Submitted:
07 October 2023
Posted:
09 October 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
I. Introduction
II. Literature Review
III. Method
IV. Components of the faith-informed advocacy model

V. Case Studies:
VI. Discussion
Case Study 1: Faith-Informed Advocacy for Social Justice
- Strengths:
- –
- The case study highlights the unique contributions of faith-based organizations in promoting social justice by addressing systemic inequalities and advocating for the rights of marginalized communities.
- –
- Faith-inspired values like equality, compassion, and solidarity provide a strong moral foundation for advocacy efforts, mobilizing believers to take action and effect change.
- –
- The model recognizes the potential of faith communities to bring together diverse stakeholders, fostering dialogue and collaboration for social justice initiatives.
- Limitations:
- –
- One limitation is the potential heterogeneity of religious beliefs and interpretations, making it challenging to form a unified faith-based advocacy approach on social justice issues.
- –
- Advocacy efforts may face criticism if faith-based organizations are seen as prioritizing their religious agenda over broader social justice concerns.
Case Study 2: Faith-Informed Advocacy for Environmental Conservation
- Strengths:
- –
- The case study showcases the role of faith communities in promoting environmental stewardship and sustainable practices, motivated by their religious teachings on protecting creation.
- –
- Faith-based organizations can leverage their influence to raise awareness about environmental issues, mobilize their members for collective action, and advocate for policies that prioritize ecological sustainability.
- –
- The model recognizes the potential of interfaith collaborations, bringing together diverse religious groups to work towards common goals in environmental conservation.
- Limitations:
- –
- limitation is that some religious teachings may prioritize human-centered perspectives, potentially limiting the attention given to non-human species and ecosystems in advocacy efforts.
- –
- Engaging communities with diverse religious or non-religious beliefs can be challenging, and faith-based advocacy may exclude or be perceived as excluding non-religious or minority religious perspectives.
Case Study 3: Faith-Informed Advocacy for Human Rights
- Strengths:
- –
- The case study highlights the influence of faith communities in promoting human rights, driven by shared values of dignity, justice, and equality, as found in various religious teachings.
- –
- Faith-based organizations have the potential to provide moral leadership, advocate for policy changes, and mobilize resources to protect and promote human rights for all individuals.
- –
- The model recognizes the power of interfaith dialogue and collaboration in advancing human rights, fostering understanding and cooperation across religious boundaries.
- Limitations:
- –
- One limitation is the potential clash between certain religious teachings and the full range of human rights principles, such as issues related to gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, or freedom of expression, which may create tensions within faith-based advocacy efforts.
- –
- Advocacy efforts may face resistance from religious institutions or conservative elements within religious communities that prioritize traditional interpretations over progressive human rights agendas.
- Strengths of Faith-Informed Advocacy for Social Justice, Environmental Conservation, and Human Rights:
- –
- Moral Foundation: Faith-inspired values provide a strong moral compass and motivate believers to engage in advocacy efforts for social justice, environmental conservation, and human rights.
- –
- Grassroots Mobilization: Faith communities have the potential to mobilize members and resources at the grassroots level, enabling community-led initiatives for change.
- –
- Interfaith Collaboration: Engaging diverse religious groups in advocacy efforts fosters interfaith dialogue, enhances collective action, and promotes understanding across religious boundaries.
- –
- Ethical Framework: Religious teachings and traditions offer a wealth of ethical guidelines and principles that can inform and strengthen advocacy efforts in these areas.
- Limitations of Faith-Informed Advocacy for Social Justice, Environmental Conservation, and Human Rights:
- –
- Heterogeneity of Religious Interpretations: The diversity of religious beliefs and interpretations may pose challenges in forming a unified faith-based advocacy approach for social justice, environmental conservation, and human rights.
- –
- Potential Exclusionary Practices: Faith-based advocacy may inadvertently exclude or be perceived as excluding non-religious or minority religious perspectives, limiting inclusivity and effectiveness.
- –
- Tension with Progressive Agendas: Certain religious teachings may clash with progressive principles related to gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and other aspects of human rights, creating challenges in faith-based advocacy efforts.
- –
- Resistance from Conservative Elements: Advocacy initiatives on social justice, environmental conservation, and human rights may face opposition from religious institutions or conservative elements within faith communities.
- –
- It is important to navigate these strengths and limitations when implementing faith-informed advocacy for social justice, environmental conservation, and human rights, ensuring inclusive and collaborative approaches that respect diverse perspectives, promote dialogue, and advance the common good.
Case Study 4: Faith-Informed Advocacy for Global Health
- Strengths:
- –
- The case study highlights the significant role of faith-based organizations in addressing global health challenges, such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and access to healthcare.
- –
- Faith-inspired values like compassion and solidarity provide a strong foundation for advocacy efforts, mobilizing resources and support from religious communities.
- –
- The model recognizes the trusted position of religious leaders within communities, enabling them to effectively disseminate health information and promote behavior change.
- Limitations:
- –
- One limitation is the potential conflict between religious beliefs and scientific approaches to health issues. Balancing religious teachings and evidence-based practices can be challenging.
- –
- Advocacy efforts may face resistance or skepticism from secular entities or individuals who perceive the involvement of faith-based organizations as proselytizing or imposing religious agendas.
Case Study 5: Faith-Informed Advocacy for Poverty Alleviation
- Strengths:
- –
- The case study showcases the vital contributions of faith communities in addressing poverty by providing social services, advocating for pro-poor policies, and empowering marginalized groups.
- –
- Faith-inspired values like justice and solidarity motivate believers to engage in poverty alleviation efforts, promoting a sense of shared responsibility and collective action.
- –
- The model recognizes that faith-based organizations often have deep-rooted community connections, allowing them to better understand local contexts and tailor poverty reduction strategies accordingly.
- Limitations:
- –
- limitation is the potential focus on charity and individual assistance rather than addressing systemic causes of poverty. Advocacy efforts may need to balance short-term relief with long-term structural changes.
- –
- The model could inadvertently reinforce power dynamics if faith leaders or organizations assume a paternalistic role instead of empowering communities to be agents of change.
- –
- Strengths of Faith-Informed Advocacy for Global Health and Poverty Alleviation:
- –
- Values-Based Approach: Faith-inspired values provide a strong moral compass, driving advocacy efforts with compassion, justice, and solidarity as guiding principles.
- –
- Community Engagement: Faith communities and leaders often have trusted relationships within communities, allowing for effective grassroots mobilization and community-based solutions.
- –
- Holistic Perspective: The integration of spiritual, physical, and social aspects of wellbeing (Moleka, 2023b) in faith-informed advocacy contributes to comprehensive approaches in global health and poverty alleviation efforts.
- –
- Resource Mobilization: Religious institutions and believers often have access to significant resources, including funding, volunteers, and infrastructure, which can be harnessed for advocacy initiatives.
- Limitations of Faith-Informed Advocacy for Global Health and Poverty Alleviation:
- –
- Balancing Religious Beliefs and Scientific Approaches: Finding common ground between religious teachings and evidence-based practices can be challenging, potentially hindering the effectiveness of advocacy efforts.
- –
- Potential Resistance from Secular Entities: Advocacy involving faith-based organizations may face skepticism or opposition from secular actors who perceive religious involvement as exerting undue influence or proselytizing.
- –
- Risk of Reinforcing Power Dynamics: Faith leaders or organizations might unintentionally perpetuate power imbalances if they assume a paternalistic role rather than promoting community empowerment and ownership.
- –
- Structural and Systemic Change: Advocacy efforts should strive for systemic and policy changes along with community-level interventions to address the root causes of global health challenges and poverty.
- –
- It is important to critically navigate these strengths and limitations when implementing faith-informed advocacy for global health and poverty alleviation, ensuring inclusive and collaborative approaches that prioritize evidence-based practices, community empowerment, and long-term sustainable solutions.
Case Study 6: Faith-Informed Advocacy for Gender Equality in Asia
- Strengths:
- –
- The case study highlights the unique contributions of faith-based organizations and women’s movements in advocating for gender equality in Asia.
- –
- It recognizes the intersection of religious teachings and feminist perspectives, leveraging faith-inspired values to challenge gender-based discrimination.
- –
- The model emphasizes the importance of inclusivity and engaging with diverse stakeholders for effective advocacy.
- Limitations:
- –
- One limitation is the potential clash between traditional religious beliefs and progressive gender equality agendas. Balancing these perspectives can be challenging.
- –
- The model assumes a cooperative relationship between faith-based organizations and women’s movements, which may not always exist due to differing priorities or power dynamics.
- –
- Case Study 7: Faith-Based Advocacy for Peacebuilding in Africa
- Strengths:
- –
- The case study sheds light on the positive role of faith-based organizations in fostering peace and reconciliation in conflict-affected areas of Africa.
- –
- It highlights the faith-inspired values of forgiveness, compassion, and social cohesion that can contribute to sustainable peacebuilding efforts.
- –
- The model acknowledges the importance of grassroots mobilization and community engagement in conflict resolution processes.
- Limitations:
- –
- limitation is the potential exclusion of diverse religious and non-religious groups, as faith-based advocacy might favor certain religious traditions over others.
- –
- It may be challenging to bridge religious differences and find common ground when engaging in interfaith peacebuilding efforts.
- Strengths of the Model:
- –
- Ethical Foundations: The model is grounded in faith-inspired values that emphasize compassion, justice, and human dignity, giving advocacy efforts a strong ethical foundation.
- –
- Mobilizing Grassroots: The model recognizes the power of grassroots movements and community engagement, amplifying the voices of those affected by the issue being advocated for.
- –
- Collaborative Approach: Collaboration with diverse stakeholders, including faith-based organizations, governmental agencies, and communities, allows for a more comprehensive and inclusive advocacy approach.
- –
- Emphasis on Policy Change: The model aims to influence policies and systems at various levels, addressing the root causes of social issues and promoting systemic change.
- Limitations of the Model:
- –
- Religious Divisions: Religious differences and conflicting interpretations may present challenges in finding common ground and promoting unity among diverse faith communities.
- –
- Power Imbalances: Power dynamics within faith-based organizations or between religious institutions and secular entities can hinder inclusivity, equity, and effective collaboration.
- –
- Exclusionary Potential: The model may inadvertently exclude non-religious or minority religious groups, limiting its reach and impact.
Conclusion
References
- Abu, O., Ogunbiyi, T., & Davis, M. (2018). Faith-Based Advocacy for Peacebuilding in Africa. Journal of Peace and Conflict Studies 40, 285–304.
- Brown, A., & García, M. (2019). Faith-Informed Advocacy for Environmental Justice. Environmental Ethics 41, 285–304.
- Brueggemann, W. (2001). The prophetic imagination. Fortress Press.
- Davis, J., & Jackson, M. (2018). Faith and social justice in Christian social work. Journal of Religion & Social Work 45, 367–381.
- Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work advocacy: A new framework for action. SAGE Publications.
- Hauerwas, S. (1983). The peaceable kingdom: A primer in Christian ethics. University of Notre Dame Press.
- Hernandez, L. (2020). Integrating faith into social work advocacy: Navigating challenges and maintaining integrity. Social Work & Christianity 47, 187–202.
- Jansson, B. S. (2018). Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy practice to social justice. Cengage Learning.
- Johnson, R. (2020). Faith-based principles in social work advocacy: Promoting social change through Christian values. Journal of Social Work & Christianity 47, 345–361.
- Martinez, J., & Lee, S. (2019). Faith-Based Advocacy for Human Rights. Journal of Religion and Social Justice 15, 123–145.
- Miller-McLemore, B. J. (2010). Christian theology in practice: Discovering a discipline. William B. Eerdmans Publishing.
- Moleka, P. (2023a). Epistemological Foundations of Christian Social Work. The Intersection of Faith, Knowledge and Practice, Munich, GRIN Verlag. Available online: https://www.grin.com/document/1391463.
- Moleka, P. (2023b). Dispelling the Limitations of Education 5.0 and Outlining the Vision of Education 6.0. Preprints 2023, 2023071703. [CrossRef]
- National Association of Social Workers. (2017). Code of ethics. National Association of Social Workers. Available online: https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English.
- Neal, A. (2014). Supporting social cohesion in the Central African Republic, Issue 62 - Article 5, Humanitarian Practice Network.
- Piderit, J. (2009). Compassionate respect: A feminist approach to social work ethics. In Ethics and Social Work Practice (pp. 59-72). Palgrave Macmillan.
- Rahman, A., Khan, Z., & Liu, L. (2019). Faith-Informed Advocacy for Gender Equality: Lessons from Women’s Movement in Asia. Journal of Women’s Studies 25, 123–145.
- Rodriguez, S., & Ahmed, S. (2020). Faith-Based Organizations and Global Health. International Journal of Public Health 65, 567–579.
- Smith, E. (2019). Christian ethics in social work practice: Integrating ethical frameworks. Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work: Social Thought 38, 308–322.
- Smith, R., & Thomas, L. (2017). Faith-Informed Advocacy and Poverty. Journal of Poverty and Public Policy 9, 156–173.
- Thompson, K. (2021). The impact of faith-based advocacy in Christian social work: Empowerment, resilience, and community engagement. Social Work & Christianity 48, 49–64.
- Wells, S. (2006). Above all earthly powers: Christ in a postmodern world. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
- Whetho, A., & Okeke, U. (2008). Religious Networks in Post-conflict Democratic Republic of the Congo: A Prognosis. African Journals Online.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
