The enduring nature of religions
Although people who have grown up in countries that have undergone a process of secularisation can be inclined to think that religion has lost its status as a dominant belief system, demographic data reveal that, on a global scale, religions are still very much alive. A comprehensive demographic study by the Pew Research Center found that, in 2015, 84% of the world’s population adhered to a religion, of whom 31% self-identified as Christians, 24% as Muslims, 15% as Hindus, and 7% as Buddhists. At the same time, 16% reported having no religious affiliation, with most of them (61%) residing in China.[1]
Nearly three-quarters of people live in countries where their religious group constitutes the majority of the population. This indicates that in many countries, one particular religion can justifiably be labelled the dominant religion or belief system among the population. Even in European countries where secularisation has led to significant proportions of unaffiliated people (like 42% of the population of the Netherlands, 28% in France, 27% in Sweden, and close to 25% in Germany), majorities still identify themselves as Christian. In the United States, more than 78% of people self-identify as Christian, while only 16% are unaffiliated. Overall, it appears that Earth is still a predominantly religious place, except for China, Japan, and a few other countries.[2]
I will not dwell upon the continuing relevance of religion, of whatever kind, to providing meaning to people’s lives. Obviously, the statistics provided above indicate that many people still think that religion is essential, notwithstanding the views of some scientists who dismiss such beliefs as misguided.[3] Arguably, these scientists are themselves misguided as they fail to distinguish between explanations of the (biophysical) world and the role of belief systems in providing meaning to people’s lives. Science itself is based on certain premises, values, and beliefs that are not inherent to science but are shaped or influenced by external (societal) factors. The significance or value of scientific findings is a matter of judgment that depends on personal values and beliefs, as well as their impact on people, societies, and the environment.
Here, I am primarily interested in exploring the implications of the ongoing importance of religious worldviews for the environment, particularly whether and to what extent these views have contributed to collective efforts aimed at environmental protection.
Christianity and the environment
As modern environmentalism and the demand for greater environmental protection first emerged in Western countries, and particularly in the United States during the 1960s, it is worth exploring to what extent Christianity, the dominant religion in these countries, has contributed to the rise of environmental awareness. At the very least, one can reasonably argue that the Christian faith has not prevented this rise from occurring, and perhaps it has been a positive force in its development.
However, the extent to which the Christian religion has been compatible with, let alone conducive to, environmental awareness and integration has been severely questioned. Instead, it has been argued that Christian teachings have predominantly encouraged a human-centred, instrumentalist and even exploitative view of the environment. For instance, Lyn Whyte, in a seminal article on Christianity’s responsibility for the environmental crisis,[4] argued that the Christian religion, predicated on the primacy of humans in the natural order of God’s creation, has been responsible for the emergence of the view that nature exists solely for the benefit of humankind. Christianity teaches that God created the world “explicitly for man’s benefit and rule: no item in the physical creation had any purpose save to serve man’s purposes”, making it “the most anthropocentric religion the world has seen”.[5] White also argued that Christianity’s acceptance of the flawed idea of perpetual progress based on science and technology became so entrenched in Western culture that even non-Christians internalised it. Although White noted that a different interpretation of the Christian faith was possible, as illustrated notably by Saint Francis (“the greatest radical in Christian history since Christ”), who demonstrated humility and respect towards other natural creatures, this perspective did not gain much traction, and orthodox arrogance towards nature continued.[6]
White’s view has been fiercely contested, among others, on the ground that his supporting arguments, reflecting negative views on technology, agriculture, democracy and anthropocentrism, are unjustified in the light of evidence that more positive practices are possible.[7] However, whether or not one agrees with White’s thesis that Christianity has been responsible for much of the environmental destruction that has occurred during the past five hundred years or so, there is little if any evidence that it has done much, if anything, to put the brakes on environmentally damaging practices, except for some small religious communities like the Quakers. It is even less clear that Christianity played a positive role in the rise of environmental awareness during the 1960s. If mainstream Christian religions or groups have started to express concern about the environment from the 1960s, this has been more in response to the general rise of environmental awareness than as an expression of an environmental ethic that has been an original part of prevailing Christian beliefs.
As noted above, Whyte argued that extracting a more positive environmental message from Christian teachings, notably those of Saint Francis, was possible. It is perhaps no coincidence that it was Saint Francis who inspired Pope Francis to not only take his name but to adopt and voice a strong stance on the environment, as illustrated in the publication of his encyclical letter Laudato Si’.[8] Arguably, this document is one of the most profound and critical statements on the world produced by a religious leader, addressing existing inequalities and injustices, the role of human arrogance, the commitment to ongoing economic growth, materialism, and consumerism, as well as environmental treatment.[9] Similarly, it has been argued that, in the United States, greening Christianity gathered momentum from the mid-1990s, especially among church leaders and organisations.[10] However, these developments illustrate that the extraction and propagation of an environmental ethic from Christian teachings by religious leaders has been a relatively recent phenomenon.
It is also unclear whether these reinterpretations imply that environmental values have become (or been confirmed as) core values and have been integrated into Christian religious behaviour and practices, or whether they have been tagged onto dominant Christian teachings. As Clements notes,[11] in the United States, there is scant evidence that the calls by religious leaders to take the environment seriously have been heeded by followers; they have attracted more opposition than support in some circles, notably from more politically conservative leaders. His research findings indicate that self-identified Christians report lower levels of environmental concern than non-Christian and non-religious people.[12] In a comparative study involving 22 mainly European countries, Hagevi[13] found that environmental concern was somewhat higher in predominantly Catholic countries than in Protestant countries, a finding that also applied at the individual level. However, he also found less concern in more secular countries. This finding does not support the view that Christian beliefs negatively affect environmental attitudes more than secular beliefs. There is also evidence that Pope Francis’s edict Laudato Si’ has fallen on deaf ears in the United States [14] and that his progressive stance on many issues has provoked hostile reactions within the Catholic church.[15]
Even from this brief overview, it becomes clear that it is not justified to make general statements about the extent to which the Christian religion is compatible with, supportive of, or obstructive to environmental integration. Christianity can and has been interpreted in various ways, offering different degrees of support for pro-environmental views and attitudes. What (positive or negative) role Christian religions play in environmental integration depends mainly on the interpretations and actions of religious leaders and their followers. In other words, this question needs to be answered by examining the role of religious actors (the agency factor) within the specific context of a community or country.
Islam and the environment
Although I will not discuss the relationship between other religions and environmental views, and/or whether they assign more or less importance to the environment than Christianity, it seems plausible that the general conclusion drawn about Christian religions also applies to other religions. For instance, although the core of an environmental ethic can be found in the Quran, it has been argued that in many Islamic countries, this ethic has been lost, and it is only recently that Islamic scholars have rekindled Islam’s environmental ethic.[16] Islamist groups have taken on board environmental issues, but for different reasons and with different agendas.[17] At the same time, environmental concerns have taken a back seat among those in power, as they prioritise economic development, often at significant environmental costs, even if they legitimate their policies and power with Islamic teachings.[18] Between predominantly Islamic countries, where there are no clear boundaries between religion and the secular domain of the state, there appears to be a lack of consistency in government attitudes towards the environment, suggesting scope for divergent interpretations and approaches.
Hinduism and the environment
As the overwhelming majority (94%) of Hindus live in just one country, India,[19] the question of whether and to what extent Hinduism has been a conducive or obstructive factor to environmental integration is closely tied to the role and environmental efforts of India’s governments. Although it has been argued that an environmental ethic can be plausibly derived from Hinduism,[20] it appears that environmental concerns and activism in India have been primarily driven by factors other than Hinduism, notably social class.[21] The principles underlying the government’s National Environmental Policy, issued in 2006, do not reference Hinduism.[22] With development being a priority for governments in India, it is not difficult to find (academic) information sources to support the view that neither religious beliefs, Gandhi’s ideas, nor environmental principles have carried much weight in the policies of governments.[23]
Buddhism and the environment
Of the four world religions, Buddhism is perhaps most often regarded as a belief system that incorporates and propagates an environmental ethic, as reflected by its appeal within environmentalist (notably deep ecology) circles in Western countries. Nevertheless, Buddhism is far from homogeneous in its teachings, with several streams offering different perspectives.[24] Within Buddhism, there is a diversity of views on what Buddhism offers in terms of environmental guidance. As with the other religions, efforts to read an environmental ethic from this faith began only after the emergence of modern environmentalism, and the idea that such an ethic was already specifically formulated in classical scriptures and teachings is an anachronism. With Buddhism being the dominant religion in just a handful of countries (Thailand, Burma, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Laos, and Bhutan), its scope for influencing many governments has been limited. Around half of the world’s 487 million Buddhists live in China [25]. Still, that country’s governments can hardly be considered tolerant towards religious minorities, let alone willing to be influenced by their teachings. However, even in countries where Buddhists are in the majority, such as Burma, it is far from clear that Buddhism has exerted a significant positive influence on the environmental efforts of governments, except perhaps in Bhutan.[26]
Conclusion
This brief overview indicates that, even in countries where a particular religion is dominant, it is difficult to establish a direct and clear connection between these dominant beliefs and governments’ environmental (integration) efforts. Few if any governments are guided in their environmental policies by faith-based worldviews, partly because efforts to extract an environmental ethic from these religions began only relatively recently and have led to different, ambiguous, or even conflicting interpretations. Moreover, in countries where an official line has been drawn between state and religion (notably in Europe), it would be problematic for a government to be seen to be led in its policies by the views of a particular religious group or church.
This does not mean that religion has no influence on environmental policies and integration. When followers of a religion are influenced by the environmental teachings and communications of religious leaders and churches, this can impact their thinking, behaviour, and practices, thereby promoting environmental integration within society and potentially bypassing government efforts. Arguably, it is in this societal realm that most of the environmental efforts of religious leaders and churches are concentrated, more so than in the political sphere of lobbying governments. However, this side of their agency should also not be ignored. Moreover, by directly influencing adherents, churches and religious leaders can influence governments indirectly as followers change or increase their demands upon the state. So, despite the tenuous relationship between religious doctrines and the environmental integration efforts of governments, we should not dismiss the role and influence of religion. Given the considerable cognitive, social, economic, and institutional power resources that some churches and religious leaders own or control, the (potential) significance of agency and power exerted by these actors (one way or the other) should not be neglected in analyses of the environmental efforts of governments.
References
[1] Pew Research Center (2017), The Changing Global Religious Landscape. Washington D.C.: Pew Center Research, http://www.pewforum.org/2017/04/05/the-changing-global-religious-landscape/ (Accessed: 19 October 2017), 8, 10, 18, 22.
[2] Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life (2012), The Global Religious Landscape. A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Major Religious Groups as of 2010, Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center, http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2014/01/global-religion-full.pdf (Accessed: 19 October 2017), 45-50.
[3] Dawkins, Richard (2006), The God Delusion. London: Transworld Publishers.
[4] White, Lynn (1967), “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis”, Science, Vol . 155, No.3767, pp.1203-1207.
[5] Ibid., 1205.
[6] Ibid, 1205-1206.
[7] Minteer, Ben A. and Robert E. Manning (2005), “An Appraisal of the Critique of Anthropocentrism and Three Lesser Known Themes in Lynn White’s ‘the Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis’”, Organization & Environment, Vol . 18, No.2, 163-176.
[8] The Holy See (2015), Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ of the Holy Father Francis on Care for Our Common Home. http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.pdf (Accessed: 13 November 2017).
[9] See also Ghosh for a comparison between the Paris Agreement and Laudato Si’ in terms of the interpretation of the climate crisis. Ghosh, Amitav (2016), The Great Derangement. Climate Change and the Unthinkable. Penguin Books.
[10] Clements, John M., et al. (2013), “Green Christians? An Empirical Examination of Environmental Concern within the U.S. General Public”, Organization & Environment, Vol. 27, No.1, 85-102, 4.
[11] Ibid., 2.
[12] Ibid., 13.
[13] Hagevi, Magnus (2014), “Religion and the Environmental Opinion in 22 Countries: A Comparative Study”, International Review of Sociology, Vol . 24, No.1, 91-109.
[14] Davis, Nicola (2016), “Pope Francis’s Edict on Climate Change Has Fallen on Closed Ears, Study Finds”, The Guardian, 24 October.
[15] Brown, Andrew (2017), “The War against Pope Francis”, The Guardian, 27 October.
[16] Khalid, Fazlun M. (2002), “Islam and the Environment”, in P. Timmerman (ed.) Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Change, 332–339.
[17] Karagiannis, Emmanuel (2015), “When the Green Gets Greener: Political Islam’s Newly-Found Environmentalism”, Small Wars & Insurgencies, Vol . 26, No.1, 181-201.
[18] Yildirim, A. Kadir (2016), “Between Anti-Westernism and Development: Political Islam and Environmentalism”, Middle Eastern Studies, Vol . 52, No.2, 215-232.
[19] Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, The Global Religious Landscape. A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Major Religious Groups as of 2010, 29.
[20] Framarin, Christopher G. (2012), “Hinduism and Environmental Ethics: An Analysis and Defense of a Basic Assumption”, Asian Philosophy, Vol. 22, No.1, 75-91.
[21] Chatterjee, Deba Prashad (2008), “Oriental Disadvantage Versus Occidental Exuberance: Appraising Environmental Concern in India — a Case Study in a Local Context”, International Sociology, Vol . 23, No.1, 5-33.
[22] Government of India M. o. E. a. Forests (2006), National Environment Policy. https://ibkp.dbtindia.gov.in/DBT_Content_Test/CMS/Guidelines/20190411103521431_National%20Environment%20Policy,%202006.pdf, (Accessed: 14 July 2016).
[23] Shiva, Vandana (1991), Ecology and the Politics of Survival: Conflicts over Natural Resources in India. New Delhi: Sage Publications; Guha, Ramachandra (1998), “Mahatma Gandhi and the Environmental Movement in India”, in A. Kalland and G. Persoon (eds.), Environmental Movements in Asia. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press, 65-82; Münster, Daniel and Ursula Münster (2012), “Consuming the Forest in an Environment of Crisis: Nature Tourism, Forest Conservation and Neoliberal Agriculture in South India”, Development and Change, Vol.43, No.1, 205-227; Kamdar, Mira (2009), “Time to Honour Gandhi’s Vision. India’s New Government Faces a Difficult Dilemma”, The Press, 12 June.
[24] Harris, Ian (1995), “Getting to Grips with Buddhist Environmentalism: A Provisional Typology”, Journal of Buddhist Ethics, Vol . 2, 173-190.
[25] Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, The Global Religious Landscape. A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Major Religious Groups as of 2010, 32.
[26] Brooks, Jeremy S. (2011), “Buddhism, Economics, and Environmental Values: A Multilevel Analysis of Sustainable Development Efforts in Bhutan”, Society & Natural Resources, Vol . 24, No.7, 637-655; Drexler, Madeline, A Splendid Isolation. Lessons on Happiness from the Kingdom of Bhutan. madelinedrexler.com.