Religions, poverty reduction and global development institutions

Abstract

Religious traditions have always played a central role in supporting those experiencing poverty, through service delivery as well as the provision of spiritual resources that provide mechanisms for resilience at both the individual and community level. However, the fact that religions can be seen to support social structures and practices that contribute towards inequality and conflict, also underscores a role for religious traditions in creating conditions of poverty. While the Western-led modern global development institutions that have emerged since the Second World War have tended to be secular in nature, over the past decade or so there has been an apparent 'turn to religion' by these global development institutions, as well as in academic development studies. This reflects the realization that modernization and secularization do not necessarily go together, and that religious values and faith actors are important determinants in the drive to reduce poverty, as well as in structures and practices that underpin it. This paper traces three phases of engagement between religions and global development institutions. In phase one, the 'pre-secular' or the 'integrated phase' seen during the colonial era, religion and poverty reduction were intimately entwined, with the contemporary global development project being a legacy of this. The second phase is the 'secular' or the 'fragmented' phase, and relates to the era of the global development industry, which is founded on the normative secularist position that modernization will and indeed should lead to secularization. The third phase is characterized by the 'turn to religion' from the early 2000s. Drawing the three phases together and reflecting on the nature of the dynamics within the third phase, the 'turn to religion', this paper is underpinned by two main questions. First, what does this mean for the apparent processes of secularization? Is this evidence that they are being reversed and that we are witnessing the emergence of the 'desecularization of development' or of a 'post-secular development praxis'? Second, to what extent are FBOs working in development to be defined as neoliberalism's 'little platoons'-shaped by and instrumentalized to the service of secular neoliberal social, political and economic systems, or do we need to develop a more sophisticated account that can contribute towards better policy and practice around poverty reduction?

Distinctive or Professionalised? Understanding the Postsecular in Faith-Based Responses to Trafficking, Forced Labour and Slavery in the UK

“…We argue that the labelling of concepts and processes matters if we are to precisely capture the nature of faith-secular partnerships. Characterising the rapprochement we observed as postsecular overlooks the important observation that many faith actors are 'strategically shift [ing]' between secular and religious 'modes of communication' (Tomalin, 2018: 3) as the discussion of our research below demonstrates.…”

“…then take seriously each other's contributions to controversial themes in the public sphere' (Habermas, 2006: 258). While Habermas' idea of a 'complementary learning process' might seem to respect all forms of knowledge and allow individuals to share their perspectives in their own voices, he has been widely criticised for ultimately holding a secularist position when he writes that 'in a constitutional state, all norms that can be legally implemented must be formulated and publicly justified in a language that all the citizens understand ' (2008: 28; see also Dillon, 2012;Tomalin, 2018). For Habermas, this 'publicly justified language' corresponds to reasoned secular discourse that prohibits reference, for instance, to divine authority or revelation, and necessitates that 'religious citizens' ultimately have to translate 'their religious norms into a secular idiom' (Dillon, 2012: 258).…”

“…This suggests that many anti-TFLS FBOs are operating on what Tomalin (2018: 3) refers to as a dual register, 'strategically shift [ing]' between secular and religious 'modes of communication'.…”

The Association Between Parents’ Socio-Economic Status and the Level of Religiosity Among Undergraduates

“…It is increasingly difficult to ignore the role of the socio-economic status in the current level of religiosity in Nigeria because research has identified the impact of religiosity on economic outcomes (Tomalin, 2018;Abdussalam, Johari, & Alias 2015;Aslam, 2014, Hogue, Khan, & Mohammad, 2015Beyes, 2014;Plouff & Tremblay, 2017). Religion is an important cultural and universal social institution that has great influence on people's attitudes, values, and behaviours at both individual and societal levels, while religiosity is the degree to which religion is practised, which can encapsulate all forms and dimensions of religion practises.…”

“…In survey research of 114 countries by Gallup (2009), it was discovered that the most highly religious countries are relatively poor with a per-capital GDP below $5000, reflecting a strong relationship between a country's SES and the level of religiosity of the residents. When there are disequilibrium in the economic, political, and social spheres of a country, the consequences of such on the citizens are a high level of stress, unemployment and poverty (Tomalin, 2018). In most developing countries with high level religiosity, there are deficiencies in capital and material resources which inhibit the optimal realization of basic needs such as food, health, education, shelter, and clothing (Ighadalo, 2012, United Nations, 1998.…”