How Science, Religion, and Politics Influence Indigenous Attitudes on Climate Change in Ecuador

Abstract

To assess the influence of science and religion on climate change, in this chapter we analyze our national survey focused on climate change in Ecuador and find that with regard to climate change specifically, religiosity and indigenous cosmovision impact respondents’ belief in climate change. Contrary to the US-centered literature on religious beliefs and climate change in the West, religiosity and cosmovision have positive effects on climate change beliefs. Recognizing that possession of an indigenous cosmovision and a Catholic or Protestant religious identity are not incompatible, we also consider how these traits interact. In addition to being influenced by both science and religion, respondents adjust their beliefs in climate change depending on whether they were located on the nation’s extractive frontier. We also show with case studies that science, religion, and a history of extractivism all impact citizen beliefs in climate change.

Gobernanza de los recursos naturales y participación social: fuentes de rechazo y apoyo a la minería

“…En una revisión de 224 estudios publicados en revistas académicas y la prensa durante las últimas dos décadas, Conde y Le Billon (2017) identifican cómo los diferentes factores afectan la probabilidad de conflicto y cómo estos operan en diferentes niveles, como el proyecto minero, las comunidades anfitrionas, la industria extractiva y el Gobierno. En cuanto al proyecto minero, por ejemplo, uno de los principales motores de la oposición es el impacto negativo de la minería en los medios de vida y el medio ambiente (ver, por ejemplo, Arce, 2014;Akchurin, 2020;Bebbington & Bury, 2013;Bebbington et al, 2008;Eisenstadt & West, 2019;Svampa, 2019). Algunos ejemplos son el riesgo de contaminación del agua, la pérdida de tierras y el desplazamiento de toda una comunidad para dar lugar a la mina.…”

“…Sin embargo, este auge también ha estado relacionado con una serie de repercusiones externas negativas, como daños ambientales, corrupción y conflictos sociales por la extracción de recursos naturales 10 . La literatura existente ha demostrado que las comunidades anfitrionas intentan defender derechos básicos en respuesta a amenazas asociadas con la extracción (ver, por ejemplo, Arce, 2014;Bebbington et al, 2008;Bebbington & Bury, 2013;Eisenstadt & West, 2019;Svampa, 2019). Así, las comunidades luchan por el acceso al agua y por su calidad, por la conservación de la tierra y los paisajes, y por la supervivencia cultural de los pueblos indígenas.…”

Rights of nature, human species identity, and political thought in the anthropocene

“…The ability to represent nature has been picked up by different actors with diverging motives. The state has been accused of using it cynically and to further what Eisenstadt and West (2019: 181) term its’ leaders’ commitments to “extractive populism.” As Kauffman and Martin (2021: 115) point out, the government was content to use RoN “instrumentally” when it served its purposes. Before 2017, the government did not lose a RoN case, while civil society plaintiffs lost more than half of the cases they brought.…”

“…Tănăsescu (2020: 436) has also pointed out that RoN “were conceived of together with the” territorial rights of the six Indigenous nationalities within Ecuador. While opposed to the RoN provision, the president at the time RoN was recognized in the 2008 Constitution, Rafael Correa, “sought both to ‘speak for nature’” while simultaneously depending on revenue from extractive industry to underwrite social initiatives (Eisenstadt and West, 2019: 73).…”

“…RoN is a potential threat to the development programs favored by Correa and his successor that depend on revenues from extractive projects. The government has also sought to ignore or render unthreatening other measure of the 2008 Constitution meant to distribute power more widely throughout the country, such as prior consent, which as scholars point out (Eisenstadt and West, 2019: 80) is “the primary mechanism” for Indigenous peoples to communicate their views on extractive projects affecting their lands.…”