238
P. H. Havea and A. De Ramon N’Yeurt
developing legal instruments to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
and carbon footprint;
integrating climate change and sustainable energy topics into the school
curriculum or teach them as a stand-alone subjects;
reinforcing the development and use of electric cars and stopping illegal
sand mining and deforestation;
engaging the affected communities, Church and State in the reforestation
of mangroves and other plant species in coastal areas and zones interalia.
Step 5 Achievements of Better Livelihood, Health, Well-being and Sustainability Church-State-Community by 2030 and Beyond
If the State, Church and the affected communities follow through steps
1–4 diligently, this will result in better livelihood outcomes, health, wellbeing and sustainability by 2030 and beyond. These expected outcomes
are argued here to be quite likely because by partnering with God as a
blueprint may lead to a better and more sustainable and climate-resilient
future for all. The reason for this expectation is that God is conceptualised
in this model as the principal stakeholder. The Bible says: “If my people [or
Church and State], which are called by my name, shall humble themselves,
and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I
hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land” (2
Chronicles 7: 14). This pledge is understood here as a promise. As shown
in Fiji during and after Tropical Cyclone Winston, Christians persevered
in their faith and saw the cyclone mainly as ‘an act of divine judgment’ or
as ‘punishment on a sinful people’ (Cox et al. 2018; Fox and Walsh 2016)
Discussion: Significance of God’s Knot Framework
for the State, Church and Communities
The development of the God’s knot idea in this chapter emerged from mixing the
quantitative and qualitative data on spirituality. This proess resulted in a leading-edge
framework that now serves as a blueprint for resilience and sustainable development.
Ergo, the State, Church and the affected communities should consider implementing
it for the following reasons.
First, given that the framework is open, flexible and universal, it allows the model
to scope across a spectrum of cultures and traditions locally and regionally, thus
enabling the three cords (i.e., Church-State-Community) to reverse the impacts of
climate change effectively and efficiently (Cortekar et al. 2016). For example, in
Sect. 3 above the framework allows the three cords to model both the climatic and
non-climatic issues affecting them, which yields highly relevant results in the context
of the Pacific (e.g., Fiji, Tonga, etc.) (Cox et al. 2018; Havea et al. 2018b; Havea
et al. 2019a).
Second, given that science, religion and people in affected communities collaborate together in unison, the probability of inflating mutual partnership to make
P. H. Havea and A. De Ramon N’Yeurt
developing legal instruments to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
and carbon footprint;
integrating climate change and sustainable energy topics into the school
curriculum or teach them as a stand-alone subjects;
reinforcing the development and use of electric cars and stopping illegal
sand mining and deforestation;
engaging the affected communities, Church and State in the reforestation
of mangroves and other plant species in coastal areas and zones interalia.
Step 5 Achievements of Better Livelihood, Health, Well-being and Sustainability Church-State-Community by 2030 and Beyond
If the State, Church and the affected communities follow through steps
1–4 diligently, this will result in better livelihood outcomes, health, wellbeing and sustainability by 2030 and beyond. These expected outcomes
are argued here to be quite likely because by partnering with God as a
blueprint may lead to a better and more sustainable and climate-resilient
future for all. The reason for this expectation is that God is conceptualised
in this model as the principal stakeholder. The Bible says: “If my people [or
Church and State], which are called by my name, shall humble themselves,
and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I
hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land” (2
Chronicles 7: 14). This pledge is understood here as a promise. As shown
in Fiji during and after Tropical Cyclone Winston, Christians persevered
in their faith and saw the cyclone mainly as ‘an act of divine judgment’ or
as ‘punishment on a sinful people’ (Cox et al. 2018; Fox and Walsh 2016)
Discussion: Significance of God’s Knot Framework
for the State, Church and Communities
The development of the God’s knot idea in this chapter emerged from mixing the
quantitative and qualitative data on spirituality. This proess resulted in a leading-edge
framework that now serves as a blueprint for resilience and sustainable development.
Ergo, the State, Church and the affected communities should consider implementing
it for the following reasons.
First, given that the framework is open, flexible and universal, it allows the model
to scope across a spectrum of cultures and traditions locally and regionally, thus
enabling the three cords (i.e., Church-State-Community) to reverse the impacts of
climate change effectively and efficiently (Cortekar et al. 2016). For example, in
Sect. 3 above the framework allows the three cords to model both the climatic and
non-climatic issues affecting them, which yields highly relevant results in the context
of the Pacific (e.g., Fiji, Tonga, etc.) (Cox et al. 2018; Havea et al. 2018b; Havea
et al. 2019a).
Second, given that science, religion and people in affected communities collaborate together in unison, the probability of inflating mutual partnership to make