By Tim Bovy
Integrating cultural ethics, the environment, and economics may be our best way forward in developing the environmental legislation required to preserve our planet. What we learn from the European Union, the Middle East, and China is that we should no longer be fearful of giving economics a moral purpose.
Let’s begin with a definition: “Cultural Ethics, in the context of sustainability, denotes the framework of moral principles and values that shape a culture’s approach to environmental responsibility and social equity. It examines how diverse cultural norms influence perceptions of nature, resource utilization, and intergenerational justice. This perspective acknowledges that ethical considerations in sustainability are not universal but are deeply embedded within cultural frameworks.”[1]
Two statements regarding sustainability tell us a lot about a culture’s approach to environmental responsibility. The first is by John Maynard Keynes; the second, by President Xi Jinping.
First, Keynes: “We destroy the beauty of the countryside because the unappropriated splendors of nature have no economic value. We are capable of shutting off the sun and the stars because they do not pay a dividend.”[2]
We destroy the beauty of the countryside because the unappropriated splendors of nature have no economic value.
Now, President Xi: “First, we shall take the development of ecological civilization as our guide to coordinate the relationship between man and Nature. We need to solve the problems brought by industrial civilization, keep human activities within the limits of the ecology and environment, and carry out holistic conservation and systematic governance of mountains, rivers, forests, farmlands, lakes, grasslands and deserts.”[3]
Keynes focuses on the overriding cultural importance of money; Xi, on the environment and balancing the relationship between man and nature. Keynes is critical of those whose sole purpose is the accumulation of wealth. They are the people that the playwright Arthur Miller had in mind when he wrote: “The history of man is his blundering attempt to form a society in which it pays to be good….I see man’s happiness frustrated until the time arrives when he is judged, given social honor and respect, not by what he has accumulated but by what he has given to his society….We reward our dealers, our accumulators, our speculators; we penalize with anonymity and low pay our teachers, our scientists, our workers who make and do and build and create.”[4]
China faces the same environmental challenges that all great industrial nations have faced since the industrial revolution as they grow their economies. However, “China’s policy-making decisions regarding the environment have evolved from when they first entered the global business community, transitioning from a capital-centric model of manufacturing to a more balanced model which seeks to mitigate environmental damages while still preserving profits.”[5]
We are still waiting for the US and the UK to undergo a similar transition, but their dedication to serving the needs of the dealers, accumulators, and speculators makes such a development unlikely. Lest we think that the UK has reformed its preference for serving the City since the 2008 financial crisis, we need to remind ourselves that in 2026 the government continues to favour the moneyed elite: “As well as eschewing a bank tax Labour has championed City deregulation as a way of boosting economic growth, with the Bank of England recently announcing it would reduce banks’ capital requirements for the first time since the crisis.”[6] As Heather Stewart notes: “the clash between progressive policies and the powerful financial sector laid bare in the Epstein emails is still evident.”[7]
In September 2025, “President Donald Trump rebuked world leaders for being overly concerned about climate change during a speech to the United Nations in which he called global warming a ‘con job.’”[8] He also “argued that renewable energy such as wind and solar are a “scam” that should be eliminated, [urging] nations instead to buy more American oil and gas.”[9] Most recently, “the Trump administration has repealed the scientific determination that underpins the government’s legal authority to combat climate change.”[10]
The problem with the UK and the US is that in a neoliberal culture everything is subordinate to the market. To put this more crassly, nothing is not about money.
Antonio Guterres recently said: “Moving beyond gross domestic product is about measuring the things that really matter to people and their communities. GDP tells us the cost of everything, and the value of nothing. Our world is not a gigantic corporation. Financial decisions should be based on more than a snapshot of profit and loss.”[11] Guterres could have been writing in 1933, elaborating on the themes that Keynes so eloquently described regarding misplaced value.
However, as I have noted in my previous articles in The European Financial Review regarding the European Union,[12] the Middle East,[13] and China,[14] it is possible to tap into a cultural ethic that, while acknowledging the importance of profit in business, nevertheless gives considerable significance to mankind’s stewardship of the earth, in effect to do it no harm. This stewardship is typically expressed through the cultural ethics contained in philosophy or religion.
In Islamic Social Teaching, humans are considered khalifah (stewards or vicegerents) on Earth (Qur’an 2:30). The environment and its resources are a trust (amanah) from God, to be used responsibly and preserved for future generations. Confucian philosophy focuses upon 天人合一 (Tiān–Rén Hé Yī) – the unity of humanity and nature. Humans and nature form an integrated whole in which environmental protection is framed as a moral and civilizational duty. In Catholic Social Teaching, stewardship translates into care for creation, which is sacred; humans are stewards, not exploiters, of the Earth.[15]
To these, we can add Maqasid al-Shari’ah (The Higher Objectives of Islamic Law), which provides a holistic blueprint for societal well-being, expressed in beliefs such as wqaf, promoting economic welfare, social stability, and sustainable development, as well as zakat, a religious obligation to redistribute wealth to the poor and needy, fostering social solidarity. Confucianism fosters 仁 (Rén) (Benevolence / Humaneness), in which companies are expected to care for employees, consumers, and communities as a moral obligation, not merely legal compliance, and 义 (Yì), which frames governance as ethical stewardship rather than as shareholder primacy. The common good concept inherent in Catholic Social Teaching states that the economy and institutions must serve the flourishing of all, not just focus on profit. Solidarity tells us that mutual responsibility binds humanity; the strong must protect the vulnerable.[16]
What we learn from all three philosophical and religious teachings is that the economy must serve the entire population. Matthew Taylor points out how “critics argue that endless, indiscriminate growth on a planet with finite resources is driving not only the climate and nature crisis but increasing inequality.” I would take his analysis several steps further. As Pope Francis reminded us in Laudato Si, in his argument for integral ecology: “the climate crisis is intrinsically linked to our present day social, political, and economic problems, and cannot be addressed in isolation from them.”[17]
The advantage of the country and the two regions noted above is that their cultural ethics exist a priori as the source from which social and environmental legislation reflect the country’s traditions, enriching both business and society. In contrast, economic systems must be developed and, as we have recently seen in the United States, can shift abruptly from progressivism to neoliberalism in the blink of a change in administration.
The climate crisis is intrinsically linked to our present day social, political, and economic problems, and cannot be addressed in isolation from them.
Cultural ethics, on the other hand, whether based upon philosophy or religion, provides the stability to create environmental legislation that ties into a population’s longstanding beliefs. This does not mean that the economy cannot be integrated. In Malaysia, for example, Islamic ethics, Islamic finance, Shariah governance, and environmental regulation are deeply interlinked.[18] China’s Ecological Civilization, which draws heavily upon Confucianism, seeks to achieve a balance between economic growth and the well-being and health of both people and the planet.[19] Germany created the Social Market Economy in 1949, drawing, at least in part, upon the ideas espoused by Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Rerum Novarum (1891), to serve the needs of the entire population.
This integration of cultural ethics with economics may be our best way forward in developing the environmental legislation required to preserve our planet. What we learn from the European Union, the Middle East, and China is that we no longer need to be fearful of giving economics a moral purpose.
About the Author
Tim Bovy has over 35 years of experience in designing and implementing various types of information and risk management systems for major law firms such as Clifford Chance; and for international accountancy firms such as Deloitte. He has also developed solutions for organisations such as BT, Imperial Tobacco, Rio Tinto, the Kuwaiti government, The Royal Household, and the US House of Representatives. Tim is an elected member of The Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, an Independent Think Tank based in Central London, and holds a BA degree, magna cum laude, from the University of Notre Dame, and MA and C.Phil degrees from the University of California, Davis.
References
[1] “Cultural Ethics Meaning” available at https://lifestyle.sustainability-directory.com/area/cultural-ethics/#:~:text=Meaning,deeply%20embedded%20within%20cultural%20frameworks. “Environmental ethics” is also a term that is frequently used, but, unlike “cultural ethics”, is not embedded in a country’s or a region’s way of life.
[2] John Maynard Keynes, “National Self-Sufficiency, The Yale Review, available at https://yalereview.org/article/john-maynard-keynes-national-self-sufficiency
[3] President Xi Jinping, “Full text of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s keynote speech at the Leaders’ Summit of the 15th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity,” 12 October 2021 available at https://gb.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/PressandMedia/Spokepersons/202110/t20211015_9547433.htm
[4] Andrew Ayoyama, “Arthur Miller Explains Death of a Salesman,” The Atlantic, Ferbruary 28, 2024 available at https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/04/arthur-miller-letter-death-of-salesman/677473/
[5] ChangLiao, WanChu, “The Environmental Mandate of Heaven: Confucian Global Governance and Environmentalism in Chinese Policies” (2021). Master’s Projects and Capstones. 1188. Available at https://repository.usfca.edu/capstone/1188
[6] Heather Stewart, “A whiff of familiarity in Mandelson’s 2009 collusion with the banks,” The Guardian, 4 Feb 2026 available at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/04/a-whiff-of-familiarity-in-mandelsons-2009-collusion-with-the-banks?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
[7] Please see Footnote 4.
[8] Scott Waldman, “‘Con,’ ‘scam,’ ‘hoax’: Trump’s UN speech on climate,” E&E News, September 23, 2025 available at https://www.eenews.net/articles/con-scam-hoax-trumps-un-speech-on-climate/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThen%20they%20said%20’global%20warming,died%20of%20heat%2Drelated%20causes.
[9]Please see Footnote 6.
[10] Lisa Friedman and Maxine Joselow, “What to Know About the E.P.A.’s Big Attack on Climate Regulation,” New York Times, February 12, 2026 available at https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/12/climate/what-to-know-epa-endangerment-finding.html
[11] Antonio Guterras, “Global economy must move past GDP to avoid planetary disaster, warns UN chief,” The Guardian, 9 February 2026 available at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/feb/09/global-economy-transformed-humanity-future-un-chief-antonio-guterres#:~:text=Guterres%20said%3A%20%E2%80%9CMoving%20beyond%20gross,snapshot%20of%20profit%20and%20loss.%E2%80%9D
[12] Tim Bovy, “Why Europe Leads the World in ESG Legislation,” The European Financial Review, November 5, 2025 available at https://www.europeanfinancialreview.com/why-europe-leads-the-world-in-esg-legislation/
[13] Tim Bovy, “Islamic Social Teaching’s Influence on ESG Legislation in the Middle East,” The European Financial Review, December 4, 2025 available at https://www.europeanfinancialreview.com/islamic-social-teachings-influence-on-esg-legislation-in-the-middle-east/
[14] Tim Bovy, “Ecological Civilization and Confucianism Driving China’s Green Technology Ascendancy and Environmental Legislation, The European Financial Review, January 19, 2026 available at https://www.europeanfinancialreview.com/ecological-civilization-and-confucianism-driving-chinas-green-technology-ascendancy-and-environmental-legislation/
[15] Generated by ChatGPT 5.2; edited by Tim Bovy
[16] Generated by ChatGPT 5.2; edited by Tim Bovy
[17] Joseph Tulloch, “Laudato si’: Pope Francis on the environment,” Vatican News, 21 April 2025 https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2025-04/laudato-si-pope-francis-death-environment-advocacy.html#:~:text=The%20case%20for%20’integral’%20development,and%20vulnerable%2C%20and%20animal%20life.
[18] Ahmad Hafiz Abdul, Aziz & Wei Zhang, “How Malaysia created a conducive ecosystem for Islamic sustainable finance,” World Bank Blogs, May 22, 2019 available at https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/eastasiapacific/how-malaysia-created-conducive-ecosystem-islamic-sustainable-finance#:~:text=To%20drive%20the%20sustainable%20finance,as%20affordable%20housing%20and%20disasters.
[19] See, for example, NIH National Library of Medicine, PMC PubMed Central, 18 Dec 2024 available at https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12851330/#:~:text=Abstract,linked%20to%20our%20physical%20body.
Source link
#Cultural #Ethics #Environment #Significance #European #Financial #Review
