Political science

  • By applying a single dataset (i.e., panel data at a national level) and a single analytical
    framework (i.e., a dynamic mathematical model), I compared religious (REL) and secular
    (SEC) ethics in two ways: as feasible strategies (i.e., with realistic parameter values such that
    a strategy can achieve its goal) and as reliable strategies (i.e., with a tight statistical relationship
    between a strategy and its goal). In both cases, the goal is to achieve environmental
    sustainability, but with different precepts and principles applied within different perspectives:
    global vs. local sustainability, individual feelings vs. social pressures as determinants of proenvironmental
    behavior, and long-run vs. short-run sustainability. Analytical results (feasibility)
    showed that REL are overall more feasible than SEC and, specifically, REL are more
    likely to affect the many pro-environmental behaviors required to achieve global sustainability,
    whereas SEC to affect some pro-environmental behaviors required to achieve local
    sustainability; REL are more likely to affect pro-environmental behaviors based on individual
    feelings and social pressures from small communities, whereas SEC to affect proenvironmental
    behaviors based on social pressures from large communities; REL are more
    likely to solve collective-action problems to achieve short-run sustainability, whereas SEC to
    solve collective-action problems to achieve long-run sustainability. Statistical results (reliability)
    based on 32 random- and between-effects regressions support these results and,
    particularly, REL and SEC were complementary in time (e.g., for REL, short-run sustainability
    is more reliable than long-run sustainability; for SEC, long-run sustainability is more reliable
    than short-run sustainability), in space (e.g., for SEC, local sustainability is more reliable than
    global sustainability), and in society (e.g., for REL, individual feelings are more reliable than
    social pressures).

  • Dipartimento di Scienze per la Qualità della Vita, Università di Bologna, Rimini, Italy

    Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-021-00802-0

    Courtesy: https://www.nature.com

    Copyright: doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00802-0 © The Author(s) 2021

View / Download research paper

©️2022 Deus Labs Ltd | All Rights Reserved

Privacy Policy

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account