Future Determinants: Examining the Level of Influence of Natural
and Human Factors on Human/Nature Relationships
F. Garrett Boudinot1 and Dr. Todd LeVasseur2
1Phone: 804.397.0446 2Phone: 843.953.3095
E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]
College of Charleston College of Charleston
Future Determinants: Examining the Level of Influence of Natural
and Human Factors on Human/Nature Relationships
F. Garrett Boudinot
“We walk continually through a terrain manufactured by the human imagination,
dwelling as much in our interpretation of the place as in the place itself.”1
Preface
Modern scholarship of religious studies understands social
organization and cohesion as essential in the social enactment of
religion. Religions which provide strong organizational value by
mediating resource consumption, reducing competition, and
creating a succinct cosmology have been found to maintain
cultures longer than those that do not. Thus religion today is
understood as an evolutionary mode adopted by Homo sapiens to
1 Belden Lane, Landscapes of the Sacred: Geography and Narrative in American Spirituality, 2001, pp.
survive on a dynamic Earth. That very species, however,
contributes to the dynamic geobiological processes through which
it struggles to survive. All life has direct and indirect
influence on the ecosystem in which it exists, and humans are no
exception.2 The level of human impact on the environment varies
from culture to culture, and beginning in 1967 with Lynn White’s
article “The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis,” much
examination has been given to the contrast of impacts cross
culturally as well as the determining factors of such impacts.
Given the role of religion in human life, it is clear that it
would be a deciding factor of the impact that a society has on
its ecosystem. But in the words of Evan Berry, “Does nature make
culture or does culture make nature?” 3
Introduction
Our Earth, the ecosystems which constitute it, and all life
that inhabit it, clearly appear to be on a path of destruction.
Human’s use of fossil fuels which emit greenhouse gasses, mining
2 The impact of human societies on their environment can be calculated using I=PAT. Here the population, affluence, and technology of a society each contribute equally to its environmental impact. 3 Berry, Evan. "Nature." Religion and Culture (2012), pp. 157
of the Earth which destroys groundwater and mountain faces, and
expansion of their own population which increases the former, all
have created the sixth fastest rate of species extinction, and
the fastest rate of global warming, the Earth has ever seen. If
it is true that religion plays a deciding role in our
relationship with our ecosystems, then it is necessary that we
understand how, and to what degree. Although humans are heavily
influenced by the physical constraints of their ecosystems, I
argue that it is the actions allowed by their religious beliefs
which are most determinant in the impact of humans on their
ecosystems. As Evan Berry said, “religion sets the context for
everyday practices,” and our everyday practices impact our
environment in innumerable ways. If we are to adapt as a species
to the current ecological crisis, we must adopt and instill a
worldview which encourages acts that “preserve the integrity,
stability, and beauty” of the Earth and which eschews acts that
negatively impact it.4
History
4 Leopold, Aldo, and Charles Walsh Schwartz. A Sand County Almanac. London, Etc.: Oxford UP, 1949, pp. 224
There’s no doubt that the physical natural world plays an
influential role in human life; it constitutes the entire world,
literally. Kirkpatrick Sale presents a captivating argument that
20,000 years ago during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), an event
referred to as “packing” occurred in which all humans were forced
to migrate to the few remaining European grasslands in order to
cope with the growing glacial cover.5 This “packing” led to
increased social complexity, anthropocentrism, and ultimately the
destructive lifestyles which humans lead today. In this view,
anthropocentrism and destruction are central aspects of human
life which cannot be eradicated. This is an example of
Environmental Determinism in that it provides geologic phenomenon
as an explanation for human behavior and belief.6 But perhaps
this is too far in the past to be projected onto contemporary
society. What occurred 20,000 years ago should be seen as an
evolutionary phenomenon in geologic time. The social constructs
and worldviews which Sale posits as stemming from this time were 5 Sale, Kirkpatrick. "Intensification and Agriculture." After Eden: The Evolution of Human Domination. Durham: Duke UP, 20066 This is much better than Benavides’ explanation of witch hunts and pederastyas products of environmental determinism, which I find an exemplar of possibleproblematic conclusions stemming from an environmental determinist lens.Benavides, Gustavo. "Ecology and Religion." The Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature 1 (2008), pp. 551
products of natural selection; those who became anthropocentric
were able to find enough food, reproduce, and survive. Evolution
is an ongoing process, and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK)
as taught by “indigenous” or “tribal” religions shows that the
environmental factors of the LGM, though influential, were not
the end-all. Many cultures in antiquity and today have
reconstructed the human role in the environment in ways that do
not reflect Sale’s imposition of destructive worldviews on all
humans.
Like Sale, Sociologist John Snarey supports the
environmental determinist view. In his research, he found that
“in societies in which water was abundant, the Supreme Deity
typically was not concerned with the morality of human
behavior.”7 This again supports that religion is an adaptive tool
which dictates human interactions with their ecosystems. Snarey’s
study indicates that when resources such as fresh water become
scarce, usually due to overconsumption, religions shift from
either no view of a high god or a view of a high god with no 7 Snarey, John. "The Natural Environment's Impact upon Religious Ethics: A Cross Cultural Study." Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 35.2 (1996), pp. 85
moral agenda to a view of a high god who cares intimately about
the moral choices of humans. In doing so, religions are able to
mitigate resource depletion and strengthen the survival of the
society.8 Jared Diamond’s “Collapse” finds four possible routes
for a society to take upon resource depletion or ecological
collapse: a) they fail to anticipate the problem, b) the problem
arrives, and they fail to perceive it, c) they perceive the
problem, but fail to solve it, or d) they realize the problem and
attempt to solve it.9 Given this theory, it appears that human
civilizations have only one in four chances of trying to solve
the problem, let alone actually succeeding. However, upon
adopting a high moral god, many societies have been able to do
just that. Thus although Snarey presents a seemingly
environmental determinist model, the implications of his findings
instead show that the ecological status, though determinant in
human religion, can be drastically improved (in that its
resources are better managed) through human religion. The use of
8 The article “Did Pulses of Climate Change Drive the Rise and Fall of the Maya?” in the November 9-12, 2012 edition of Science Magazine (AAAS) is an excellent examination of this very concept in regards to the survival of the Maya. 9 Diamond, Jared M. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. New York: Viking, 2005
“Seva” along the Yamuna River is an exciting contemporary
example; through the adaptation of new religious interpretation,
devotees are now glorifying Yamuna Ma in their service to her
health and beauty.10
One scholar who finds the opposite effect of religion on the
environment is Lynn White, Jr. In his 1967 article, White posits
Western Christianity as “the most anthropocentric religion” (thus
the most ecologically destructive) and presents a convincing
argument to back this up.11 As he and Vine Deloria12 note, the
record of Western Christianity is that it allows morally
irresponsible actions on all levels, from the degradation of the
native peoples upon colonization to the degradation of the Earth
since the middle ages. Statistical analysis of modernity backs
this up: America, whose culture is steeped in Christian “values,”
has only five percent of the world’s population and contributes
twenty percent of the world’s overall carbon dioxide pollution.13
10 Haberman, David L. River of Love in an Age of Pollution: The Yamuna River of Northern India. Berkeley, CA: University of California, 200611 White, Lynn. The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis: American Association of Science, 1967, pp. 512 Deloria, Vine. God Is Red: A Native View of Religion. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 197313 http://www.cepnet.org/interactive-map_CO2-emissions-per-capita.php
White’s analysis of Christian actions towards their environment,
and not the beliefs themselves, is a crucial aspect to White’s
argument. He accepts that there are indeed ecologically positive
hermeneutics of the Christian religion, and presents St. Francis
as the “patron saint” for Christians to look to for an
ecologically sensitive worldview, but he correctly notes that
this hermeneutic is not mainstream. Scholar Yi-Fu Tuan refutes
this argument, theorizing in line with Sale that instead all
cultures negatively impact their environments, regardless of
their religious beliefs.14 Tuan, however, misses a key point in
the analysis of religions. His thesis is based on the idea that
humans will ignore their religious teachings in order to continue
their destructive actions. This presents a problem, because if
this is the case, then the beliefs are not truly held by the
participants. As David Wilson writes, “actual participation in
organized religion…is more important than religious beliefs per
se.”15 To categorize their actions as against their religion
14 Tuan, Yi-Fu. "Our Treatment of the Environment in Ideal and Actuality." American Scientist 58.May-June (1970)15 Wilson, David Sloan "Evolutionary Biology, Religion, and Stewardship" The Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature / Editors, Bron R. Taylor, Jeffrey Kaplan,pp. 3
misses this crucial insight. The destruction of the environment
that Tuan sees as contrasting with traditional Chinese religion
is instead a product of what David Loy calls the “Religion of the
Market,” which has at this point penetrated the majority of the
world’s cultural values.16 This important insight provided by Loy
must be taken into account, as the religion he describes seems to
have stemmed from the Western hermeneutic of the Christian Bible,
as theorized by White. Hermeneutics then is key, which Tuan
misses. The idea that Chinese farmers would view nature in the
same way that the elite religious leaders would is a fallacy.
Tuan and Sale alike claim that the environment is the deciding
factor in religion, but they fail to recognize that humans are
part of the environment, and that humans are ultimately the
creators of religions. To ignore the variety of religious
interpretation within societies ignores the reality of how
religion plays out in social life. Scholars such as David
Haberman, Calvin Dewitt and Norm Habel show that hermeneutics and
results (i.e. not the beliefs at face value but the beliefs in
light of which actions they allow), are the deciding factors in
16 Loy, David R. "The Religion of the Market." Journal of the American Academy of Religions 65.2 (1997)
environmental relationships. These scholars will be reviewed
later, but their methodologies of reinterpreting religious
beliefs show that the human factor, the human interpretation and
resulting action, is much stronger a determinant than the
environment or the religion itself in the relationship between
humans and nature.
The Future
The method of evaluating religions in an ecological light by
investigating the effects of its beliefs on the environment is
also used by scholars John Grim and Mary Evelyn Tucker in their
pursuit of an “Ecological Reformation.”17 Utilizing the “three
R’s,” Retrieval, Reevaluation, and Reconstruction, these scholars
have built an area of study around the idea that religious
beliefs dictate actions that impact ecosystems. The first step,
retrieval, focuses on the textual and historical aspects of
different religions and what actions they dictate towards the
environment. They key point inherent in this method is that there
is a “gap between values and practice,” and that the values which
17 Source from professor; in dialogue to find official citation.
dictate the practice should be evaluated first and foremost.18
This is what I refer to as a hermeneutical analysis, which will
be discussed later. The second step, reevaluation, extrapolates
the retrieved beliefs onto the contemporary ecological crisis and
asks how these might be beneficial or harmful in practice. The
third step, reconstruction, generates ways in which current
religions can adopt teachings to themselves improve the health of
their ecosystems. In formulating this approach to the study of
religions and ecology, Tucker and Grim have created a plausible
means by which humans today can adopt religious beliefs to
improve the state of our environment. This is the future of human
religion, and it is based on an interpretive analysis of
religion.
The power of a hermeneutical approach in the ecological
analysis of religions is necessary if we are to move forward. It
eliminates the possible fallacy that could be followed from a
misreading of White’s article, the possibility of “finger
pointing” at other religions that they are intrinsically
ecologically negative. Misguided analyses often lead to the
18 Source from professor; in dialogue to find official citation.
conclusion that a religion is “green” or that a religion is
“destructive.” But there are no silver-bullet religions; no
religion creates a perfect human/ nature relationship (if there
even is one), and no religion is set out to destroy the Earth. To
postulate that religions themselves are harmful, to say that a
religion is ecologically bad, is useless. We cannot blame
religious leaders and writers, many of whom did indeed contribute
much good to the human enterprise, for the actions that their
ideas allowed centuries later. White was careful to make this
clear in his distinction between Western and Eastern
Christianity. In acknowledging that interpretation is the key,
there can be a transformation for the future.
Transformations
What would this transformation look like? What are
beneficial human actions, and how do we know? Luisa Maffi
indirectly (but accurately) answers this question in her
examination of “biocultural diversity.”19 Basing her work off of
the assumption that, again, religions are mediators between
humans and their environment, Maffi posits that cultural
diversity and biological diversity “are different manifestations
of a single, complex whole.”20 In other words, there is a direct
correlation between cultural diversity and biological diversity,
both of which are seen as signs of a “healthy” ecosystem. Finding
“causal links between the environment and cultural values,” Maffi
shows that the current global ecological crisis parallels the
depletion of cultural diversity (“50 percent of the world’s
approximately 7000 languages are currently endangered”).21
Conversely, she finds that cultures which have adapted TEK show
“sustainable resource use, environmental conservation, and the
analysis and monitoring of long-term ecological changes.”22 TEK
then provides an interesting case study for understanding human
19 Maffi, Luisa. "What Is Biocultural Diversity?" Earthscan (2010)20 Ibid, pp. 621 Ibid, pp. 9, 1122 Ibid, pp. 9
religious belief which instills responsible and respectful
actions towards its ecosystem.
Traditional Ecological Knowledge is the concept of religious
tradition passed on through “traditional” societies which
promotes healthy human/nature relationships. Characteristics
which are common amongst societies which instill TEK are: smaller
populations with a resulting strong sense of community
responsibility and reciprocity, a worldview based on cyclical
space or land and not linear history,23 and transmission of such
knowledge through “repeated practice”.24 When these
characteristics are combined, the product is what Pramod Parajuli
calls a “cosmovision,” a worldview which places humans
respectfully within the relationship between the natural,
supernatural, and human realms.25 When this cosmovision is
ecologically beneficial, the relationship is seen as man living
in Earth as a household.26 What is learned from this 23 Deloria, Vine. God Is Red: A Native View of Religion. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1973.24 Posey, Darrell Addison. Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity: A Complementary Contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment. London: Intermediate Technology, 199925 Source from professor; in dialogue to find official citation.26 What is not held, contrary to common belief, is the belief in “Mother Earth,” which Sam Gill demonstrates as a product of the imposition of western ideals onto other cultures. Gill, Sam D. Mother Earth: An American Story. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1987
investigation is that all cultures have the ability to create an
“ethnoscience,” a cultural understanding of the ecology of its
location and a resulting means of managing its resources.27 What
is profound about this insight to Westerners is that none of this
knowledge comes from traditional Western Science. All a culture
needs is to be able to understand its own ecology, something that
Western Science has been blind to for centuries until very
recently. However, given the global expansion of the West, the
large scale communities, the lack of reciprocity, and the lack of
a healthy cosmovision, it is unlikely that a beneficial
ethnoscience is possible, because all of these characteristics
are in stark contrast with TEK, from which beneficial practices
stem. Again it is seen that religions which instill respectful
actions towards its environment are better aware of the
ecological systems and are better suited to manage and adapt to
their environment. Interestingly, despite common characteristics,
there is no set of beliefs or teachings which are necessary or
intrinsically green – they are all within relation to their own
ecological surroundings. As Gustavo Benavides notes,
27 Burkes, Fikret. Sacred Ecology: TEK and Resource Management. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis, 1999
“adaptiveness is not a once - and - for - all affair.”28 It is in
the hands of each culture to determine its own cosmovision, its
own ethnoscience, and its own future. “Traditional” and
“indigenous” societies have proven the efficacy of TEK in
managing ecosystems, but Western colonization seems to have done
everything possible to stymie their continuation. In the face of
crisis, might the West learn something from the past, and from
others?
Given the focus on Christianity from an ecological view
since White’s article, much has in fact been done by Western
traditions to instill a healthy cosmovision. Echoing White’s
argument, Norm Habel presents an analysis of the Christian
creation story which finds an anthropocentric hermeneutic
intrinsic in the rhetoric of the Book of Genesis. He calls this
“The Mandate to Dominate,” which “provides a justification for
de-powering and devaluing of not only Earth creatures but also
Earth itself.”29 Habel concludes that new interpretations of the
texts which shine light on a possible “eco-hermeneutic” are well 28 Benavides, Gustavo. "Ecology and Religion." The Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature 1 (2008), pp. 55029 Habel, Norm. "The Mandate to Dominate." An Inconvenient Text, pp. 7
intended, but ultimately a waste of time.30 This conclusion is
brilliantly countered by Calvin Dewitt’s “theocentric”
interpretation of a passage from the Book of Job. As he finds, a
reading of the story from the point of view of the creator (which
is how the bible is technically intended to be read, considering
it is “his word”) inspires “wonder,” “respect,” and
reciprocity.31 He continues by codifying “Distillates from a
Christian Cultural Matrix,” twelve assumptions in his hermeneutic
which he claims would instill a proper relationship between
humans and nature. Despite Dewitt’s convincing demonstration,
Habel’s argument here seems to be most productive – Even though
Dewitt does find ecologically responsible themes in this passage,
his interpretation is not an accurate representation of the
enacted practices and beliefs which stem from the text. Moreover,
the passage which constitutes the focus of Dewitt’s analysis is
minor to say the least. It is hard to believe that changing the
focus and interpretative methods of 2.18 billion Christians to
30 Ibid, pp. 931 Dewitt, Calvin B. "Behemoth and Batrachians in the Eye of God." Christianity andEcology (2000), pp. 293, 296, 302
promote an entirely new worldview and lifestyle is a plausible
means of improving our current ecological state.32
Approaching the task of “greening” Christianity from a
hands-on technique, Mallory McDuff surveys the experience of
Christians and Jews partaking in “an encounter with mountaintop
removal.”33 She finds that when religious teachings and rituals
are incorporated with experiences with nature, a sense of
ecological responsibility and concern is produced. The mechanisms
involved here are personal appeal, inspiration of urgency, and
the use of emotional feelings. In being placed in an area of
environmental destruction, the participants of this “pilgrimage”
are moved by what they feel is a destruction of God’s creation. A
similar worldview is being appropriated using the same means of
urgent and emotional appeal by the Evangelical movement “Creation
Care.” Defended by the Reverend Richard Cizik, this worldview
comes from a realization that the current ecological crisis is a
threat to God’s creation, and instills a sense of “stewardship”
32 Pew Forum http://www.pewforum.org/christian/global-christianity-exec.aspx33 McDuff, Mallory D. Natural Saints: How People of Faith Are Working to save God's Earth. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010, pp. 126
towards the Earth instead of dominion.34 Cizik believes that if
we “bring scientists and evangelicals together,” we can use the
strong Evangelical political influence to create the necessary
changes needed to transform our society into one which maintains
a better relationship with the Earth.35 The idea of using
scientific data of environmental degradation to influence
influential religions is examined likewise by David Haberman.36
The devotees of the Yamuna were so moved by the undeniable
degradation of her waters, they partook in a social movement
which has improved the river’s health. Although Cizik rightly
assumes this would be applicable to Evangelical Christianity, he
failed to anticipate the power of those against him. His
resignation from the National Association of Evangelicals is a
harbinger of the inevitable problems with fundamentalism and
ecological change. Had he not been involved in a fundamentalist
group, perhaps his message would have stuck. But Evangelicals are
fundamentalist, by definition against change, and thus to not
34 Cizik, Richard. "What If?" Love God, Heal Earth. Ed. Sally G. Bingham. Pittsburgh, PA: St. Lynns, 200935 Ibid, pp. 936 Haberman, David L. River of Love in an Age of Pollution: The Yamuna River of Northern India. Berkeley, CA: University of California, 2006
deny climate change would be against the premise of their
beliefs. Given the extent of the scholarship on Christianity and
ecology, it is clear that there are indeed possible futures for
an ecologically sensitive cosmovision. The problem is that
“possible” and “probable” are two very different predictions, and
if history is any indication of the future, the prediction does
not look hopeful.
There are, however, alternatives to approaching change by
addressing preexisting religions. The natural rise in awareness
of environmental issues over time has prompted what Bron Taylor
calls “Dark Green Religion.” This worldview perceives nature as
intrinsically valuable and sacred, recognizes the interdependence
of all aspects of ecosystems, and inspires “deep feelings of
belonging to nature.”37 Although this religion has penetrated
some preexisting religions (The Clergy Letters Project, Earth
Charter Initiative, etc.),38 Taylor argues that Dark Green
Religion in fact constitutes its own religious entity. Moreover,
he presents strong evidence that this worldview is growing with
37 Taylor, Bron. "Gaian Earth Religion and the Modern God of Nature." Phi Kappa Phi Forum Summer 2011, pp. 1338 Ibid, pp. 15
speed and strength globally and within Western culture. This
“religious environmentalism” held by so many in the West is often
coupled with romanticization of non-Western cultures. Finding
this problematic, Emma Tomalin examines the differences between
perceived “nature religions” and “religious environmentalism.”39
What she concludes is that “nature religions” are not always
ecologically responsible, and that the Western fetish for other
cultures is in fact problematic in appropriating new beliefs.
There is an important difference between nature worship and
nature service which she illuminates, as well as “full belly” and
“empty belly” environmentalism.40 This critique is necessary for
the development of religious environmentalism, but is not meant
to belittle the validity of such worldviews. By finding the two
nature-based religious teachings incongruous, she helps to show
that each culture must create its own unique relationship with
its own ecosystem in order to be most productive.
39 Tomalin, Emma. "The Limitations of Religious Environmentalism for India." Worldviews 30th ser. 6.12 (2002)40 Tomalin, Emma. "The Limitations of Religious Environmentalism for India." Worldviews 30th ser. 6.12 (2002), pp.19
A prophet of religious environmentalism far before his time,
Aldo Leopold presented a possible cosmovision and ethnoscience
for his society. In 1949 he wrote his book “A Sand County
Almanac,” which submits what he calls “The Land Ethic,” an ethic
which he believed must be adopted by the West in order to better
manage its natural resources.41 As a forester, he spent much time
observing and interacting with his ecological surroundings. He
recognized the commodification of the Earth (which we now
recognize as connected to the “Religion of the Market”) as a
moral dilemma; just as the ancient Greeks treated women as
objects to exploit, the West today views the Earth in the same
manner. Leopold considered this connection reason to expand our
ethical boundaries to “include soils, waters, plants, and
animals, or collectively: the land.”42 In doing so, a worldview
follows which respects the interdependency and rights of all
members within ecosystems. Profound in Leopold’s presentation is
an understanding of the function of worldviews on actions, that
worldviews themselves are worthless unless they direct action.
41 Leopold, Aldo, and Charles Walsh Schwartz. A Sand County Almanac. London, Etc.:Oxford UP, 194942 Ibid, pp. 204
This he claims can be enacted upon: “social approbation for right
actions: social disapproval for wrong actions.”43 Given the
responsibility of community, the view of Earth as not a commodity
but as a home, and the understanding of ecology to create an
enthoscience, Leopold shows that the West is indeed capable of
formulating its own cosmovision and instilling a respectful
relationship with the Earth.
Conclusion
I invite the reader to refer back to the opening quote. Our
interpretations of place, our worldviews, constitute what it
means to be human, to live our lives with purpose, with answers,
with structure. But more than provide comfort, our worldviews
give us the ability to survive, to adapt. We can no longer
imagine that our Earth is a comfortable place. The actions of
humans long before us have created a need for reevaluation of our
worldviews, a critique of our religions, if we are to mitigate
our ecological impact and improve the health of the environment.
Sale reminds us that our species succeeded in adaptation to a
changing climate only 20,000 years ago, a blink of an eye in 43 Ibid, pp. 225
geologic time. In that case, it was beneficial to us to exploit
the Earth – we were hungry, we were cold, and we were struggling
for survival. But today it is beyond beneficial, it is
imperative, that we adopt a worldview that interprets the real
place in which we must survive. We are the determinants of the
future.
Works Cited
Benavides, Gustavo. "Ecology and Religion." The Encyclopedia of Religion
and Nature 1 (2008): 548-53
Berry, Evan. "Nature." Religion and Culture (2012): 155-71
Burkes, Fikret. Sacred Ecology: TEK and Resource Management. Philadelphia, PA:
Taylor and Francis, 1999
Cizik, Richard. "What If?" Love God, Heal Earth. Ed. Sally G.
Bingham. Pittsburgh, PA: St. Lynns, 2009. 1-10
Diamond, Jared M. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. New
York: Viking, 2005
Deloria, Vine. God Is Red: A Native View of Religion. New York: Grosset &
Dunlap, 1973.
Dewitt, Calvin B. "Behemoth and Batrachians in the Eye of God."
Christianity and Ecology (2000): 290-311
Habel, Norm. "The Mandate to Dominate." An Inconvenient Text : 1-10
Haberman, David L. River of Love in an Age of Pollution: The Yamuna River of
Northern India. Berkeley, CA: University of California, 2006.
Lane, Belden C. Landscapes of the Sacred: Geography and Narrative in American
Spirituality. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins UP, 2001.
Leopold, Aldo, and Charles Walsh Schwartz. A Sand County Almanac.
London, Etc.: Oxford UP, 1949.
Loy, David R. "The Religion of the Market." Journal of the American
Academy of Religions 65.2 (1997)
Maffi, Luisa. "What Is Biocultural Diversity?" Earthscan (2010):
1-11
McDuff, Mallory D. Natural Saints: How People of Faith Are Working to save God's
Earth. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010.
Posey, Darrell Addison. Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity: A
Complementary Contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment. London:
Intermediate Technology, 1999
Sale, Kirkpatrick. "Intensification and Agriculture." After Eden:
The Evolution of Human Domination. Durham: Duke UP, 2006: 71-102.
Snarey, John. "The Natural Environment's Impact upon Religious
Ethics: A Cross Cultural Study." Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion 35.2 (1996): 85-96.
Taylor, Bron. "Gaian Earth Religion and the Modern God of
Nature." Phi Kappa Phi Forum Summer 2011: 13-15
Tomalin, Emma. "The Limitations of Religious Environmentalism for
India." Worldviews 30th ser. 6.12 (202): 12-30.
Tuan, Yi-Fu. "Our Treatment of the Environment in Ideal and
Actuality." American Scientist 58.May-June (1970)
Top Related