Having thought about how ‘Changing Borders ’ will be a crucial part of the transition to a low carbon economy, I got to thinking about morality. How can we know which borders to change and how? How can we make value judgements about sustainability?

I’m sure (hope?) that nearly all of you have your own moral framework within which you evaluate options and make decisions. Some of you will be religious, some of you scientific, some of you philosophical. All of you will be constrained to some extent by your evolutionary heritage: the urge to secure the best resources for those closest to you, typically in this kind of order: children/spouse/family/friends/religious co-believers/nation/race/humanity/animals/everything else.

So, in a world where we need to accept that changing borders is a necessary part of progress, how can we extend or refine our morality to cope with and benefit from the transition?

For what it’s worth, I think we need to listen to Shantaram’s Abdel Khader Khan (Afghani Bombay Mafia don and spiritual leader to the book’s hero):



Let’s give it the acid test:

‘Should I buy a car that does less than 50 mpg?’ – if everyone did this we’d run out of fuel too quickly – therefore it’s not good. (I’ll refrain from ‘evil’, but…)

‘Should I eat less meat?’ – if everyone did this we’d reduce our carbon footprint and increase the amount of available food – therefore it’s good.

I won’t labour the point: you get the idea. Does this idea of morality work for you? I’ve been using it since I read Shantaram and I have found it pretty robust: not that it means that I always choose the good option, but that’s another challenge entirely.