit all and draw on the talents of all. The universality and spirit of common cause infusing the new global development agenda reflect a growing commitment to the premise that every member of the human family has not only the right to benefit from a thriving global civilization but also the capacity to contribute to its construction. Capacity of this kind is defined not only by the potential to achieve goals, but also the determination to take needed actions. For this reason, leveraging capacity has to do not only with what people are able to do, but also what they actually choose to do.

Volition is therefore an issue of unparalleled importance. Financial resources are being mobilized at historic scales to implement a wide range of development efforts, but sustainable global progress cannot be achieved through monetary means alone. A central question, then, is how qualities such as commitment and dedication are generated in large numbers of people. How do individuals and communities become motivated to contribute their efforts toward a cause greater than themselves? How can increasing numbers be assisted to take the vital step from passivity to action?

Faith has shown itself to be key in this regard. Whether faith in the efficacy of the development process, the capacity of the human race, the virtues of family, community, or a host of other ideals, the combination of conviction and aspiration has been central to generating motivation and action.  Among these, religious faith has played a unique and vital role in development efforts. Religion has been a feature of human civilization since the dawn of recorded history and has prompted countless multitudes to arise and exert themselves for the well-being of others. Religion offers an understanding of human existence that lifts the eye from the rocky path to the distant horizon. And when true to the spirit of its transcendent founders, religion has been one of the most powerful forces for the creation of new and beneficial patterns of individual and community life.

The link between commitment to any set of high-minded principles and service to the common good, however, is by no means automatic. When it comes to religion, for example, it is entirely possible to have a congregation of well-intentioned adherents whose actions do little to contribute to the betterment of society. Clearly there is much to learn about how noble ideals become expressed in committed, sustained action. For their part, religious communities might be understood as communities of practice in which spiritual teachings are translated into social reality. But a process of capacity building that enables people of all backgrounds to participate in the transformation of society will be needed in numerous kinds of social spaces. How this process unfolds in widely differing contexts and environments promises to be an area of rich exploration for all involved in social development efforts.

Formulating action within a paradigm of learning and volition is, we believe, a powerful means of rethinking and strengthening social development in the contemporary world.  Building new patterns of thought and behaviour is clearly a task of immense proportions. It will require intense learning and the informed, committed participation of ever-growing numbers. But the Bahá'í International Community has no doubt that humanity possesses the capacity to carry out this work, and  it welcomes the contributions of all who are interested in exploring the foundations of lasting social development.

[To read the official UN document, in English and the five other official UN languages, click here.]

Anthropogenic climate change is not inevitable; humanity chooses its relationships with the natural world. This lies at the heart of the 2015 Paris Climate Conference (COP 21), the efforts of which are, in many ways, focused on identifying means by which better choices can be made. The current global order has often approached the natural world as a reservoir of material resources to be exploited. The grave consequences of this paradigm have become all too apparent, and more balanced relationships among the peoples of the world and the planet are clearly needed. The question today is how new patterns of action and interaction can best be established, both individually and collectively, through personal choices, social systems, and governing institutions.

With the adoption of the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including its social, economic and environmental dimensions, momentum for meaningful change has been building. A universal, legally binding agreement on carbon emissions seems within reach for the first time.  Yet sustainability is defined as much by human and social factors as ecological ones. Correlation has been found, for example, between inequality and environmental degradation[1], suggesting that the relationships linking human beings with one another have a direct impact on the physical resources of the planet. The global systems that have left many facing poverty and want, have similarly impoverished the natural environment.

A more balanced attitude toward the environment must therefore address human conditions as consciously as it does natural ones. It must be embodied in social norms and patterns of action characterized by justice and equity. On this foundation can be built an evolving vision of our common future together. And that vision, in turn, stands as a powerful mechanism for mobilizing action around the world and coordinating numerous efforts into mutually-reinforcing lines of action.

Foundations for a New Consciousness

Setting humanity on a more sustainable path to the future involves transformation in attitudes and actions. Reform of institutional structures will be critical, and indeed this is a central focus of those gathered at COP 21. Yet ultimately it is people, whatever their role or place in society, who implement the policies of a central administration or ignore them, who participate in well-conceived programs or continue patterns of life as before. We all have agency and none of our decisions are without consequence. Establishing sustainable patterns of individual and collective life will therefore require not only new technologies, but also a new consciousness in human beings, including a new conception of ourselves and our place in the world.

From where will this consciousness arise? And where will the volition and self-discipline needed to embody it in countless cities, towns, and villages be found? Qualities such as the capacity to sacrifice for the well-being of the whole, to trust and be trustworthy, to find contentment, to give freely and generously to others derive not from mere pragmatism or political expediency. Rather they arise from the deepest sources of human inspiration and motivation. In this, faith has shown itself to be key, whether in the efficacy of sustainability efforts or the capacity of the human race.

Of particular note is the role to be played by religious faith. Religion has been a feature of human civilization since the dawn of recorded history, and has prompted countless multitudes to arise and exert themselves for the well-being of others. Religion offers an understanding of human existence and development that lifts the eye from the rocky path to the distant horizon. And when true to the spirit of its transcendent founders, religion has been one of the most powerful forces for the creation of new and beneficial patterns of individual and collective life.

Religion therefore offers a vital source of commitment to new and potentially challenging patterns of daily life. It is notable that religious leaders and faith-based organizations have been increasingly active on environmental and justice issues as they relate to climate change. But religious conviction does not automatically translate into service to the common good. It is entirely possible, for example, to have a congregation of well-intentioned adherents whose actions do little to contribute to the betterment of society. Clearly there is much to learn about how noble ideals become expressed in committed, sustained action. In this sense, religious communities can be understood as communities of practice in which spiritual teachings are translated into social reality. Within them, a process of capacity building that enables people of all backgrounds to participate in the transformation of society can be set in motion. How this unfolds in different contexts and cultures promises to be an area of rich exploration for all working on sustainability issues.

Identifying the spiritual principles at the root of ecological challenges can also be key in formulating effective action.  Principles– that humanity constitutes but a single people, for example, or that justice demands universal participation in the work of sustainable development – reflect the rich complexity of human nature. Just as importantly, they help foster the will and the aspiration needed to facilitate the implementation of pragmatic measures. Identifying the principles underlying given issues and formulating action in light of their imperatives is therefore a methodology that all can benefit from and contribute to – those in traditionally religious roles, but also leaders of government, the corporate sector, civil society, and others involved in the formulation of public policy.

A Basis for Collective Action

Action on issues of sustainability is often grounded in the sentiment that we all live on the same planet. Of course shared concerns such as climate change, transnational migration, and global pandemics are not to be discounted. But truly transforming individual and collective patterns of life will require a much deeper appreciation of the interconnectedness of the planetary biosphere. People and the environment are inter-connected aspects of one organically integrated system. At this point in history, neither can be accurately understood in isolation from the other. 

Implicit in this understanding is the organic oneness of the human race itself. Deceptively simple in popular discourse, the concept that humanity constitutes a single people has numerous implications for the formulation of effective action at all levels. COP 21, for example, can be understood as an opportunity to embrace more deeply the practical implications of the oneness of humanity, including the obligation to translate our moral responsibility toward one another and the natural world into tangible agreements, approaches, and plans of action.   

A rich and deepening consciousness of the oneness of humankind is the only way that the obstacles inherent in dichotomies like rich/poor, north/south, developed/developing can be overcome. Designations of this kind are not without basis, for some countries do have more financial resources than others. But while such realities are not to be denied, neither should they be allowed to paralyze constructive action. Rather, they should be incorporated into the perspective that an integrated, sustainable and prosperous world will not be built by “us” working together with “them”, but by all of us working on behalf of everyone.

The principle of the oneness of humankind highlights the powerful connections found between raising the well-being of people and reversing environmental degradation. It is true that the ecological footprint of certain areas is far larger than that of others. This is a reality that will need to be addressed through both voluntary choice and governmental regulation. But equally important will be lifting billions out of poverty in ways that not only reduce harm to the environment, but actively improve it. Addressing social needs in the context of environmental ones responds to the pressing moral imperatives of climate change. But its rationale is highly pragmatic as well, for climate change calls for urgent action, and the dividends of such steps are greater the sooner they are taken.

Efforts of this kind also lay a foundation for valuing people and the planet as explicitly as profit has been. It is widely recognized today that the single-minded pursuit of financial gain has all too often led to the destruction of both natural systems and human lives. This legacy has left deep ambivalence about the role the corporate sector and market forces should play in sustainability efforts. Such questions are complex and not simply answered. But what seems imperative is that good faith efforts be integrated into a just global effort that avoids all forms of exclusion that breeds opposition, hostility, defensiveness, and distrust.

Recasting Relationships for a Sustainable Planet

The principle of the oneness of humankind has implications for relationships at all levels. Individual choices and governmental action are often subtly placed in opposition to one another, suggesting that one or the other either takes or deserves precedence. In reality, of course, both are needed. Agreements and protocols at the governmental level will not be sufficient if individuals do not adopt more sustainable lifestyles and behaviors. Similarly, individual actions alone, such as conserving water and reducing waste, for instance, will not be sufficient if governments do not make the necessary changes at the structural level. Also crucial is the community which, as a distinct unit of civilization with its own capacities and qualities, has a unique and vital role that cannot be overlooked. Increasing integration between these three levels will be needed, if long-lasting progress is to be achieved

What might this look like in practice? Consumption habits provide a helpful illustration. People might be open to recycling, for example, but live in areas without services such as drop-off centers or community composting. Without appropriate supports from government, then, possibilities for individual change are severely constrained. Institutional action to create an enabling environment is needed. Government has a vital role to enact the policies, laws, and regulations needed to support the desired actions and behaviors.

This framework, however, merely sets the stage. For ultimately it is individuals who take the initiative to adopt new patterns of action or continue with business as usual. Human behavior and personal decision-making are therefore critical to the success of sustainability efforts, particularly in the sphere of values, ethics, and morals. Such qualities might seem diffuse or somewhat “soft”, but changes in lifestyle will not be sustained if normative drivers of behaviors such as attitudes and beliefs do not shift as well. Consumption habits will not change if acquisition and the ongoing accumulation of luxury goods are seen as powerful symbols of success and importance. Building more sustainable patterns of life will therefore require continuing conversation about human nature and the prerequisites of well-being.

How do such conversations arise? Government can contribute, through educational outreach and efforts to build commitment among stakeholders. But the community has a vital role to play in allowing for dialogue about choices and behavior. Are municipal or provincial policies on water conservation welcomed as progress or treated as an unnecessary hassle? Are collective decisions about infrastructure informed by a shared vision of the future or do individuals mostly look out for themselves? The qualities of culture that inform questions such as these arise within the context of community. The community can provide an arena in which numerous participants, backgrounds, talents, and efforts combine to achieve change and progress. It also provides a key space in which consensus on shared goals and objectives can be reached and a common vision of the future built among a population. The growing list of cities taking far more robust action than their national governments on climate issues is just one example of the power inherent in a community that is able to pursue a common purpose through coordinated efforts.

Exploring new patterns of interaction among the actors of society, such as individuals and institutions, will be central to the task of building more sustainable relationships with the natural world and among various segments of the global family. The work of addressing global climate change ultimately revolves around the aim of human lives well lived, which is a goal cherished by people and cultures the world over. In it can therefore be found a powerful point of unity to support the work ahead. We trust that the efforts of those at COP 21 will contribute to building a firm foundation on which the well-being and prosperity of humanity can be ever more effectively pursued for this and future generations.

A few weeks ago, a judge visited a prison in a city in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and spoke with some of the prisoners. Among them was a Baha’i who took the opportunity to inform him that when she became eligible for conditional release, she made a request in writing, but was subsequently told that it had been rejected by the Ministry of Intelligence. Asking to which authority she should now refer to regarding the future of her application, she was told by the judge that she is neither eligible for conditional release nor for furlough, because the public prosecutor is against it.  “Whoever you write to,” he added “it will bounce and bounce and will come back to be placed in your case file.”  And once again, when she asked what could be done, the judge gave a shocking response, unexpected when coming from a member of the judiciary. He simply said: “You have said yourself that you have nowhere to turn to.  So you should quietly, peacefully, and silently finish your sentence and leave.”

Mr. President, the Baha’is in Iran are not only subject to arbitrary detention—since 2005, there have been over 820 of such arrests, which are in  violation human rights norms—but throughout the judicial process they face an unjust treatment that clearly violates Iran’s own Penal and Criminal Procedure codes. Where is justice when a person – a law abiding citizen – is told by a judge – the very symbol of justice:  “you have nowhere to turn to”?

The Baha’is in Iran ask for no special privilege, but only for their rights, and they hope that the international community and the High Commissioner for Human Rights will continue to put pressure on the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to put an end to this manifestly unjust discrimination.

On 24 May, agents of the Iranian government Public Places Supervision Office sealed eleven shops in the city of Sari.  This followed a similar closure of eighty shops in Kerman, Rafsanjan, and Jiroft, in October 2014 and again a few last April.

The sole excuse for the shutting down of these businesses was that they had been closed during the Baha’i Holy Days.  In fact, some of the owners were asked to sign a document stating that they will only close their stores on the recognized national holidays, otherwise their business licenses would be revoked and their stores closed permanently.

Asking for such an undertaking and making such a statement do not only violate the right to work and to an adequate standard of living enshrined in the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to which Iran is a party, it shows the extent to which the Iranian authorities are willing to go in order to weaken the resolve of the Baha’is and to undermine their determination to live and work in their native land.

In actual facts, the Iranian authorities are basically preventing a shop owner to close his business at any time he or she wishes.  And thus, they are also showing the true face of their relentless persecution of the Baha’is: an irrational religious hatred where the mere closure of a shop for a day or two becomes intolerable.

Today, small enterprises are virtually the only means of economic subsistence for the majority of Iranians of this Faith because the Iranian government widespread plan for the economic deprivation of the Baha’i community has already banned them from all government employment and private sector businesses are frequently pressured to dismiss their Baha’i employees.

So the recent closure of shops is not just a violation of economic rights, it is yet another effort by the Iranian authorities to eradicate the Baha’i community as a viable entity in the place of its birth.