February 15, 2006

Stewardship and Economics: Two Sides of the Same Coin

by Jordan Ballor

A group of evangelical leaders made headlines last week whenthey announced the formation of the Evangelical Climate Initative (ECI), a movement is intended to bring to bear the moral authority of theseleaders on the question of global warming and climate change. Indeed, theseChristians see their position tied up with a great responsibility: “Climatechange is the latest evidence of our failure to exercise proper stewardship,and constitutes a critical opportunity for us to do better.”

For many who talk about the biblical concept of stewardshipof the earth--or “creation care”-- the practice of environmentalresponsibility is antithetical to the concerns of economics. Eugene Dykema, forexample, writing for the Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN), one of the groups behind theformation of the ECI, talks of a view of creation in which “everything isrelated to everything else.” He continues, “Everything in relationship,everything in context is familiar to the field of ecology, but quite alien tothe field of economics.”

Whether or not his characterization of economics isaccurate, his contrasting of environmental and economic concerns is clear. Butthis picture is misleading in a number of ways. Perhaps the most importantpoint to recognize is the common foundation for our respective understandingsof stewardship and economics. The two are related linguistically by theircommon Greek origins, and related theologically by their biblical usage.

The English word economics is derived from the Greek word οικονομία , which is a compound term literally meaning “house”( οικο )“order” ( νομία ), and it refers to the administration of a household. The person whoruled the household was called an οικονόμος , and this is usually rendered in English as“steward” or “manager.”

The Bible uses these terms frequently, sometimes to refer tothe providential work of God in redemptive history. But even in these cases,the more mundane analogue is another biblical use of the terms, regarding theeveryday maintenance of a household in the Ancient Near East.

Joseph, for example, acted as the steward of Potiphar'shousehold when he first arrived in Egypt (Genesis 39:2-6). Jesus tellsthe parable of the shrewd οικονόμος (manager) in Luke 16:1-15, who used hisposition over worldly wealth not as an end in itself but rather with eternalconsequences in mind. Jesus concludes by saying, “No servant can serve twomasters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devotedto the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money” (v. 13).

These few examples display the shared biblical origin of theterms economics and stewardship. Economics can be understood as the theoreticalside of stewardship, and stewardship can be understood as the practical side ofeconomics. Here in the Midwest, over the course of the winter we've heard anumber of news reports about the dilemma facing households over the rise inhome heating costs. Often, the decision must be made to pay only one of twobills, to pay the heating bill or buy food. Dire situations like these are onesin which tough economic decisions are made by the heads of households.

Far from being a discipline that explains all of humanexistence, in the biblical view, as we saw in the case of the shrewd manager,economics is the thoughtful ordering of the material resources of a householdor social unit toward the self-identified good end. Thus, if we hold a biblicalview of economics and stewardship, we will not be tempted to divorce the twoconcepts but instead will see them as united.

On a larger scale, then, economics must play an importantrole in decisions about environmental stewardship. Economics helps us rightlyorder our stewardship. The fact that some advocates for political action onglobal warming are now attempting to propose economic arguments for theirposition is a positive step toward reconciling these two often estrangedconcepts.

Andy Crouch ,for example, says that we have “much technological progress, energy security,and economic efficiency to gain if we act on climate change now.” Sir JohnHoughton, Britain's leading climatologist, in testimonylast year before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee , claimedthat with respect to the Kyoto protocol, “future targets adopted are achievableand compatible with healthy economic growth.” He also cites “economic and otherbenefits of increased efficiency” to US industries from the reduction of carbonemissions.

The underlying unity of these concepts means that theconclusions, and to a greater extent the methodology, of the CopenhagenConsensus should have an important role to play in the formation of specificpolicy claims by environmentally-concerned Christians. The idea of theconsensus in 2004 was to take economic experts from around the world,evaluate various global threats (including global warming), and construct a“prioritized list of opportunities meeting the biggest challenges.”

When economics tells us that there are much more imminent threatsand opportunities than global warming, the proper approach to Christianstewardship is to heed these priorities and work to effect changes in the mostpressing areas. This means that true Christian stewardship will first supportefforts to control HIV/AIDS and malaria, provide micronutrients to thosesuffering from malnutrition, and reduce barriers to trade--and all with aview toward meeting the Great Commission.

---