نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 پژوهشکده کشاورزی هسته ای، پژوهشگاه علوم و فنون هسته ای، سازمان انرژی اتمی، کرج- ایران
2 گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی،دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی،دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز،اهواز،ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The global water crisis transcends mere technical or managerial challenges; it fundamentally reflects an ethical-value crisis in the human-nature relationship. Employing a qualitative-analytical and comparative approach, this study integrates the theoretical framework of Ostrom's ten design principles for common-pool resource governance (eight original plus two supplementary: adaptation to local conditions and nested institutional coordination) with religious environmental ethics to examine the status of water and the ethical principles of its conservation within six major world religious traditions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Indigenous traditions). A content analysis of sacred texts and secondary sources reveals that despite theological and cultural differences, four common ethical principles can be identified: (1) the sacredness and life-giving nature of water; (2) moral responsibility for protection (as stewardship or duty); (3) justice in access and distribution; and (4) the existence of concrete normative/legal mechanisms to ensure protection. The study argues that these principles can serve as complementary normative resources to strengthen contemporary sustainable water governance frameworks (such as IWRM and SDG 6) by providing legitimacy, mobilizing social participation, and filling motivational gaps. The integration of religious teachings with modern knowledge—through mechanisms such as developing ethical charters, engaging religious institutions in policymaking, and revitalizing traditional water management institutions—can enhance the resilience and social acceptability of water policies. However, given the study's focus on sacred texts, further field and empirical research is needed to assess the practical application of these principles within religious communities.
کلیدواژهها [English]
The global water crisis is not merely a technical or managerial challenge; it fundamentally reflects an ethical‑value crisis in the human‑nature relationship. Despite significant advances in integrated water resources management (IWRM) and related policy frameworks, purely technocratic and economic approaches often lack the deep ethical and cultural grounding needed to foster intrinsic motivation, cultural legitimacy, and intergenerational justice. Religious and spiritual traditions, which shape the worldviews of more than 80% of the world's population, offer rich normative resources that can complement and deepen contemporary water governance. However, systematic comparative research that extracts shared ethical principles across multiple religious traditions and explicitly links them to operational governance frameworks—such as Elinor Ostrom's design principles for common‑pool resource management—remains scarce. The present study addresses this gap by asking: What common ethical principles concerning water can be identified within six major religious traditions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and selected Indigenous traditions), and how can these principles be operationalised within contemporary sustainable water governance frameworks? The study's objectives are: (1) to examine the status and interpretation of water in these six traditions; (2) to extract and compare shared ethical principles of water conservation; (3) to analyse contemporary water threats in light of those principles; and (4) to propose practical strategies for integrating religious teachings into water policy and governance. A qualitative‑comparative and integrative approach is employed, combining Ostrom's ten design principles (eight original plus two supplementary principles: adaptation to local conditions and nested institutional coordination) with religious environmental ethics as a unified theoretical lens.
The study uses a qualitative, descriptive‑analytical, and comparative design with thematic content analysis and cross‑faith matrix comparison. The sample consists of 52 primary and secondary sources, including 28 sacred texts (Qur'an, Bible, Torah, Rigveda, Upanishads, Pali Tipitaka, etc.) from standard academic editions, 15 peer‑reviewed articles and books (2010‑2024) indexed in Scopus/WOS, and 9 international reports (UNESCO, UN‑Water, IPCC, FAO, WHO, UNEP). For Indigenous traditions, four selected case studies are examined (Māori of New Zealand, Wayúu of Colombia, Yoruba of Nigeria, Amazigh of Morocco) with documented legal personhood cases (e.g., Te Awa Tupua Act 2017). Data collection followed a PRISMA‑ScR‑adapted protocol. Open, axial, and selective coding were used, with two independent coders (PhD in Water Engineering and PhD in Islamic Jurisprudence) achieving excellent inter‑rater reliability (Cohen's κ = 0.87, 95% CI [0.82, 0.92], p < 0.001). Analysis was performed using NVivo 14 and Excel for the comparative matrix (6 traditions × 10 Ostrom principles), triangulated with empirical data from IPCC, WHO, and SDG 6.
The analysis reveals that all six traditions recognise water not merely as a material resource but as a sacred symbol of life, purity, divine mercy, and interdependence. Four common ethical principles are present in at least five of the six traditions: (1) sacredness and life‑giving nature of water; (2) moral responsibility for protection (as stewardship or duty); (3) justice in access and distribution; and (4) the existence of concrete normative/institutional mechanisms for protection. Concrete mechanisms include: in Islam – ḥimā protected areas, the legal maxim lā ḍarar (no harm), prohibition of isrāf (waste), and the ḥisbah institution; in Christianity – social teaching, "Green Church" initiatives, episcopal synods, and the Waters of Life network; in Judaism – bal tashkhit (do not destroy), rabbinic responsa, and beth din courts; in Hinduism – the "Clean Ganga" movement, Kumbh Mela purification rituals, and panchayat systems; in Buddhism – "ordination of rivers" rituals, Vinaya rules, and monastic mediation; in Indigenous traditions – legal personhood for rivers (Te Awa Tupua Act 2017), the Ayllu system, customary law, and councils of elders.
The comparative analysis suggests that several religious traditions contain normative or institutional elements that may be interpreted as functionally comparable to a number of Ostrom’s governance principles, although the degree and form of correspondence varies significantly across traditions. For example, clear boundaries are achieved through ḥimā, parish boundaries, tribal water territories, etc. Graduated sanctions appear in Islamic ta'zīr, canon law penances, halakhic fines, and monastic pātimokkha rules. Polycentric governance is evident in waqf hierarchies, episcopal structures, beth din levels, and the Ayllu system.
Evidence of effectiveness includes: the ḥimā system in Oman (centuries‑old protection); archaeological confirmation of graded sanctions at Humayma (Jordan); a Thai Buddhist monastery's plastic waste reduction efforts (Liu et al., 2025); and an Indonesian study showing a 15% reduction in illegal groundwater extraction following local fatwas (Mangunjaya & Praharawati, 2019). Legal personhood of rivers in New Zealand and Colombia is recognised as a successful hybrid governance model.
Violations and tensions are also documented: in Hinduism, belief in the Ganges' self‑purification has led to untreated sewage discharge (250 million litres/day in Varanasi); in Islam, traditional irrigation systems in Yemen and Morocco sometimes operated on class/tribal lines; in Judaism, priority is given to ritual use (mikveh) over non‑Jewish needs during scarcity; in Christianity, the "dominion" interpretation has been criticised as an ecological root cause; in Thai Buddhism, tensions exist between environmentalist and traditionalist monks. Three drivers of the belief‑action gap are identified: selective textual interpretation, weak monitoring infrastructure, and conflict with modernisation/state centralisation.
This comparative study demonstrates that the global water crisis is deeply rooted in an ethical‑value crisis, and that six major religious traditions share a core set of normative principles (sanctity, stewardship, justice, waste prohibition) that can serve as complementary resources alongside technical‑economic strategies. The paper's main contribution is a systematic analytical‑comparative framework that extracts these shared principles and places them into dialogue with Ostrom's polycentric governance model, thereby offering a comprehensive pathway for sustainable water management that meets present needs while safeguarding future generations' ethical rights. These principles enhance sustainability, resilience, and social acceptability by providing intrinsic motivation, cultural legitimacy, and intergenerational justice.
However, the ethical capacity of religions is double‑edged: violations are real and require transparent, accountable, and participatory institutional mechanisms to translate principles into practice. Successful hybrid governance models (legal personhood of rivers, ḥimā system) show that such translation is achievable, provided equal dialogue between religious/Indigenous knowledge and modern science, and political will to recognise normative pluralism.
The study's limitations include the absence of deep field research on everyday practices and incomplete coverage of intra‑religious diversity. Future research should conduct ethnographic studies, evaluate faith‑based conservation campaigns, and perform comparative policy analysis in countries that have formally integrated religious values into natural resource governance (e.g., Bhutan, Ecuador, Oman, New Zealand).
Policy recommendations are proposed at three levels: (i) governance – develop a national ethical‑religious water charter, create dedicated religious affairs units, revise legislation inspired by qawā'id fiqhiyya, and integrate spiritual criteria into environmental impact assessments; (ii) research and education – establish interdisciplinary programmes (e.g., "Islamic jurisprudence and water"), design integrated school curricula, and fund comparative research; (iii) civil society and international – revitalise traditional water institutions (qanats, ḥimā), launch trans‑religious conservation campaigns, establish water‑specific awqāf (endowments), and promote interfaith dialogues on water governance.
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
All authors contributed equally to all stages of the study, including the design and execution of the research, data collection, statistical analysis, interpretation of the data and results, drafting of the manuscript, verification and quality control of the findings, as well as revising, reviewing, and finalizing the manuscript.
During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used ChatGPT (OpenAI) for language refinement and structural editing assistance. All generated suggestions were critically reviewed, revised, and verified by the authors, who take full responsibility for the final content.
Data available on request from the author
The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions in manuscript revision.
The authors avoided data fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, and any form of misconduct.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
)