Modernisation and secularisation quantified

Modernisation and secularisation quantified

Modernisation and secularisation quantified

Marion BurkimsherMarion BurkimsherObservatoire des Religions,Observatoire des Religions,

University of Lausanne, SwitzerlandUniversity of Lausanne, Switzerland

Marion BurkimsherMarion BurkimsherObservatoire des Religions,Observatoire des Religions,

University of Lausanne, SwitzerlandUniversity of Lausanne, Switzerland

Modernization and secularization quantified

Modernization and secularization quantified

Marion BurkimsherMarion BurkimsherObservatoire des Religions,Observatoire des Religions,

University of Lausanne, SwitzerlandUniversity of Lausanne, Switzerland

Marion BurkimsherMarion BurkimsherObservatoire des Religions,Observatoire des Religions,

University of Lausanne, SwitzerlandUniversity of Lausanne, Switzerland

Religiosity-Human Development Index

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96HDI

% attenders

Nigeria

India

Philippines

Indonesia

Malta

Ireland

United States

Poland

Brazil

S Korea

Mexico

Italy

RomaniaTurkey

IranPortugal

Hungary Great Britain

Czech RepRussia

Latvia

BelarusChina

Viet Nam

Ukraine

Moldova

Bulgaria

Canada

Austria

Spain

Argentina

South AfricaPeru

All countries moved from left to right, ie to a higher HDI, except Belarus and Russia

Measure of modernisationMeasure of modernisation: the Human Development Index: the Human Development Index

Composite indicator (max. 100) combining measures of:Composite indicator (max. 100) combining measures of:• Health: life expectancy at birthHealth: life expectancy at birth• Education: adult literacy and school enrolmentEducation: adult literacy and school enrolment• Wealth: GDP per capita (PPP)Wealth: GDP per capita (PPP)

Measure of secularisationMeasure of secularisation: attendance at religious services: attendance at religious services

World Values Survey: World Values Survey:

data from 4 waves 1981, 1990, 1999, 2006data from 4 waves 1981, 1990, 1999, 2006

Attendance at religious service: Attendance at religious service:

at least once a month = attenderat least once a month = attender

Any religion, self-defined by respondentAny religion, self-defined by respondent

45 countries: needed to have HDI data and WVS data 45 countries: needed to have HDI data and WVS data

for 2 years, so that a trend could be plotted for 2 years, so that a trend could be plotted

Highly developed countries are over-representedHighly developed countries are over-represented

Because of measurement and sampling issues, any data Because of measurement and sampling issues, any data

point can have a wide margin of uncertaintypoint can have a wide margin of uncertainty

Religiosity - Human Development Index 1981-1984

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96

HDI

% attenders

Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada,Denmark, France, Great Britain, Hungary,Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, S. Korea, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United States (19 countries)

Religiosity - Human Development Index 1981-1984

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96

HDI

% attenders

Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada,Denmark, France, Great Britain, Hungary,Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, S. Korea, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United States (19 countries)

Religiosity - Human Development Index 1989-1993

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96

HDI

% attenders

Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Chile, China, Czech Rep, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, S. Korea, Latvia, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United States (37 countries)

Religiosity - Human Development Index 1995-2002

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96

HDI

% attendersArgentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Belarus, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Czech Rep, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Japan, S. Korea, Latvia, Malta, Mexico, Moldova, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United States, Viet Nam(45 countries)

Religiosity - Human Development Index 2005-2007

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96

HDI

% attenders

Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Finland, France, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, Iran, Italy, Japan, S. Korea, Mexico, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia,South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United States, Viet Nam (33 countries)

Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of values is widevalues is wide

Religiosity-Human Development Index

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96HDI

% attenders

Nigeria

India

Philippines

Indonesia

Malta

Ireland

United States

Poland

Brazil

S Korea

Mexico

Italy

RomaniaTurkey

IranPortugal

Hungary Great Britain

Czech RepRussia

Latvia

BelarusChina

Viet Nam

Ukraine

Moldova

Bulgaria

Canada

Austria

Spain

Argentina

South AfricaPeru

The area between the black dashed lines can be considered The area between the black dashed lines can be considered the “natural level” of religiosity of a population given its the “natural level” of religiosity of a population given its level of development. level of development. This “This “normal bandnormal band” is roughly the trendline +/- 10%” is roughly the trendline +/- 10%

These countries have been in the “These countries have been in the “normal bandnormal band” at some ” at some point:point:

India, Turkey, Brazil, Iran, Romania, South Korea, India, Turkey, Brazil, Iran, Romania, South Korea, Hungary, Slovenia, Great Britain, Belgium, Australia, Hungary, Slovenia, Great Britain, Belgium, Australia, Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, France, Finland, Norway, Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, France, Finland, Norway, Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland (21 countries)Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland (21 countries)

Religiosity-Human Development Index

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96HDI

% attenders

Nigeria

India

Philippines

Indonesia

Malta

Ireland

United States

Poland

Brazil

S Korea

Mexico

Italy

RomaniaTurkey

IranPortugal

Hungary Great Britain

Czech RepRussia

Latvia

BelarusChina

Viet Nam

Ukraine

Moldova

Bulgaria

Canada

Austria

Spain

Argentina

South AfricaPeru

These countries have been These countries have been aboveabove the “ the “normal bandnormal band” and ” and their most recent trend is their most recent trend is downwardsdownwards::

Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil, Peru, Argentina, Chile, Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil, Peru, Argentina, Chile, Malta, Poland, Iceland, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Malta, Poland, Iceland, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Canada, United States, Australia (16 countries)Spain, Canada, United States, Australia (16 countries)

However, these countries are above the “normal band” but However, these countries are above the “normal band” but have not seen recent falls:have not seen recent falls:

South Africa, Nigeria, South Korea, Italy, Portugal South Africa, Nigeria, South Korea, Italy, Portugal (5 countries)(5 countries)

Exceptions to prove the rule?Exceptions to prove the rule?

Religiosity-Human Development Index

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96HDI

% attenders

Nigeria

India

Philippines

Indonesia

Malta

Ireland

United States

Poland

Brazil

S Korea

Mexico

Italy

RomaniaTurkey

IranPortugal

Hungary Great Britain

Czech RepRussia

Latvia

BelarusChina

Viet Nam

Ukraine

Moldova

Bulgaria

Canada

Austria

Spain

Argentina

South AfricaPeru

These countries were initially These countries were initially belowbelow the “ the “normal bandnormal band” ” but are now but are now closercloser to it (most have seen to it (most have seen risesrises in in attendance rates):attendance rates):

Moldova, Viet Nam, China, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Moldova, Viet Nam, China, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Latvia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Iceland, Finland Latvia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Iceland, Finland (11 countries)(11 countries)

Only Bulgaria is the exception to this pattern, having Only Bulgaria is the exception to this pattern, having moved a little further away from the “normal band”moved a little further away from the “normal band”

Religiosity-Human Development Index

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96HDI

% attenders

Nigeria

India

Philippines

Indonesia

Malta

Ireland

United States

Poland

Brazil

S Korea

Mexico

Italy

RomaniaTurkey

IranPortugal

Hungary Great Britain

Czech RepRussia

Latvia

BelarusChina

Viet Nam

Ukraine

Moldova

Bulgaria

Canada

Austria

Spain

Argentina

South AfricaPeru

Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of values is widevalues is wide

Conclusion 2: There is a natural level of religiosity related Conclusion 2: There is a natural level of religiosity related to a country’s level of development and there is to a country’s level of development and there is convergence towards thisconvergence towards this

Religiosity-Human Development Index

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96HDI

% attenders

Nigeria

India

Philippines

Indonesia

Malta

Ireland

United States

Poland

Brazil

S Korea

Mexico

Italy

RomaniaTurkey

IranPortugal

Hungary Great Britain

Czech RepRussia

Latvia

BelarusChina

Viet Nam

Ukraine

Moldova

Bulgaria

Canada

Austria

Spain

Argentina

South AfricaPeru

Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of values is widevalues is wide

Conclusion 2: There is a natural level of religiosity related Conclusion 2: There is a natural level of religiosity related to a country’s level of development and there is to a country’s level of development and there is convergence towards thisconvergence towards this

Conclusion 3: Some countries have had a period of Conclusion 3: Some countries have had a period of revival, which has then been followed by renewed revival, which has then been followed by renewed secularisation if that revival took them above the “normal secularisation if that revival took them above the “normal band”, eg. South Korea, Brazil, Mexico, Romaniaband”, eg. South Korea, Brazil, Mexico, Romania

Religiosity-Human Development Index

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96HDI

% attenders

Nigeria

India

Philippines

Indonesia

Malta

Ireland

United States

Poland

Brazil

S Korea

Mexico

Italy

RomaniaTurkey

IranPortugal

Hungary Great Britain

Czech RepRussia

Latvia

BelarusChina

Viet Nam

Ukraine

Moldova

Bulgaria

Canada

Austria

Spain

Argentina

South AfricaPeru

Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development Conclusion 1: there is a correlation of higher development being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of being associated with lower religiosity, but the spread of values is widevalues is wide

Conclusion 2: There is a natural level of religiosity related Conclusion 2: There is a natural level of religiosity related to a country’s level of development and there is to a country’s level of development and there is convergence towards thisconvergence towards this

Conclusion 3: Some countries have had a period of Conclusion 3: Some countries have had a period of revival, which has then been followed by renewed revival, which has then been followed by renewed secularisation if that revival took them above the “normal secularisation if that revival took them above the “normal band”, eg. South Korea, Brazil, Mexico, Romaniaband”, eg. South Korea, Brazil, Mexico, Romania

Conclusion 4: Many countries are approaching maximum Conclusion 4: Many countries are approaching maximum development (as defined by the HDI), but the minimum development (as defined by the HDI), but the minimum attendance rates would appear to be around 10-20% of the attendance rates would appear to be around 10-20% of the populationpopulation

Possible feedback mechanismsPossible feedback mechanisms

• HealthHealth: more religious people tend to have healthier lifestyles - less : more religious people tend to have healthier lifestyles - less smoking, drinking, promiscuity, greater social cohesionsmoking, drinking, promiscuity, greater social cohesion

• EducationEducation: in highly educated countries, young people are more : in highly educated countries, young people are more likely to be attenders if they have either a likely to be attenders if they have either a highhigh education or a education or a lowlow educational leveleducational level

• WealthWealth: in highly developed countries, individuals in wealthier : in highly developed countries, individuals in wealthier households are less likely to be attendershouseholds are less likely to be attenders

• Less developed countries attract Less developed countries attract aidaid, often delivered by religious , often delivered by religious organisationsorganisations

• ImmigrationImmigration: highly developed countries attract immigrants who : highly developed countries attract immigrants who bring their higher religiosity with thembring their higher religiosity with them

• FertilityFertility: in highly developed countries, attenders have a higher : in highly developed countries, attenders have a higher fertility than secular peoplefertility than secular people

Changing proportion of young people (under 30) who were attenders

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

198119821983198419891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008

Austria

Australia

Canada

SloveniaSpain

Netherlands

Belgium Switzerland

Great Britain

FinlandNorway

France

Japan

SwedenIceland

Denmark

WVS waves 1981-2007, ESS data 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, EVS 2008

Changing proportion of young people (under 30) who were attenders

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

198119821983198419891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008

Austria

Australia

Canada

SloveniaSpain

Netherlands

Belgium Switzerland

Great Britain

FinlandNorway

France

Japan

SwedenIceland

Denmark

WVS waves 1981-2007, ESS data 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, EVS 2008

Changing proportion of young people (under 30) who were attenders

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

198119821983198419891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008

Austria

Australia

Canada

SloveniaSpain

Netherlands

Belgium Switzerland

Great Britain

FinlandNorway

France

Japan

SwedenIceland

Denmark

WVS waves 1981-2007, ESS data 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, EVS 2008

What next?What next?

As many developed countries are approaching “maximum As many developed countries are approaching “maximum development” as defined by the HDI, what new factors development” as defined by the HDI, what new factors will come into play?will come into play?

The HDI does not consider other measures of The HDI does not consider other measures of “development”, such as urbanisation, “development”, such as urbanisation, (tele)communications, insecurity…(tele)communications, insecurity…