Ethical questions concerning global sustainability governance have been widely discussed with respect to the role of civil society in general. Interestingly, faith-based actors (FBAs) have so far attracted scant attention in this context. Yet FBAs actively participate in international political negotiations and public debates on sustainable development. Secularisation theory differentiates between religious and secular actors. To date, however, it remains unclear whether FBAs contribute a distinct faith-based perspective to global sustainable development discourse and, if so, what this perspective is. The present article aims to identify the relevant norms and ideas in FBAs’ communications and to contrast them with other existing ideas on sustainable development. On the basis of a content analysis of the submissions by FBAs and non-faith based civil society groups in the context of the UN Rio+20 summit, the article first investigates what visions are contained in current articulations of FBAs with respect to sustainable development. Secondly, it explores in what way FBAs’ ideas about sustainable development differ from those of secular civil society. Our analysis establishes a basis for further inquiries into the role of FBAs in global sustainable development discourse.
AnshelmJ., and HanssonA.. 2011. ‘Climate change and the convergence between ENGOs and business: On the loss of utopian energies’. Environmental Values20(1): 75–94. Crossref.
2.
ApplebyS.2000. The Ambivalence of the Sacred. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
3.
AudiR., and WolterstorffN.. 1997. Religion in the Public Square. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
BarbatoM., and KratochwilF.. 2009. ‘Towards a post-secular political order?’ European Political Science Review1(3): 317–340. Crossref.
6.
Baumgart-OchseC.2010. ‘Religiöse Akteure und die Opportunitätsstruktur der Internationalen Beziehung’. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen17(1): 101–117. Crossref.
BergerP.1969. The Sacred Canopy. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
9.
BergerP.1999. The Desecularization of the World. Washington: Eerdmans Publishing.
10.
BernsteinS., and CashoreB.2007. ‘Can non-state global governance be legitimate? An analytical framework’. Regulation and Governance1(4): 347–371. Crossref.
11.
BerryE.2014. ‘Religion and sustainability in global civil society: Some basic find-ings from Rio+20’. Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture and Ecology18(3): 269–288. Crossref.
12.
BiermannF., and GuptaA.. 2011. ‘Accountability and legitimacy in Earth System Governance’. Ecological Economics70(11): 1856–1864. Crossref.
13.
BushE.2007. ‘Measuring religion in global civil society’. Social Forces85(4): 1645–1665. Crossref.
14.
CarrW., PattersonM., YungL. and SpencerD.. 2012. ‘The faithful skeptics’. Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature and Culture6(3): 276–299. Crossref.
15.
CashoreB.2002. ‘Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How non-state market-driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule-making authority’. Governance15(4): 503–529. Crossref.
16.
CorellE. and BetsillM.. 2001. ‘A comparative look at NGO influence in international environmental negotiations: Desertification and climate change’. Global Environmental Politics1(4): 86–107. Crossref.
17.
Di GiulioA., DefilaR. and Kaufmann-HayozR.. 2010. ‘Gutes Leben, Bedürfnisse und nachhaltiger Konsum’. Umweltpsychologie14(2): 10–29.
FuchsD.2007. Business Power in Global Governance. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
27.
GlaabK.2017. ‘A climate for justice? Faith-based advocacy on climate change at the United Nations’. Globalizations14(7): 1110–1124. Crossref.
28.
GlaabK.2018. ‘Faithful translation? Shifting the boundaries of the religious and the secular in the global climate change debate’. In BergerT. and EsguerraA. (eds), World Politics in Translation: Power, Relationality, and Difference in Global Cooperation, pp. 175–190. London: Routledge.
29.
GoreA.2006. An Inconvenient Truth. New York: Rodale Press.
30.
GottliebR.2006. A Greener Faith. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31.
GrimJ.2013. ‘The roles of religions in activating an ecological consciousness’. International Social Science Journal205/206: 255–269.
32.
HabermasJ.2001. Glauben und Wissen. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
33.
HajerM.1993. ‘Discourse coalitions and the institutionalisation of practice: The case of acid rain in Great Britain’. In FischerF. and ForesterJ. (eds), The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning, pp. 43–67. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
34.
HajerM.1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
35.
HolzscheiterA.2005. ‘Discourse as capability’. Millennium33(3): 723–746. Crossref.
36.
KallandA.2005. ‘The religious environmentalist paradigm’. In TaylorB., (ed.) Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature, pp. 1367–1371. London: Continuum.
37.
KerberG.2014. ‘International advocacy for climate justice’. In VeldmanR., SzaszA. and Haluza-DeLayR. (eds), How the World's Religions are Responding to Climate Change, pp. 278–293. Milton Park: Routledge.
38.
KratochwilF.2005. ‘Religion and (inter-)national politics’. Alternatives30(2): 113–140. Crossref.
39.
KubálkováV.2000. ‘Towards an international political theology’. Millennium29(3): 675–704. Crossref.
40.
LevyD., and NewellP. (eds). 2005. The Business of Global Environmental Governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41.
LitfinK.1995. Ozone Discourses. New York: Columbia University Press.
42.
LitfinK.2003. ‘Towards an integral perspective on world politics’. Millennium32(1): 29–56.
43.
LitfinK.2010. ‘The sacred and the profane in the ecological politics of sacrifice’. In ManiatesM. and MeyerJ. (eds), The Environmental Politics of Sacrifice, pp. 117–143. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44.
MarshallK.2011. ‘Development and faith institutions’. In ter HaarG., (ed.) Religion and Development, pp. 27–53. London: Hurst.
45.
MayringP.2014. ‘Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Available at: https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/39517 (accessed 8 February 2018).
NorrisP., and InglehartR.. 2004. Sacred and Secular. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48.
PetersonA.2010. ‘Ordinary and extraordinary sacrifices’. In ManiatesM. and MeyerJ. (eds), The Environmental Politics of Sacrifice, pp. 91–115. Cambridge: MIT Press.
49.
RolstonH.III2006. ‘Caring for nature: What science and economics can't teach us but religion can’. Environmental Values15(3): 307–313. Crossref.
50.
RoweP.2015. ‘Religious movement and religion's contribution to global civil society’. In HerringtonL., McKayA. and HaynesJ. (eds), Nations Under God, pp. 211–217. Bristol: E-International Relations.
VeldmanR., SzaszA. and Haluza-DeLayR.. 2014a. ‘Social science, religions, and climate change’. In VeldmanR., SzaszA. and Haluza-DeLayR. (eds), How the World's Religions are Responding to Climate Change, pp. 3–19. Milton Park: Routledge.
63.
VeldmanR., SzaszA. and Haluza-DeLayR. (eds). 2014b. How the World's Religions are Responding to Climate Change. Milton Park: Routledge.
64.
WestD., and LoomisB.. 1999. The Sound of Money. New York: Norton.
