Holy See
@@ HOLY SEE
Check against delivery
Statement by II.E. Archbishop Francis Chullikatt
Apostolic Nuncio
Permanent Observer of the Holy See
Second Preparatory Committee for the
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development
New York, 7 March 2011
PERMANENT OBSERVER MISSION OF THE HOLY SEE TO THE UMTED NATONS
25 Ëast 39ù SEeet . NEW YORK NY 10016 0903 . Tel (212) 370 7885 . Fax (212) 370t622
Mr. Chairma¡,
At the outset my delegation expresses its gratitude for the invitation extended to the Holy
See to participate in this PrepCom, as it did exactþ twenty years ago dwing the fourth PrepCom in
March 1992 just befo¡e the Rio Conference where we agreed that the human beings are at the center of
our concom.
The promotion of sustainable development is one of the most important challenges
humanity faces today. As the main forum for dialogue on global issues, the United Nations as the
"Family of Nations" will necessarily sewe a key role in promoting international cooperation towards
this goal. These preparatory meetings will provide a useful opportunity fo¡ Govemments and civil
society to discuss how the intemational community can best achieve sustainable development and
poverty eradication. My delegation hopes that this second round of preparatory meetings for the
Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development will be successfif, trusts that all concems will be
hea¡d and addressed in mutual respect and in a spirit of goodwill, and proposes its own small
contribution in this same spirit. Above all, we must acknowledge that the human beings must remain
the center of our focus and basis of our actions for sustainable development.
While many have suggested that this committee should focus exclusively on "strategies"
and "best practices" and avoid "theoretica"l debates," in the view of my delegation it would be helpful
to restate the principles that need to guide development strategies and policies lest our efforts crcate
policies that could be harmful. This is particularly the case when \rye are considering concepts such as
the proposed adoption of the theme of "green economy''as the Committee's Report recommends. ln
pursuing the goal of "Green Economy i¡ the context of sustai¡able development and poverty
eradication" (GESDPE), my delegation hopes that we would not forget that the purpose of
development is integral human development a¡d that all our strategies and practices must be judged by
this standard - for the human beings are and must remain at the center of our concem.
Many years ahead of the Earth Summit, the Holy See called for a new perspective on
development that promotes the "authentic human development" of all persons and the whole person.
This vision of development is not in opposition to economic growh and progress; instead, it is a
recognition that economic growth, whether it is driven by markets or driven by States, will not
necessarily promote the kind of development that is worthy of. huma¡s. Promoting economic
development should not be at the expense of the poor and marginalized or of future generations, which
is oíten qualified as. "inter-generational engagement and justice". The well-being of all, and especially
those who live with the pains of hunger a¡d who are excluded from contributing to and benefiting
from the economic, social and political life of their communities, requires that both markets a¡rd
govemment policies be directed towards the higher goal of integral human development, grounded in
the principle of the fundamental human dignity of each person. With them, it is our solemn obligation
to remain in solidarity. We all must work together to ensüe that this is incorporated into the goal of
sustainable development and the concept ofthe "green economy."
Most of the development stategies and policies that have failed to promote integral human
development in the past have done so because they reduced humans to a shadow of their humanity.
On the one hand we are told that self-interest and greed are the sole drivers of human behavior, and
t}1at "free markets" are all that is needed to tum'þrivate vice into public virnre." On the other hand
we are told that human nature is what society makes it, giving us a development shategy that centers
on structues and institutions, with the hope that the right institutions will be enough to promote
development. Each view has part of flre truth: humans often are driven by self-interest and social
institutions do greatly shape human attitudes and actions, markets and governnent policy both have
potential to promote the common good. But humanity cannot be reduced to either selfish egos or
social constructs. A firll understanding of what it mea¡s to be human must also include the basic
solidarity that is a necessary part of our humanity, that comports to the fundamental dignity of each
person and that demands justice. Just as we need to improve the functioning of ma¡kets and the
effectiveness of govemment policy, we must also work to promote solidarity and social justice.
Real development will not a¡d cannot be produced by changes in structures or market
incentives alone. Of equal importaace is the required change of hearts and minds as well as our
subsequent action. Benedict XVI wrote: "integral human development is primarily a vocation"
(Caritas in verilate, 11), for development to be meaningfif and sustainable it has to be human
development, the development of each human in úe totality of their humanity, directed towards the
coÍìmon good. If our view of the Green Economy in the context of Sustainable Development and
Poverty Eradicatiol (GESDPE) is based on either of the two narrow views of personhood, then the
strategies developed will center only on "structua1 and technological changes in the institutions" a¡d
will in the end fail to promote authentic human development. Structural and technological óhalges
will only promote real development if they are used to help people become more human. When they
do not promote human development they risk becoming tools ofsocial control and exclusion.
The economy needs objective moral formation in order to function correctly - not any
ethics whatsoever, but a moral formation which is people-centered" (CV 45). An economy grounded
in a people-centered ethics and morality will necessarily promote the goals of GESDPE, for it will
promote both the care of humans and the care of creation. Such an approaih must recognize that the
economy starts with several vital gifts: first, the gift of creation to all humans and, second, the sharing
of that gift between humans. An economy not grounded in a people-centered ethics and morality will
undoubtedly instrumentalize the goods of the earth for the benefit of the ¡ich and powerful. It will
tum social and environmental indicators, which can be valuable tools for helping to promote authentic
human development, into statistical fxaiions and false goals that give the appearance of progress
without producing the reality of true progress. Or worse, they can become excuses for sacrificing
human rights and assaulting human dignity, all for a distorted view of the common good. If humans in
their fulI humanity .are not viewed as the ultimate goal of development as was agreed in Rio twenty
years'ago, then we fear that huma¡s will be seen by many as the primary barrier to development and
we can be certain which humans these will be: the poor; the marginalized the inconvenient; those yet
to be bom and those who due to age, disability or illness cannot defend themselves.
My delegation hopes that this Committee work will set the stage for a re-commitment to
sustainable development at Rio+20. It may be a coincidence that this important confeîence
corresponds to the 45"' anniversary of the late Pope Paul VI's landmark encyclical "Populorum
Progessio" @evelopment of Peoples), considered the magna carta of development. We hope that it
will also become a clarion call to people of goodwill for an integral human development that will form
the for¡ndation for peace, founded on socìal justice and animaled by solidarity.
Thank you, Mr. Chai rman.
Check against delivery
Statement by II.E. Archbishop Francis Chullikatt
Apostolic Nuncio
Permanent Observer of the Holy See
Second Preparatory Committee for the
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development
New York, 7 March 2011
PERMANENT OBSERVER MISSION OF THE HOLY SEE TO THE UMTED NATONS
25 Ëast 39ù SEeet . NEW YORK NY 10016 0903 . Tel (212) 370 7885 . Fax (212) 370t622
Mr. Chairma¡,
At the outset my delegation expresses its gratitude for the invitation extended to the Holy
See to participate in this PrepCom, as it did exactþ twenty years ago dwing the fourth PrepCom in
March 1992 just befo¡e the Rio Conference where we agreed that the human beings are at the center of
our concom.
The promotion of sustainable development is one of the most important challenges
humanity faces today. As the main forum for dialogue on global issues, the United Nations as the
"Family of Nations" will necessarily sewe a key role in promoting international cooperation towards
this goal. These preparatory meetings will provide a useful opportunity fo¡ Govemments and civil
society to discuss how the intemational community can best achieve sustainable development and
poverty eradication. My delegation hopes that this second round of preparatory meetings for the
Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development will be successfif, trusts that all concems will be
hea¡d and addressed in mutual respect and in a spirit of goodwill, and proposes its own small
contribution in this same spirit. Above all, we must acknowledge that the human beings must remain
the center of our focus and basis of our actions for sustainable development.
While many have suggested that this committee should focus exclusively on "strategies"
and "best practices" and avoid "theoretica"l debates," in the view of my delegation it would be helpful
to restate the principles that need to guide development strategies and policies lest our efforts crcate
policies that could be harmful. This is particularly the case when \rye are considering concepts such as
the proposed adoption of the theme of "green economy''as the Committee's Report recommends. ln
pursuing the goal of "Green Economy i¡ the context of sustai¡able development and poverty
eradication" (GESDPE), my delegation hopes that we would not forget that the purpose of
development is integral human development a¡d that all our strategies and practices must be judged by
this standard - for the human beings are and must remain at the center of our concem.
Many years ahead of the Earth Summit, the Holy See called for a new perspective on
development that promotes the "authentic human development" of all persons and the whole person.
This vision of development is not in opposition to economic growh and progress; instead, it is a
recognition that economic growth, whether it is driven by markets or driven by States, will not
necessarily promote the kind of development that is worthy of. huma¡s. Promoting economic
development should not be at the expense of the poor and marginalized or of future generations, which
is oíten qualified as. "inter-generational engagement and justice". The well-being of all, and especially
those who live with the pains of hunger a¡d who are excluded from contributing to and benefiting
from the economic, social and political life of their communities, requires that both markets a¡rd
govemment policies be directed towards the higher goal of integral human development, grounded in
the principle of the fundamental human dignity of each person. With them, it is our solemn obligation
to remain in solidarity. We all must work together to ensüe that this is incorporated into the goal of
sustainable development and the concept ofthe "green economy."
Most of the development stategies and policies that have failed to promote integral human
development in the past have done so because they reduced humans to a shadow of their humanity.
On the one hand we are told that self-interest and greed are the sole drivers of human behavior, and
t}1at "free markets" are all that is needed to tum'þrivate vice into public virnre." On the other hand
we are told that human nature is what society makes it, giving us a development shategy that centers
on structues and institutions, with the hope that the right institutions will be enough to promote
development. Each view has part of flre truth: humans often are driven by self-interest and social
institutions do greatly shape human attitudes and actions, markets and governnent policy both have
potential to promote the common good. But humanity cannot be reduced to either selfish egos or
social constructs. A firll understanding of what it mea¡s to be human must also include the basic
solidarity that is a necessary part of our humanity, that comports to the fundamental dignity of each
person and that demands justice. Just as we need to improve the functioning of ma¡kets and the
effectiveness of govemment policy, we must also work to promote solidarity and social justice.
Real development will not a¡d cannot be produced by changes in structures or market
incentives alone. Of equal importaace is the required change of hearts and minds as well as our
subsequent action. Benedict XVI wrote: "integral human development is primarily a vocation"
(Caritas in verilate, 11), for development to be meaningfif and sustainable it has to be human
development, the development of each human in úe totality of their humanity, directed towards the
coÍìmon good. If our view of the Green Economy in the context of Sustainable Development and
Poverty Eradicatiol (GESDPE) is based on either of the two narrow views of personhood, then the
strategies developed will center only on "structua1 and technological changes in the institutions" a¡d
will in the end fail to promote authentic human development. Structural and technological óhalges
will only promote real development if they are used to help people become more human. When they
do not promote human development they risk becoming tools ofsocial control and exclusion.
The economy needs objective moral formation in order to function correctly - not any
ethics whatsoever, but a moral formation which is people-centered" (CV 45). An economy grounded
in a people-centered ethics and morality will necessarily promote the goals of GESDPE, for it will
promote both the care of humans and the care of creation. Such an approaih must recognize that the
economy starts with several vital gifts: first, the gift of creation to all humans and, second, the sharing
of that gift between humans. An economy not grounded in a people-centered ethics and morality will
undoubtedly instrumentalize the goods of the earth for the benefit of the ¡ich and powerful. It will
tum social and environmental indicators, which can be valuable tools for helping to promote authentic
human development, into statistical fxaiions and false goals that give the appearance of progress
without producing the reality of true progress. Or worse, they can become excuses for sacrificing
human rights and assaulting human dignity, all for a distorted view of the common good. If humans in
their fulI humanity .are not viewed as the ultimate goal of development as was agreed in Rio twenty
years'ago, then we fear that huma¡s will be seen by many as the primary barrier to development and
we can be certain which humans these will be: the poor; the marginalized the inconvenient; those yet
to be bom and those who due to age, disability or illness cannot defend themselves.
My delegation hopes that this Committee work will set the stage for a re-commitment to
sustainable development at Rio+20. It may be a coincidence that this important confeîence
corresponds to the 45"' anniversary of the late Pope Paul VI's landmark encyclical "Populorum
Progessio" @evelopment of Peoples), considered the magna carta of development. We hope that it
will also become a clarion call to people of goodwill for an integral human development that will form
the for¡ndation for peace, founded on socìal justice and animaled by solidarity.
Thank you, Mr. Chai rman.
Stakeholders