4 Leveraging Vanua: Metaphysics, Nature …
69
The dominant conceptions of nature in the Judeo-Christian tradition reveals a
single real nature (Williams 1980; Cronnon 1995). Amongst other attributes, this
conception of nature asserts the human dominion over the rest of the material world
as a moral right (Strang 2017). Similar values are found to underly some of the
common approaches to climate change mitigation and even adaptation strategies
such as ‘payment for ecosystem services’ or carbon trading. This ontological base
of man’s assumed dominion over nature (Brincat and Gerber 2015; Castree 2005,
2012; Escobar 1999; Gerber 2019) is the root of many of the problems contributing
to climate change (Moore 2016, and importantly for an argument on religion see
Berry 1988). There are a number of studies that have compared religions to ascertain
the link between environmental concerns and belief-systems. In terms of Christian beliefs, White’s (1967) famous claim that the Judeo-Christian tradition has
promoted anthropocentric attitudes and environmentally destructive behaviours has
been confirmed by a number of contemporary studies (Taylor et al. 2016). There are
range of reasons for this: Christian anthropocentrism and the desacralization of nature
observed in Genesis; scepticism of science (including climate science) as denying
Biblical truth; humanity’s dominion over Nature bequeathed by God. Of course, there
are counter-hegemonic discourses within Christianity also, such as man’s stewardship of Nature, “creation care” and Liberation Theology to name but few. These,
however, are subordinate discourses at best. Hand and Van Liere (1984) showed
how religiously conservative Christian traditions (e.g., Baptists and Mormons) were
more likely to endorse the idea of mastery over nature than liberal denominations
(e.g., Episcopal and Methodist) that have “a value orientation compatible with the
demands of a limited world” (Hand and Van Liere 1984, p. 568). Greeley (1993)
has shown Catholics were just as likely as non-Christians to support environmental
spending. However, other studies show religious views are a weak predictor of environmental attitudes (Boyd 1999), and others show it is the more secular a person
the “more pro-environment” they tend to be (Guth et al. 1995, p. 377; Roser-Renouf
et al. 2016). As Taylor (2015) surmises, the hope that religions may come to ‘the
environmental rescue’ requires careful scrutiny.
If these findings are indicative for Fiji, it throws additional complexities when
it comes to metaphysics in practice, specifically human-Nature relationships. The
predominance of Christianity may imply a dissonance between it and the capacity of
the traditional iTaukei notion of spirit for dealing with environmental problems. That
is, given that the vast majority of ethnic Fijians identity as Christian may impede
the pro-environmental iTaukei traditions. As an exemplar, Currenti et al. (2019)
have documented how after Cyclone Winston residents of an interior village worked
towards making buildings more resilient with government and NGO support. Importantly, they showed how the “belief in the Bible and Divine providence” was “a factor
influencing attitudes towards dealing with changes in climate and socioeconomic
conditions” (Currenti et al. 2019, p. 74). They identified the problem of those that
relied “exclusively on divine intervention to save them from the impacts of climate
change” and the potential to “undermine cooperative inclinations” between church
denominations (Currenti et al. 2019, p. 74) Yet, at the same time, with Methodists
predominating across the archipelago—a denomination that studies elsewhere have
69
The dominant conceptions of nature in the Judeo-Christian tradition reveals a
single real nature (Williams 1980; Cronnon 1995). Amongst other attributes, this
conception of nature asserts the human dominion over the rest of the material world
as a moral right (Strang 2017). Similar values are found to underly some of the
common approaches to climate change mitigation and even adaptation strategies
such as ‘payment for ecosystem services’ or carbon trading. This ontological base
of man’s assumed dominion over nature (Brincat and Gerber 2015; Castree 2005,
2012; Escobar 1999; Gerber 2019) is the root of many of the problems contributing
to climate change (Moore 2016, and importantly for an argument on religion see
Berry 1988). There are a number of studies that have compared religions to ascertain
the link between environmental concerns and belief-systems. In terms of Christian beliefs, White’s (1967) famous claim that the Judeo-Christian tradition has
promoted anthropocentric attitudes and environmentally destructive behaviours has
been confirmed by a number of contemporary studies (Taylor et al. 2016). There are
range of reasons for this: Christian anthropocentrism and the desacralization of nature
observed in Genesis; scepticism of science (including climate science) as denying
Biblical truth; humanity’s dominion over Nature bequeathed by God. Of course, there
are counter-hegemonic discourses within Christianity also, such as man’s stewardship of Nature, “creation care” and Liberation Theology to name but few. These,
however, are subordinate discourses at best. Hand and Van Liere (1984) showed
how religiously conservative Christian traditions (e.g., Baptists and Mormons) were
more likely to endorse the idea of mastery over nature than liberal denominations
(e.g., Episcopal and Methodist) that have “a value orientation compatible with the
demands of a limited world” (Hand and Van Liere 1984, p. 568). Greeley (1993)
has shown Catholics were just as likely as non-Christians to support environmental
spending. However, other studies show religious views are a weak predictor of environmental attitudes (Boyd 1999), and others show it is the more secular a person
the “more pro-environment” they tend to be (Guth et al. 1995, p. 377; Roser-Renouf
et al. 2016). As Taylor (2015) surmises, the hope that religions may come to ‘the
environmental rescue’ requires careful scrutiny.
If these findings are indicative for Fiji, it throws additional complexities when
it comes to metaphysics in practice, specifically human-Nature relationships. The
predominance of Christianity may imply a dissonance between it and the capacity of
the traditional iTaukei notion of spirit for dealing with environmental problems. That
is, given that the vast majority of ethnic Fijians identity as Christian may impede
the pro-environmental iTaukei traditions. As an exemplar, Currenti et al. (2019)
have documented how after Cyclone Winston residents of an interior village worked
towards making buildings more resilient with government and NGO support. Importantly, they showed how the “belief in the Bible and Divine providence” was “a factor
influencing attitudes towards dealing with changes in climate and socioeconomic
conditions” (Currenti et al. 2019, p. 74). They identified the problem of those that
relied “exclusively on divine intervention to save them from the impacts of climate
change” and the potential to “undermine cooperative inclinations” between church
denominations (Currenti et al. 2019, p. 74) Yet, at the same time, with Methodists
predominating across the archipelago—a denomination that studies elsewhere have