1. RELIGION AND RISK: THE CHALLENGE OF HARNESSING FAITH AND REDUCING EXPOSURE Dr Lisa Schipper Stockholm Environment Institute – Bangkok, Thailand lisa.schipper@sei.se London – 7 February 2008

2. Outline  Context  Risk  Religion  Examples from the field  Conclusions  Questions for discussion

3. Context  ‘People have always dealt with risk’ – but still not adapted: why? Is religion a limit to adaptation?  Technical terminology aside, people understand risk through a certain lens, influenced by their culture  Usually not included in studies because sensitive, complex  At IPCC Plenary (November 2007) scientists urged greater involvement of social scientists in the next assessment report particularly from behaviour- related fields

4. Risk  Threat resulting from combination of Hazard and Vulnerability to that Hazard: R = H x V  Reducing risk means:  Reducing causes of hazard (flood, drought, earthquake, cyclone)  Reducing causes of vulnerability (underlying factors that make people more exposed to specific hazard)

5. What is religion?

8. Religion  Shared conviction/set of principles  All forms of belief systems including spirituality, mysticism, divine faith expressed through formal, organised institutions as well as superstition, mythology and folktales  Centre around some form or forms of divinity

9. Religion  Influential (positive)  Support and hope  Structures social systems  Provides social and cultural identity  Prayer as a coping mechanism  Influential (negative)  Divides people, cause of many wars  Climate change is already recognised by many religious groups

10. Where do they meet?  Strong link between religion and nature (divine creation, moral obligation to protect)  Belief systems have always been a way to explain biophysical processes, including extreme climate events (lack of scientific knowledge, world views)  Religion influences  Perceptions of risk  Attitudes about response  Exposure to risk

11. El Salvador: Perceptions and Risk Religion affects perceptions and attitudes  Evangelical Protestants and liberation theology Catholics  Difference in perception of risk, in attitude toward response  Deep roots in political history  Religion can be harnessed to help stimulate risk reduction, but only with Catholics

12. Ethiopia: Religious Duties and Risk Religion affects exposure to risk  Orthodox Christians and Muslims  Difference in crop loss between two groups  Orthodox Christians have many more religious duties  Muslims are not as badly affected by crop loss  Not as political, but affects livelihoods seriously

13. Conclusions Religion directly and indirectly affects risk  Directly, because it influences  Perceptions of what a hazard represents  Perceptions of exposure to a hazard  Attitudes about reducing exposure  Indirectly, because it influences  Time availability  Livelihood choices  Settlement location  Social networks

14. Conclusions  Belief systems should be part of vulnerability and impact analyses  Will influence willingness to adapt – and limit adaptation, adaptive capacity  There are aspects that can be harnessed to raise awareness (where faith does not interfere)  More thinking required to understand options when religious view direct cause of vulnerability

15. Recommendations  Identify how belief systems are constructive/ unconstructive  Develop platform for dialogue with religious leaders and groups on climate change and disaster risk  Integrate such studies into IPCC and Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction process  Enhance dialogue with faith-based groups

16. Questions  Role of culture and/or belief systems in your research?  How was it manifest – constraint or benefit?  If constraint: how did you overcome?  If benefit: how did you take advantage?