European Geologist Journal 59

Geoethics Principles in the Sustainable Development Goals for Reducing Natural Disasters

by Nieves Sánchez¹

¹ President of Ilustre Colegio Oficial de Geólogos

Contact: nieves.sg@gmail.com

Abstract

Geoethics principles must be applied in all decision-making processes if society truly aims to enhance resilience against the vulnerability that climate change can inflict on our economic and social systems. The United Nations Agenda with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) needs to incorporate those geoethics principles like a common basis to work for a better future for all people, apart from their economic position or social level. Geology, from an ethical point of view, must be on the table of the political decisions related to the land use and the management of the environment. The catastrophic event that we have suffered in the east of Spain on October 29, 2024, is a demonstration that all of society needs the geoscience and ethical basis (free of ideology) to create resilience rather than vulnerability.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

1. Geoethics as a challenge

The purpose of geoethics is to enhance the awareness of geoscientists of their ethical responsibilities in conducting their professional activities, promoting geoethical thinking to ensure sustainable development, responsible interaction with the Earth system, and the protection of human communities [1].

In the geoethical dimension [2], ‘not only must human actions be addressed, but also the deontological behaviour of the professionals involved must be considered’. The deontological code of the Spanish Official Association of Professional Geologists [3] has incorporated the postulates and principles of geoethics, ensuring that when a professional carries out their tasks, they must consider this aspect and pay attention to the potential consequences of their actions, viewing the planet as a whole and the impacts that may arise. Furthermore, we should not forget the long-term repercussions of the decisions and the possible effects on future generations. In addition to the deontological principles of honesty, integrity, professional secrecy, fair competition, etc., shared with other professions, geoethics establishes additional principles on which the behaviour of professionals practising geology should be based. Some of these principles include:

• Caution or precaution: when there is potential risk. Technological advances can entail risks or ethical dilemmas that must be considered before their application.
• Sustainability: applicable to socio-economic development and with a global perspective. The exploitation of resources must respect the environment.
• Human safety: Professionals must contribute their full knowledge and experience in the prevention and mitigation of geological risks, seeking the safety of people and the environment, including the duty to inform the authorities and society with seriousness and scientific rigour. Likewise, this principle refers to the search for solutions to improve living conditions and reduce poverty based on geological resources.

Geology will be crucial in addressing the great challenges facing humanity, as it has been throughout history [10]. We are approaching a moment, in planetary time, when human progress and prosperity collide with the natural environment, leading to profound consequences. In this context, geology shows us that Earth will likely endure, continuing to orbit around the sun and rotate on its axis. However, it is unclear whether humanity can survive if it continues to destroy its own habitat.

The new essential approach, less arrogant and more humble, involves geoethics as the union between sustainable thinking and the understanding of nature through geological processes. To advance this shift, a profound transformation in professional practice is required, including improved management across all areas, to ensure that all available knowledge is applied to achieve the most sustainable outcome.

This requires better training for those who practice geology, promoting a broader interdisciplinary approach and the creation of multidisciplinary teams, so that diverse scenarios and available options are assessed using all relevant existing mechanisms, ensuring the most sustainable outcome. Before initiating any project, it is necessary to assess whether the outcome aligns with geoethical principles or could be improved by raising the bar when it comes to considering environmental impacts. Specialised training will continue to be necessary, but, at the same time, it will be essential to work with experts with different visions, especially experts in environmental science, to develop innovative solutions that help minimise the negative impacts.

Climate change will increase natural risk, making it necessary to incorporate new variables and uncertainties into long-term planning and design. Risk analysis will therefore need to adopt new methodologies and take into account effects that have previously been overlooked. Risk management will carry great social and economic relevance, as it may trigger insecurity, displacement of people, social change and economic loss.

New technologies will certainly support more effective planning for future scenarios. However, it will also be necessary to consider the cascading effects and interactions between different risks and their impacts, including floods, droughts, desertification, erosion, loss of soil, and landslides, recognising that these impacts are not only local, but also have cross-border consequences.

Professional associations help ensure that ethics remains a central part of public debate and professional reflection, enabling practitioners to respond to emerging approaches. The complexity of current problems and the need to find solutions demand multidisciplinary teams that integrate diverse scientific and technical perspectives. Promoting this collective, multidisciplinary vision will be essential. Associations avoid establishing unnecessary barriers, breaking down borders, opening up more options for sharing knowledge and seeking formulas for continued collaboration between institutions to work for the social good. The scientific perspectives of schools must be complemented by more humanistic ones, thus enabling effective collaboration in addressing new challenges that require this transversality. Innovation in professional management and in relation to society will be necessary.

2. Uncertainties management

Until the 20th century, science was seen as a source of certainty. However, since Karl Popper, science is no longer considered valid if it does not introduce the parameter of uncertainty, which must be quantified before making any estimate. As Professor J. Esteve [4] explains, we have not yet managed to incorporate science into law. Science offers probabilities, while the law seeks definitive criteria. Science provides bands and law wants clear lines.

Our legal system is largely of Napoleonic origin, in other words, deterministic. This legal framework often provides a loophole for avoiding compliance with technical regulations, as it requires the reliable demonstration of facts, whose scientific analysis can only provide a probability of occurrence. Risk is the probability of harm, with potential impacts on human and animal life, and on the economy, yet in criminal liability, it is difficult to factor probability into legal judgement.

In nuclear regulation [5], an acceptable risk threshold must be reached, which depends, on public perception and on the level of safety set out in the regulation. The ruling on the flood that devastated the Las Nieves campsite in Biescas, Huesca, the 7 August 1996 exempted the town council from liability. Although the town council had authorised the campsite’s location on a debris flow cone, with its known dynamics and geological activity, the event was deemed ‘unforeseeable’ [12]. One may debate whether the probability of occurrence was high or low – in this case reflected by a return period estimated by experts at 500 years – but the fact remains: the probability exists and can be calculated.

The slow pace of geological processes or the long-time frames in which nature operates can result in decisions that are unacceptable for future generations and undervalued in the present. Law must evolve to address problems whose resolution will affect the future inhabitants of the planet for a long time. Perhaps it is necessary to rethink approaches that are rooted in the ‘here and now’, ensuring that decisions with long-term consequences are not treated as temporary. The precautionary principle must be applied at all times, even when key variables require time to be properly understood.

In many parts of Europe, decision-making is guided by legal and political considerations, while the scientific aspect is still far from being consistently incorporated into public decisions, despite the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic has been a catalyst in this regard. The level of scientific literacy will be key to advancing innovation. This requires fertile ground, which, as we know, does not yield immediate results but is a long-term cultivation.

In light of this reality, we need a citizenry that demands greater scientific input in decision-making and develops the capacity to understand probabilities as a tool for managing uncertainties. Without that third pillar of science, we are bound to continue down a path in which populism, self-serving narratives, and confrontational politics prevail, without offering real solutions; a critical attitude must be cultivated from childhood through high-quality education, where science, historically linked to philosophy, serves as a fundamental pillar. In addition, geology cannot be missing, as it is essential to foster individuals with a global vision of the world and a deep understanding of time in all its planetary dimensions.

3. The 2030 Agenda and the 17 SDG

The United Nations 2030 Agenda [6] calls for decisions to be based on scientific evidence and guided by a shared vision, one that should not be questioned by any public or private institution. To move beyond the current climate of quasi-permanent political confrontation, which sometimes leads to institutional paralysis, the European Union must help to define a common roadmap. The indicators linked to the sustainable development goals [7] must be addressed by all entities that wish to join a collective project, and where each person contributes, however modestly, for the benefit of society as a whole.

Several sustainable development goals call on us to reduce the environmental impact of our consumption, whether by promoting affordable and clean energy (SDG 7), advancing industry, innovation and infrastructure (SDG 9), or building sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11). In addition, SDG 13 on climate action reminds developed countries that we occupy a privileged vantage point, consuming resources at a rate that, if replicated globally, would exceed the planet’s capacity and result in unacceptable environmental damage, according to the available prediction models. Poverty will remain poverty if we do not contribute to reduce inequality. This is not an ideological issue, but a vision rooted in Agenda 2030, a set of objectives aimed at the common good of everyone on this planet. All public or private institutions should act accordingly, debating the procedures perhaps, but not the goals.

Resilience was a concept previously used only in civil protection, to assess our preparedness for catastrophic events. Today however, it is a term that is here to stay. It serves as the counterweight to vulnerability. The resilience we aim to achieve should not be limited to individuals or institutions capable of withstanding change. From the geoethical standpoint, we must also strive to ensure that all communities across the planet reach a level of resilience that enables them not only to survive, but to do so with dignity.

I highly recommend reading books such as La vida contada por un Sapiens a un Neandertal [8], or El chico de la gran dolina [9]. There are also many other books linked to the magnificent Atapuerca site, which we are lucky to have in Spain. Science helps us understand who we are and where we can evolve. It is worth highlighting the important role that mothers and grandmothers have played in promoting survival, thereby enhancing reproductive efficiency of the human species. Women have internalised a preventive mindset as part of their vital caregiving role during human evolution, making it possible for three generations to coexist. The preventive role of grandmothers after menopause was crucial for enabling more offspring to be raised. What sets humans apart from other animals is their ability to anticipate what may happen. This is the key to building resilience: foreseeing what may come and acting with foresight.

It is essential to base decisions on scientific knowledge and to avoid acting without properly considering its implications. There are many historical examples of poor decisions made without proper scientific input. On 10 April 2010, when the president of Poland, reportedly under pressure, and in combination with other factors, may have instructed the pilot to land despite dense fog and adverse weather — a decision that ultimately led to a fatal crash [13]. At Chernobyl, on 26 April 1986, an order was given to disable key safety systems during a test, which resulted in a terrible nuclear accident with enormous consequences [14]. When civil works are undertaken without sufficient knowledge of the subsoil and its geotechnical behaviour, serious safety problems emerge. In some cases, projects are abandoned mid-way, causing significant economic and social harm.

It is evident that a more resilient society is one that anticipates risks, applies the precautionary principle, and makes decisions grounded in science. In addition, we have also learned that events occurring in a location may have far-reaching effects elsewhere. We have seen this in the Covid-19 pandemic, in nuclear accidents and in environmental processes that transcend administrative borders.

The most vulnerable societies are struck by disaster time and again. Just as they begin to recover from previous damage, they are hit once more — often left unable to recover without external support. When a country is larger and already has a sufficient level of economic prosperity, it is better equipped to face catastrophes that partially destroy its infrastructure or environment. That is why Europe, as a union of countries that seek to act together in the face of great challenges, will always have more strength and capabilities to respond to disruptive changes affecting humanity.

Local administrations must also act by creating resilience: I invite all those large-scale urban plans currently under approval in many municipalities, to ask about geothermal energy. Being a renewable and permanent energy source, and if considered in the early phases of construction, it represents a substantial improvement in the investment made and, as a result, makes self-sustainability achievable. Why not consider it, when other energies imply external dependence and have an environmental impact at a planetary level? In the total cost of house construction, the speculative component of land, which does not add any real value, should never reduce the margin for improvement in sustainability. Until this speculative problem is eradicated, it will be difficult for construction developers to apply the best available science and technology in their processes, truly improving the quality of life for people and environment.

4. Professionals as the key to the future

Professions, with their expert knowledge and ethical foundations, are crucial for shaping a better future. Those of us who practice a profession, alongside public and private institutions, must help build ethical awareness and promote understanding of each citizen’s environmental footprint. Just as there are indicators of institutional quality, with measurable variables such as transparency, social openness, leadership selection, proactive governance – we must also promote quality citizenship, characterised by scientific literacy, critical thinking, environmental awareness, and social commitment. These variables should ultimately, be driven by a goal of building a better world for all humanity. Only in this way can we strengthen our collective project and achieve greater resilience.

To suggest that nothing we do can be effective because it cannot alter environmental evolution, is essentially to convey the idea that our capacities are so limited that it is better to do nothing – simply letting natural events take their course. Some US nuclear regulations [15] include a detailed list of potential events to consider in the design and operation of nuclear facilities, covering both natural hazards and anthropogenic risks – and, as a final category, cite acts of God, referring to circumstances beyond human control.

Some seem to believe we should ignore science and revert to the old explanation once invoked after catastrophes: God willed it. The Lisbon earthquake occurred on All Saints’ Day in 1755. Thanks to the Enlightenment, this was no longer framed as divine punishment, avoiding appeals to ecclesiastical doctrine.

To stand up for science is to prevent this kind of narrative from taking root. Let us provide data, with its probabilities and uncertainties, and make informed decisions based on scientific evidence. But let us not allow anyone to sell us the idea that whatever has to be, will be. A conformism that is not interested in prevention is unacceptable. Science must help to displace belief-driven narratives that are not based on data, especially in public discourse and decision-making. Moreover, it must prevent the use of fear as a political tactic to shape opinion or control science itself. Lobby groups are well aware of this, and they use a wide range of arguments to serve their own interests. A society that wants to prosper and increase its resilience to future risk scenarios must demand that all institutions, at least public ones, work to prevent and mitigate damage. It is irresponsible to publish articles claiming that possible scenarios resulting from rapid global warming, such as droughts, famines, forced migrations, floods, and soil loss are merely ‘hypotheses, from having been proven.’

Even if this were merely a hypothesis, which is not true given the available measurement data [11], we have an ethical responsibility not to underestimate an issue on which our livelihood and, perhaps, our very existence as a species depends.

Those of us who practice geology are here to warn of risks and to anticipate their possible consequences – not to wait until it is too late, when solutions become far more costly or even impossible to implement. That is our professional and ethical responsibility.

5. Lessons learned

After the catastrophic damage that occurred on October 29 in the Valencia area (Spain), figure 1, we must draw lessons:

• Ignoring geology in urban planning poses an economic and social risk that society cannot afford.
• Acting preventively is always preferable: first assess the existing risks, then plan in an orderly and informed manner.
• Construction must adapt to natural risks and be innovative, seeking architectural solutions that improve land use.
• We must develop and publish risk indicators, using common methodologies across European countries, to assess actual vulnerability in each area.
• Construction prices should reflect both environmental and economic sustainability criteria, serving as an incentive for responsible development.

Figure 1: (a) Vehicles piled up on a street after the heavy rains of the Dana event. Photo courtesy of Agencia EFE / Author: Biel Aliño; (b) Damages in Letur (Albacete-Spain) after the Dana event. Photo courtesy of Europa Press; (c) Satellite image showing the massive transport of sediments towards the sea. Photo courtesy of Nasa Earth Observatory.

The European Union must spearhead a change in how natural risks are managed. This article proposes the drafting of a European Directive that would establish a common framework for all public administrations, requiring them to account for existing natural risks before making any urban planning decisions. The European Civil Protection Mechanism provides a framework for mutual assistance after a catastrophic event has already occurred. However, prevention has not been prioritised as a foundational principle in the territorial management of Europe.

If we speak about climate change, but fail to change our habits or adapt public decision-making to its likely effects, environmental and economic damage will continue to increase.

Geology professionals hold essential knowledge for this purpose. Our codes of ethics must incorporate geoethical principles, which must be consistently applied in practice. In addition, we need regulatory instruments that require the use of expert geological knowledge, even when it places limits on short-term interests. In this way, citizens will be able to place their trust in us and in the entire public land management system.

References

1. AP Consulting Ltd., 2023; Base Design for the use of geothermal energy for heating needs of industrial, public and medical-tourist buildings and facilities of the Municipality of Krapinske Toplice, Varaždin, May 2023
2. IVICOM Consulting Ltd., 2023; Feasibility study and CBA analysis – Hydrothermal potential of Krapinske Toplice (HyPoKraT), Zagreb, Croatia, December 2023.
3. Norwegian Research Center – NORCE, 2023; Status Report HypoKraT project, Bergen, November 2023.
4. IVICOM Consulting Ltd. 2023; Environmental protection report for the exploitation of geothermal water for energy needs as part of the HyPoKraT project, Krapina-Zagorje County, Zagreb, December 2023.
5. Geoda Consulting Ltd., 2024; Base Design for the construction of an exploration geothermal borehole Sveta Nedelja GT-2 (SNGT-2) with drill working area for accommodation of drilling rig on EA Sveta Nedelja 2, Zagreb, Croatia, March 2024
6. IVICOM Consulting Ltd., 2024: Environmental protection report for drilling of the exploratory geothermal well Sveta Nedelja GT-2 (SNGT-2) in the research area Sveta Nedelja 2, Zagreb County, Zagreb, Croatia, March 2023
7. Croatian Ministry of Economy, 2024; Database of national factors of emissions and removal of greenhouse gases, https://mingo.gov.hr/o-ministarstvu-1065/djelokrug/uprava-za-klimatske-aktivnosti-1879/ugljicni-otisak/8960 (accessed on 5 December 2024).
8. Energy Institute Hrvoje Požar – EIHP, 2023; Energy in Croatia – Annual review for 2022, Ministry of Economy and Sustainable development, Zagreb, Croatia
9. European Investment Bank – EIB, 2023; Project Carbon Footprint Methodologies – Methodologies for the assessment of project greenhouse gas emissions and emission variations, Version 11.3, Luxembourg, January 2023
10. European Commission. Technical guidance on the climate proofing of infrastructure in the period 2021-2027, 2021/C 373/01. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/cipr/items/722278/en  (accessed on 5 December 2024)
11. Klanfar, M., Korman, T., & Kujundžić, T., 2016; Fuel consumption and engine load factors of equipment in quarrying of crushed stone. Tehnički vjesnik, 23(1), 163-169., Zagreb, Croatia, DOI: 10.17559/TV-20141027115647
12. Energy Institute Hrvoje Požar – EIHP, 2019; Analysis and basis for the development of the Energy Development Strategy of the Republic of Croatia – GREEN BOOK, Zagreb, UG-18-00098/1

This article has been published in European Geologist Journal 59 – UN Sustainable Development Goals – where the geology lies