Introduction to the issues

The first Visser 't Hooft Memorial Consultation in 1993 set out to focus Christian thinking on the challenges confronting humanity resulting from the present and projected future state of our planet. Its report, Sustainable Growth and Development, reflects a rather unique ecological, economic and social assessment of our past approaches to economic growth and development, and provided useful guidance for the preparation of the second Visser 't Hooft Foundation consultation in 1995.

The original working title for the second consultation was "Sustainable Production and Employment". The planning group quickly perceived that the concept of sustainable production was only one half of the equation -- and that the consultation would need to examine both production and consumption patterns. In fact, the meeting opted for the term "sustainable society", which provided a link between the first consultation's reflection on sustainable development and the need for special attention to the role of institutions within our societies. A provocative review of the churches' past views regarding the "Protestant work ethic", conspicuous consumption and accumulation of wealth led to the challenging recognition that these issues seem to have faded from the Christian agenda.

At the same time, the planning group saw the focus on "employment" as being potentially too narrow and restrictive. "Employment" was seen as a term which reflected a bias towards paid full-time employment and left aside such critical factors as women's unpaid work, homeworkers, the informal sector in both rural and urban areas of developing countries, precarious part-time jobs, indentured, slave and forced labour, child labour, and subsistence farming, forestry and fisheries. As a result, the group opted for the word "work" over that of employment as a way to stress the varied nature of employment situations around the world.

The planning group noted that the fragility of the environment is amply reflected in a multitude of studies and reports in the media, but not enough attention is given to the tragic "waste" of human beings. While this human perspective is less visible in the media, it is evident from rapidly increasingly levels of poverty, unemployment and social exclusion. The challenge of the consultation was seen to be identifying ways and means through which the Christian churches can help to overcome this polite indifference towards the social and human fate of others and promote a new sense of solidarity. There was a general consensus that any response to these issues needs to give particular priority to the development of an ongoing and participatory (including churches) process of change, rather than trying to come up with detailed, explicit, global and local prescriptions as to what each of us must do.

My objective here is to raise a number of the key issues related to the world of work, the concept of sustainable societies, inter-relationships between the world of work and society, the role of churches in promoting a more sustainable society and several key factors influencing the transition to a more sustainable society.

Insights into the world of work

Lukas Vischer's essay on "The Work of Human Beings as Creatures of God" (pp.286-311) focuses our attention on what the churches have said -- and not said -- about the meaning and limits of work and enables us to see the historical link between work and consumerism in the writings of the church. It is important to relate this philosophical and historical review of the churches' "teachings" about the meaning of work to the realities of the world of work today as depicted in the essays which focus on a specific geographical area or specific groups in society.

Here I should like to identify ten factors regarding the world of work which seem to me important for this discussion:

1. How can we promote a more equitable distribution of work within our societies? This concerns not only the problem of unemployment, but also under-employment, unpaid work, subsistence activities, voluntary work and, of course, the inequitable, patriarchal system of the division of labour between men and women in all of our societies.

2. If Abraham Maslow's classification of the hierarchy of meeting human needs is correct (income, intrinsic enjoyment of work, social contact and self-realization), how can we encourage a shift in the present balance between these motives in developed and developing countries and in transition economies?

3. How can workers be protected from potential "negative" aspects of work: for example, loss of dignity, fatigue, boredom, health and safety risks?

4. We have more capacity to influence our social choices than we are sometimes willing to admit. For example, the crisis of the 1980s led to a significant restructuring of economies and labour markets in the North. In the European Union, it was "decided" that the costs of this restructuring would be carried by significantly increased unemployment levels. In the United States, on the other hand, it was "decided" that the costs would be carried by drastic decreases in income levels. These are important choices for our societies. How can we make this process more transparent and responsive to our social and human priorities?