It is clear that at present the peoples of this planet, in general, do not treat it as a single superhabitat for all its life forms, including its human population. There is little evidence that even the so-called developed countries have this global philosophy. The reluctance of nations such as the USA and Australia to come to terms with clear danger signs of global warming is a striking example of the priorities adopted by ‘developed’ nation states in the third millennium. They are unwilling to forfeit some economic well-being by taking precautionary steps that would reduce the rate of human-induced climate change. The argument that the change has not been proved beyond doubt to the satisfaction of the political leaders is a shallow excuse. So widespread are the repercussions of climatic change, and so potentially detrimental to human welfare generally, that the safe global strategy would be to begin taking preventative steps now, and argue about the validity of scientists' warnings later. But the bottom lines of national economies take precedence over global concerns, and in democracies these choices must reflect the wishes of the majority, or governments that espoused such approaches would fall. In the end, the people of the ‘leading countries’ of the world must bear the responsibility.

But I am an optimist. I believe that the overriding philosophy within the next century will be framed within a truly global outlook.