https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2924-2818
![Sample our Geography journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5937/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Geography.jpg"})
Abstract
Changing trends in environmental governance over recent decades have brought more civil society involvement into decision-making processes. The participation of faith communities in these processes is under-researched and poorly understood. This paper applies a governance lens to features of faith organizations to explore their roles, strengths, and shortcomings in contributing to environmental governance. Data were collected through literature review, interviews, focus groups, and participant observation. The data reveal that governance strengths of faith organizations coalesce around providing space for dialogue, helping shape the values and direction of governance, and the existence of strong organizational infrastructure and networks to implement action. Capacity challenges are posed by declining membership in some communities and a large proportion of new immigrants in others. Our research findings also provide a foundation for future studies (as some of the first studies of this kind in Canada) by offering preliminary conclusions and questions for further investigation.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank all the organizations that participated in these projects and the undergraduate research assistants who contributed their time and efforts. We are grateful for the financial support provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.
Correction Statement
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
Notes
1 In addition to ongoing research on faith-based environmental engagement (e.g., Moyer, Sinclair, and Spaling Citation2012; Moyer Citation2018; Moyer and Scharper Citation2019; Moyer and Brandenbarg Citation2021), the lead author has also served in a volunteer capacity on environmental projects with the Mennonite community for over 15 years.
2 These projects were approved by Research Ethics Boards of The University of Toronto and The King’s University. Experts (EI) are identified by name and affiliation with their consent, FBO and leadership organizations are identified by the name of the organization, and focus group participants (FG) are identified by pseudonym.
3 The exact number varied across interviews.
4 For example, https://iap2canada.ca/resources/Documents/Webinars/Beyond%20Inclusion%20-%20Equity%20in%20Public%20Engagement%20-%2020%20May%202020.pdf
5 This point was clearly exemplified in the recent development of new impact assessment legislation in Canada. See for example: https://www.wcel.org/program/environmental-assessment; https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/conservation/assessments/environmental-reviews/environmental-assessment-processes/building-common-ground.html.