4.2 Fair distribution of opportunities and burdens

Despite the necessity of political intervention, one must not succumb to the illusion that socio-ecological change can be comprehensively planned and precisely implemented. However, the possibility of unknown or unintended consequences should not lead us to completely reject reforms. Rather, it is crucial to name and discuss these imponderables as early as possible. Moreover, unintended consequences should not only be seen as a risk. Some unforeseen results may also be beneficial to the transformation goal. In order to make use of this opportunity, it is necessary to design the transformation in a learning-reflective way: Not everything will succeed, but the greater danger certainly comes from inaction, delay and concealment.

In many places, the Corona pandemic has lead to massive changes (at least in the short term). It has led to serious political interventions in private life, society and in the economy that were hardly conceivable before. It has brought long-suppressed social and ecological grievances, such as those in the meat industry, into the public eye, and it has caused behavioural changes (e.g. less air and long-distance travel, more home office) that could contribute, at least partly, to a long-term change of attitude. However: as already indicated, the crisis alone does not necessarily lead to profound longer-term changes. It is not uncommon for the responses to be limited to mere crisis intervention in time and substance, and often enough a crisis also leads people to fall back on familiar structures and practices out of a need for security and orientation.

The example of the mobility transition shows that already established effective change processes and social trends can be used as supporting factors. The negative consequences of individual motorised transport described above create a certain pressure for action to fundamentally change our current system of mobility. However, this has not yet been sufficient to set the indicated mobility turnaround in motion. The existing economic structures, mobility models and behavioural routines contribute too much to maintaining the outdated system. Digitalisation opens up new possibilities to make alternative forms of mobility (and not only the "upgrading of one's own car") attractive for broad segments of society, from further developed car-sharing concepts to networked intermodal mobility, in which different forms of mobility are connected in a user-friendly and profitable way. A modern transport policy does not only include the promotion of research and technology. It also includes reducing tax incentives and other inducements for motorised individual transport and creating attractive mobility alternatives as well as political framework conditions to literally make room for these alternatives, for example by creating car-free city centres. Here, too, the importance of the above-mentioned entrepreneurial-innovative action becomes apparent: social trends such as the growing willingness to "use instead of own" can be used for the transformation if, in the case of the mobility turnaround, companies in the automotive industry are willing to dare to take new steps and develop their self-image from a mere car manufacturer to a mobility service provider.

In general, it is important to perceive social trends and the changes that already take place, in order to actively reinforce them and, if possible, to use them to overcome previously effective path dependencies. This is easiest if, as in the case of renewable energies or alternative drive technologies, technological alternatives are available and thus no drastic personal change in behaviour is required. Relevant technological innovations should be promoted through appropriate incentives and not prematurely prevented out of an exaggerated fear of possible risks and consequences. In order to create broad acceptance and to be able to evaluate risks, such innovations should already in the development phase be discussed by society as a whole, also in order to be able to accompany their later implementation with appropriate social and political measures.

The urgently needed change of path in nutrition can only succeed, for example, if cultural behavioural patterns and economic business strategies are taken into account and (bio-)technological solutions, such as different meat substitutes, are not excluded from the outset. In view of the still growing world population, the obvious limits and problems of conventional meat production and the dwindling fish stocks, it is clear that the goal of a balanced, protein-rich diet for all people represents a global challenge for the future. Of course, (bio-)technological solutions will only be part of a much more complex change strategy with a clear appreciation of plant-based dietary patterns. Education for healthy nutrition, more transparency in the food industry and the fight against dumping prices all play an important role here.

Despite all openness to technological alternatives, without which the overall transformation of society cannot be achieved, it must be emphasised once again: Honest transformation policy is also a policy of distributing impositions in order to open up new opportunities for action for others as well as for oneself. If the negative effects that have so far been passed on to vulnerable people, future generations or to the nature are to be borne by the polluters themselves in the future, this is not possible without cuts and losses in the value of stranded assets. In order not to be paralysed by the unavoidable distribution conflicts (cf. chapter 3.2), it is helpful to show the affected interest groups at an early stage that the restrictions can not only be "bearable", but even enriching, under the right conditions and with appropriate social compensation. With a corresponding appreciation of the common good or the renunciation of short-term and often strongly material maximisation of benefits, supposed restrictions can represent a real enrichment in the long term. They have a liberating and enriching effect not only for those who have so far been disadvantaged by the status quo, but also for previous profiteers who can now break out of old paths. The wise and differentiated analysis of power relations must therefore be combined with an assessment in the light of justice and the orientation towards the common good.

The vested interests of actors can certainly be reconciled with the common good. In this case, the particular interest should be used to achieve the transformation goals and should be stabilised as a supportive incentive. This applies, for example, to many of the abovementioned innovations, which are also driven by the interests in making profit, but which can facilitate common good and sustainable development. Not infrequently, the motivations are also mixed. This is true, for example, for "social entrepreneurship", for companies that want to make profits and serve a good purpose at the same time with their business model, or for consumers who are guided by ecological criteria (also) for reasons of distinction. Some of the initiatives of the UN Global Compact point in this direction, such as the call for a combination of the recovery of the economy after the Corona crisis with the necessary reforms to achieve the 1.5° target that over 150 globally active companies with more than 5 million employees addressed to the governments.⁶² As long as the actions of self-interested actors serve sustainable development, they can be addressed in both respects: their vested interest and their (possible) moral motivation.

Those who want to advance the transformation must also be prepared to oppose individual interests that use exploitative or environmentally damaging practices to maximise profits and, if necessary, to address these in a public way. Power structures that are harmful to the common good and those who profit from them must be named as such and must be given more responsibility. Civil society organisations and also the church have a special role to play here by advocating the interests of particularly disadvantaged groups. Of course, all those who voice such necessary criticisms may themselves be "complicit" in behaviour that is harmful to the common good – a dilemma that can only be alleviated by a willingness to increase self-criticism and transparency.

An essential prerequisite for countering the (often well-connected) power of individual interests that are detrimental to the common good are alliances of people, initiatives, political parties, civil society organisations, trade unions and companies that work together for a socio-ecological transformation, despite all the differences in perspectives and backgrounds of experience and beyond the usual understanding of roles.