As a marker of identity that transcends national borders, religion influences many environmentally relevant behaviors. Thus, understanding its role is key to tackling environmental challenges that are fundamentally transnational.
Previous research has found that religion influences many aspects of lifestyle that affect the environment. These include childbearing decisions and the use of contraceptives (and resulting effects on population growth); risk behaviors and use of health services (which affect life expectancy); whether people see climatic change as human-caused, or related to forces beyond human control; consumption patterns, and thereby use of natural resources and emissions of greenhouse gases; and willingness to take actions to abate environmental degradation.
We have investigated the link between environmental challenges and religion in a new study in the Journal of Religion and Demography. The work builds on a growing body of research carried out at the Center for International Earth Science Information Network and the Columbia Aging Center. We looked at the environment-religion relationship by analyzing religious affiliation together with a variety of environment and climate change-related indicators at the country level. We also conducted exploratory and descriptive statistical analyses to better understand the associations among religion on one hand, and economic development, greenhouse gas emissions and exposure to environmental stressors on the other.
Basically, we found that nations whose inhabitants are less religious tend to use more resources and produce more emissions; yet, they are also better prepared to deal with resulting environmental challenges, because they are wealthier. On the other hand, nations whose populations are more religious tend to use fewer resources; yet at the same time, they have less capacity to meet environmental challenges, and are subject to more adverse outcomes, in part due to their high levels of poverty and continuing population growth.
We argue that it is important to consider the religious dimension when discussing who wins and who loses amid environmental degradation, resource shortages and global warming. To address issues of environmental justice, we need to identify groups that are disproportionately causing environmental risks, and those who are disproportionately exposed.
A key aim of our study is to assess the religious composition of those subject to environmental changes, and how gaining an understanding can help to craft environmental policies that are more effective in fighting climate change. This aspect is especially relevant in the poorest nations of the world, where close to 100 percent of the population ascribes to a religion, and where religion plays a very important role in providing basic services and social cohesion.
Further, the study looks into the role of religion in shaping human behavior. Religious change can affect social cohesion, consumption trends and willingness to pay for climate-change mitigation or adaptation initiatives. Our findings indicate that religious affiliation relates to greenhouse gas emissions, energy use and gross domestic product on a global scale. Countries with more emissions and greater GDP tend to be less religious, have less population growth and to be better prepared for environmental challenges. Conversely, countries with a greater proportion of religiously affiliated tend to have younger populations, higher environmental risks, lower GDP and lower preparedness levels.
Nations that are more religious may behave differently as they develop economically and technologically. This implies that international disagreements based on religious beliefs, values and viewpoints may play strong roles in the future.
The lowest level of energy use per capita, for instance, is observed among Hindu-dominated countries. The lowest climate-change adaptive capacity is found among countries with Muslim or Hindu majorities. It is conceivable that risk perception, and therefore preparedness, among these religious groups differs from those in other groups. This finding has been backed by previous research.
On the other hand, where the religiously unaffiliated are in majority, levels of climate-change adaptive capacity are the highest. Also, the World Risk Index is lowest for the religiously unaffiliated. In terms of risk of future water shortages, owing to their geography, climate and population dynamics, countries dominated by Muslims and Hindus have the highest levels of water stress. Christian and Buddhist countries have the lowest levels.
As the impacts of climate change become greater, the world is becoming more religious; the share of the world population with a religious affiliation is expected to rise, from 84% in 2010 to 87% by 2050. The world is also becoming more polarized in regard to how different nations affect the environment, with high and growing emissions shares from Europe and China, both regions with a high share of people without religious affiliation.
How exactly growth in the importance of religion might translate to climate policy and the future evolution of the climate system remains to be seen. Since religion may influence which policies are most effective and plausible, it is important to understand the evolution of the religious composition of the world alongside environmental changes. Furthermore, the ethical dimensions of climate change—namely the ways in which different faith traditions disproportionately contribute to or are impacted by climate change—will likely receive growing attention. Finally, identifying effective ways to communicate environmental issues and risks within faith traditions, and encouraging inter-faith and religious-nonreligious collaboration, will be important for addressing future global environmental challenges.
Vegard Skirbekk is a professor of population and family health at the Columbia Aging Center. Alexander de Sherbinin and Susana Adamo are, respectively, senior research scientist and research scientist at the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN). The other authors of the paper are José Navarro, an independent researcher, and Tricia Chai-Onn, a senior staff associate at CIESIN.
Well, I guess you’re right that people who don’t have a religion tend to produce more emissions. You are also right that people who are in a religious group tend to behave differently. Anyhow, maybe this is our time to listen to the sermon from the Christian home.
maybe thats the reason why we should join hands by creating global awareness.
The question for me is how do we get diverse religious groups to understand, respect and collaborate with common purpose and intent. In Africa, colonialism is blamed for climate change – not unreasonable, in many respects. How do we heal the wounds of division and suspicion, and create solidarity between groups, ensuring the honouring of the dignity of difference… I think Interfaith organisations have a powerful role to play in teaching spiritual literacy in the world today. Interfaith friendship is our superpower and compassionate integrity training at every level is one of our most effective vehicles.
I am of the opinion, it is not only the religion that establishes man’s relationship with environment but his mere existence do. Ever since the time man began his journey on the Earth he was confronted with forces in nature (natural calamities and hazards) and for which he did not have any solution or answer. Man believed in these forces as supreme powers or probably (God), as a result of which he started worshipping forces in nature culminating to many of the religious practices may have evolved.
Keeping yourself away from religion the true religion the one logical and reasonable religion not just you life style will change you will have life at all because the above mentioned religion is God attribute and quality and moral behaviour the most pure life where human beings are human beings full of respect and faithfulness and the truthfulness.I give you example : now with the new technology all the machines you pay you get you don’t pay or you insert fake coins you get nothing those machines are human made no how these people culture is but they know and I am sure that everyone does know what is good from what is bad all these attributes are in God and wants people to have these attributes to live as human where justice and equality and love and harmony and mercy .You stay away from this pure and true religion you live in in trouble and unhappiness.
This really doesn’t help with the negative effects of religion on the environment
How does religion preserve flora and fauna hie lm 12 and l want to know About the world and religion
None of the religions teach pollution of water bodies, deforestation, excessive and bad eating habits, use of norcotics etc,there by preserving not only fauna n flora but all living beings
The negative effect on respect for the environment
From this summary I don not read any discussion of the impact of religious “afterlife” beliefs. From a logical point of view, people who do not believe in an “afterlife” and therefore are not considering the concept of reward and punishment and are more likely to use resources up to without respect to others as the reward/punishment is not relevant to them. The paradoxical behavior of strong religious christians – reward & punishment but they do not try to minimize as their belive is such, that “this is a god given quest”. This framework of religious beliefs around the world will substantially contribute to the willingness of populations to participate in the necessary global actions to fight climate change.
Religion seems to be an integral part of the human existence. Somehow, it is needed by humans to have the complete life. Religious adherence has also shifted throughout the ages to meet the societal requirements of the populace. Historically, animism led to pantheism, led to monotheism, (led to atheism as scientific reality gained ascendance?).
However, we are now facing a global crisis in the form of human-induced climate change. The fact is, that we now desperately a religion/religious practices that restore inter-species respect, but also embody powerful critiques of the ideologies and practices that have got us into this mess. So, where to from here?