Abstract
Within this edited volume the fields of religion, politics and development are brought together so as to demonstrate the interconnectivity of these themes in both theory and practice. A primary goal of this book is to challenge the idea that these three fields act independently and separately. For the authors, development—particularly that based on a Western model— is frequently described as being unrelated to religion by definition. This mentality is also applied to politics, a realm of influence claimed to be distinct from religious organizations. The works included in this book demonstrate how this conceptualization is premised on a problematic dichotomy between the government as a public sphere and religion as explicitly private. Furthermore, this is a challenge that also requires an argument for reframing how development, politics and religion relate to one another. Rather than assuming that religion, politics and development ought to remain segregated, the included scholars problematize all three bodies of influence by examining their triple nexus in various contexts within the Asian continent.
The contents of this book are very relevant for scholars in several fields, especially as a tool for advancing interdisciplinary research on the topics at hand. As the editors point out, those in religious studies, development studies, and political science tend to collaborate rather infrequently. Many of the authors here do a sufficient job demonstrating how this is not only odd, but counterproductive for all the three fields. Specifically concerning development, this volume does an excellent job of gathering work on distinct, yet related, theories and empirics in order to advance ways of thinking about and studying modes of development. By focusing on the problems of ‘secular’ and ‘apolitical’ development philosophies, the included chapters show the ways through which religious actors are involved ‘on the ground’ in strategies to promote social growth and betterment in non-spiritual terms.
This book is well-organized and touches on a wide range of subjects related to the central theme. One observation that stands out, however, is the misleading nature of the title. While the text aims to be broad and inclusive (which in many ways it is), the included chapters all specifically address case studies in Asia. Perhaps excluding this information in the title, or even amending a subtitle clarifying the authors’ region of study, was done to make the text widely marke-table. Such an omission is not condemning in itself, but it does alert readers to a deeper issue to which the book inadvertently draws attention.
Focusing on Asian countries naturally represents diverse contexts. Within the region there exist many forms of religion, political systems and development projects. Yet even the diversity of institutions in the continent does not aptly represent similar situations elsewhere. Many of the chapters focus on specific situations which, together, demonstrate the complex or the ‘grey’ nature intersectionality of religion, politics and development. It is the specificity of these conditions which goes underemphasized; rather than focusing on religions per se, this book could just as easily generalize grassroots organizations or non-profits as unique liaisons and facilitators in development practices. The nature and dynamics within such groups vary from place to place, even when maintaining general characteristics or principles. What this book occasionally leaves unclear is how religion is particular in any way. Most meta-analysis of religion discusses not religiosity in general, but a more specific ‘religion as part of development and politics’. While useful, this framework would be well complemented by broader examination of how religion becomes defined, especially when related to varied political, social and economic contexts.
Another concern within the book is the lack of examples showing how atheism, secular humanism and irreligion in general fit into the network of development stakeholders. If ‘religion’ is meant to represent sets of beliefs—and in this case it seems to—then the frameworks for analysis need to be more inclusive. Non-religious aid is the focus of the Watanabe’s final chapter of the book, but its presentation comes across more like an afterthought than an essential point of inquiry towards one of the main questions posed: what is religion? While secularism is certainly discussed in the book, it is generally used to acknowledge the Western idea of individualized belief systems as part of church–state separation; at times the term ‘secular’ even seems to be used as a pejorative, as seen in Salemink’s chapter. More common than mentioning secularism are references to religion as a complicated term which deserves debate over its definition. Under-representing research on institutions explicitly self-defined as non-religious is a setback for facilitating such a debate.
A separate observation of this book is that poverty and development are at times described as inversely related and perhaps inseparable concepts. Rather than preface the book by describing how politics, development and religion intersect, Fountain et al. state that the intersection of politics, ‘poverty’ and religion is the central element of the volume (p. 12). This problem is not prominent in all parts of the book, but it does reflect a broader issue of coherency in some of the subtler points raised by its authors. Additionally, it leaves the actual relation between poverty and economic development unsettled.
Critique aside, this book will serve as an excellent resource for researchers striving to construct new or rethought forms of development policy and application. The key arguments of the book suitably highlight the strengths of its included work: that religion and development are non-static and relatively negotiable, and that deeming development innately ‘secular’ ignores the many religious-like traits of development proponents and their plans for future economic gains. Going forward, this book might best appeal to those wishing to answer a question inadvertently raised by its editors: should religion be involved in politics? While two comparable questions are more directly engaged with (if religion should be involved with development, and if development is necessarily political), this third line of inquiry may well be the next stage for scholars of development, political science and religious studies hoping to progress in their respective fields through interdisciplinary collaboration.