Existential security theory

Norris and Inglehart (2011)

• Variations in religiosity due to variation in degrees of existential security

Existential security

• The feeling that survival is secure enough that it can be taken for granted

Religion and existential security

• Meets need for security so is now in societies in which people already feel secure

Poor societies and religion (also applies to poor people in rich societies)

• Face life-threatening risks → more insecurity → more religiosity

Rich societies and religion

• Higher standard of living → less risk → more security → lower rates of religiosity

Religious demand

• High from low-income groups/societies

  • Explains higher religiosity in LICs and secularisation in HICs

Population and religion

• Population growth higher in LICs → undermines trend to secularisation

• The majority of the world is more religious

  • Rich companies more secular and less populous

  • Poor countries more religious and populous

Europe and religiosity

• W.Europe more secular due to well-developed welfare states which protect poor from insecurity

🇺🇸 and religiosity

• Way more religious due to huge inequalities despite richness, along with less welfare and greater focus on individualism

  • Less religious than LICs

  • More religious than other HICs

Gill and Lundegaarde (2004) — state welfare and religiosity

• More welfare spending → less religious participation

  • Past: religion provided welfare for poor (continues in LICs)

  • Now: state provides welfare

• Still doesn’t eliminate need for religious as religion answers ‘ultimate’ questions where religion does not

2 criticisms of EST — Vasquez (2007) (does agree with explanation of global trends)

1. Only uses quantitative data about income levels, not quality data about own definition of existential security

2. Only sees negative response for religion yet ignores positive aspects of participation and rich people being religious