The environmental impact of religious beliefs in the East and West: evidence from China
2024

The Environmental Impact of Religious Beliefs in the East and West: Evidence from China

Sample size: 1860 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Yang Junyan, Lu Chuntian

Primary Institution: Institute for Empirical Social Science Research (IESSR), Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China

Hypothesis

How do religious beliefs influence environmental attitudes and behaviors in China?

Conclusion

Individuals with traditional Eastern religious beliefs exhibit higher environmental awareness and willingness to sacrifice for environmental protection compared to those with no religion or traditional Western religious beliefs.

Supporting Evidence

  • Individuals with Eastern religious beliefs are more likely to make personal sacrifices for environmental protection.
  • Natural empathy did not significantly mediate the relationship between environmental awareness and willingness to sacrifice.
  • Anthropocentrism negatively influenced pro-environmental behaviors.

Takeaway

This study shows that people who follow Eastern religions like Buddhism and Taoism care more about the environment and are more willing to help it than those who don't have religious beliefs or follow Western religions.

Methodology

The study used data from the 2021 Chinese General Social Survey and structural equation modeling to analyze the relationship between religious beliefs, natural empathy, anthropocentrism, and environmental attitudes.

Potential Biases

The classification of Confucianism as a religion may lead to an overrepresentation of non-religious respondents.

Limitations

The sample composition may not fully represent religious adherents due to the small number of religious individuals compared to non-believers.

Participant Demographics

The study included a diverse sample from mainland China, focusing on individuals' religious beliefs and their environmental attitudes.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p = 0.005

Confidence Interval

95% CI: (−0.389, −0.167)

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1432142

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication