The Emergent Sea of Nature and R E L I G I
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TTHHEE EEMMEERRGGEENNTT SSEEAA OOFF NNAATTUURREE AANNDD RREELLIIGGIIOONN JJUUSSTTIINN TT... LLAAWWSSOONN THE EMERGENT SEA OF NATURE AND RELIGION: A Study of Faith-Based Responses to Issues of Environmental Sustainability JUSTIN T. LAWSON DipNRM, BEnvSc (Hons) Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy DEAKIN UNIVERSITY November 2012 ABSTRACT Due to a lack of existing, comprehensive data, an investigation of various faith-based communities with regards to environmental sustainability in Australia was undertaken during 2009 and 2010. The aim of the study was to investigate the levels of awareness and involvement of the faith community on issues relating to biodiversity protection, water conservation, energy efficiency, waste management and cultural property heritage. A mixed methods approach was employed, incorporating postal surveys, face- to-face and over-the-phone interviews, as well as site observations. In addressing the five themes outlined above, the study is designed to investigate five methods of implementation, namely; education, advocacy, facilitating action, networking, and engaged ethics. A total of 2907 surveys were delivered to 1303 locations throughout Australia, targeting 56 different faith groups. Of these, 423 were completed by individual representatives from 36 different faith communities. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with 34 individual representatives, increasing the total number of faith groups represented to 40 and consequently all six major faith groups present in Australia were represented, i.e. Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and other religious groups (including Bahá’í, nature religions, Sikhism, spiritualism, scientology, Eckankar and new age). Site observations were undertaken at 35 sites of worship throughout Australia (excluding Tasmania and Northern Territory). Postal surveys were also sent to 902 members of the public selected at random at 868 locations throughout Australia, with a total of 175 replies. A total of 624 participants were involved in the study. Results showed that education was achieved through various media outlets and networks but was not overly comprehensive, systematic or balanced. In many cases it was often left up to the individual and their own desires to be properly informed. In some instances individuals within the congregation made various issues known to the congregation via workshops (e.g. Christian). Other groups know about issues through outside connections as per a secular 'paradigm' (e.g. Western Buddhist). As a result, the dissemination of information relating to issues of sustainability was not very effective and ad hoc. This was largely dependent on human resources, which were predominantly voluntary based and there was marginal but growing support or assistance from other organisations to provide information on sustainability issues. There were instances of working with other religious groups but these were predominantly Christian (Catholic, Anglican and Uniting Church in Australia). Strong networks exist amongst denominations that have high numbers and a passionate membership. Some networks have been operating for longer than others and were therefore better able to disseminate information and provide support. However, some members may technically be in a highly networked system (e.g. Catholic, Anglican) but were in remote locations (e.g. outback WA, western Tasmania) and struggle with little resources (financial and human). Gaps existed amongst denominations (e.g. iii Anglican/Anglican, Anglican/Catholic) as well as amongst faith groups (Christian/Muslim, Pagan/Jewish etc.). Progressives provided the links but the conservatives provided the gaps. Numerous reasons for this included: belief system/worldview; distance; financial restraints; prime directive (i.e. salvation of soul or devotion to spiritual leader/figurehead); and, external support (or lack thereof) from three tiers of government - minimal incentives to implement programs and services (e.g. no financing for solar panels, no recycled kerbside collection). There was a very broad spectrum of behaviour with regard to advocating support; from no advocacy to as far as it can go, with political campaigns an occurrence. Acting at a corporate level was difficult again due to limited human resources. Faith groups engaged across a wide range of actions, dependent on numerous factors, such as: how progressive/conservative the faith community was; what type of action was proposed; costs in time, energy, money and human resources; and, the context of the issue (was there a unanimous belief that it was significant enough to be enacted upon and not detract from the faith community's prime focus). A variety of effective campaigns derived from an environmental ethic was prevalent and again not comprehensive throughout the faith groups. Some faiths were struggling to come to terms with climate change (still a fair degree of denial), while others fully embraced the issue and were galvanizing efforts amongst those in need. Most surveyed had a communalist ideology, and those with an accommodating ideology were more than likely to not support environmentally sensitive actions such as vegetarianism or mindful consumption of goods. Thus, the conclusions are: 1. Given that the majority of adherents to faith groups showed a high level of concern to environmental issues, there is a need to provide comprehensive community engagement programs. 2. Further education is required considering there was uncertainty about some environmental issues, in particular climate change. 3. More funding opportunities and a degree of latitude are required with regard to council by-laws on site development, so that adaptive re-use of sites of worship can be better implemented. 4. A general environmental ideology (accepted by proponents of strong sustainability) was challenged by various faith representatives to be exclusive of a spiritual awareness or understanding and consequently there is a need to provide a more comprehensive 'worldview'/paradigm/ideology that is inclusive of a spiritual awareness. iv CONTENTS Abstract............................................................................................................................................ iii Figures ............................................................................................................................................ ixx Tables .............................................................................................................................................. xii Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... xiii Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... xv CHAPTER 1 - Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 2 - Finding Common Ground and Working on It - Faith and Sustainability .................... 7 2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Background ............................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Scope ......................................................................................................................................... 9 2.3.1 Location and Cultural/Faith Context .................................................................................. 9 2.3.2 Defining Sustainability ..................................................................................................... 10 2.3.3 Themes/Sectors and Strong Sustainability ...................................................................... 13 2.4 Focusing on practical outcomes ............................................................................................. 15 2.4.1 Biodiversity Protection ..................................................................................................... 18 2.4.2 Water Conservation ......................................................................................................... 20 2.4.3 Energy Efficiency .............................................................................................................. 22 2.4.4 Waste Management ......................................................................................................... 24 2.4.5 Cultural Property Heritage ............................................................................................... 26 2.5 Religious Response ................................................................................................................. 27 2.5.1 The Five Assets ................................................................................................................. 30 2.5.1.1 Worldview Shapers ................................................................................................... 30 2.5.1.2 Moral Authority ........................................................................................................ 31 2.5.1.3 Crowds of Power ....................................................................................................... 32 2.5.1.4 Resource Base ..........................................................................................................