Consideraciones finales

Each family member noted particular characteristics that shaped their family identity, which extended to include distinctive family values and practices. At the core of this identity is the family’s strong Christian faith, which underpins the way in which they appoint meaning to objects as well as practices. This is perhaps unsurprising given that each religion provides its followers with a ‘set of norms, institutions, traditions and moral values that provide the basis for an individual to establish and maintain a secure identity’

(Coşgel & Minkler, 2004; 5). Indeed, studies have shown that an individual’s religious beliefs play a significant role in shape their attitudes towards the environment (Hope &

Jones, 2014; Minton, Kahle & Kim, 2015; Wardekker, Petersen & van Der Sluijs, 2009) as well as the ways in which they consume with reference to media and services such as information and communication technologies (ICT) and the internet (Nyland & Near, 2007). However, it is necessary to exercise caution when such claims are made, as the impact of one’s religious beliefs on the ways in which they consume is highly dependent on the individual’s religious commitment, that is, how important religion is in their lives

between denominations, with only some of which demonstrating pro-environmental attitudes (Hope & Jones, 2014).

Richard and Grace are very committed to their faith. Both come from religious families, are committed churchgoers, are well-respected members of their congregation, and are very active in organising church events and activities for younger members of the church.

During her first interview, Grace drew upon her theocentric beliefs in combination with her own upbringing in order to illustrate the meanings that she attaches to her own energy use and wider resource consumption. In doing so, Grace also reflects on her decision to have a large family, and what this might mean for her own energy use;

Grace I’m very devoted to my faith (...) And spirituality itself [...] I mean, maybe this seems like a strange thing to bring up in an interview about energy use, but I would just explain that for me, the relationship between the earth and human beings is a deliberate one. So I believe that the earth and all of its resources have been provided for the purpose of human life, and that the destiny of humankind is closely tied with our earth and its resources. So this effects my energy use in two ways. One, I’m very grateful for the earth and its resources. I feel it’s a great gift and I feel in a way that its my job -that I must respect it ‘cause I believe it’s a Creation, that the earth is an intentional, deliberate creation -so something for me to respect and be grateful for and use wisely, you know, to be a steward of it -also to consider other people and that they -you know, these things were made to be shared not just for one person to think “OK well I’m comfortable thank goodness!”

[laughs] So in one way that causes me to be thoughtful about the ways in which I use energy, while on the other hand (...) I believe that the earth is meant to sustain human life, which is why my husband and I feel very comfortable about having children. You know, I’ve met some people who have a belief similar to mine and that leads them to feel like humans are the enemy of the earth and, you know, we should just curtail our numbers and not put a strain on the earth. So that’s where my- sort of my faith impacts my energy use. It’s in two ways. I think that the earth and its resources are there to be used, and they’re to be used to benefit people (...) But I do think that we’re to use it wisely.

In the above extract Grace draws upon a creation narrative to draw attention to the relationship between people and the environment. Grace views the environment and its natural resources as a ‘gift’ to humanity from a divine Creator, which must be cared for to ensure continued human flourishing (Hope & Jones, 2014). The notions of

responsibility, respect and stewardship directly arise from this worldview, as Grace frames humanity as the caretakers of Creation. This duty of care extends beyond the environment to others through the “thoughtful” management and “wise” use of resources that “were made to be shared”. Grace’s account also touches upon the inherent tensions between the subjects of population growth and environmental sustainability as she reflects on her decision to have a large family. Earlier in the interview, Grace described herself as being

“very devoted to family”, and that to her, family represents “the [very] source of joy in life”. She had reflected on her own upbringing within a large and loving family, which engaged in a “lot of family time” and being together; characteristics which she has sought to emulate within her own family. In the above extract, Grace draws upon the creation narrative as a means of resolving the inherent tension between having many children, which is traditionally considered a blessing in many religions (Ibid.), and environmental sustainability.

From the above discussion it is possible to see how Grace’s religious beliefs have structured the meanings that she associates with energy consumption in contrasting ways.

While Grace feels that her family are “entitled” to use resources (including energy) in the routine accomplishment of their everyday lives, her narrative seems to also suggest that her beliefs place a moral restraint on her consumption practices for the benefit of others.

In addition, Grace notes that what matters to her are “relationships [rather] than achievements or acclaim or you know even material things or status symbols [...] so it’s more about life than lifestyle if you know what I mean”. Here, she frames her spirituality in direct opposition to materialism, something that her husband (“we don’t placate our children with gadgets, but with time and attention” because “having all the latest things doesn’t necessarily bring any happiness") and children (“we’ve chosen to value time instead of possessions”- Lisa) also do. This rejection of purchasing new technologies does not stem from a concern for the environment nor for conserving energy, but rather, from their religiously informed ideology regarding ‘the good family’ (Edgell & Docka, 2007).

Within this family-oriented rhetoric, the Thomas’s Christian faith provides them with a moral code that prioritises collective wellbeing rather than individualistic ideologies and mainstream mores. Indeed, Richard’s aforementioned statements could be interpreted as a criticism of fast-paced fashion associated with the development of domestic technologies, which ‘creates a rapidly changing and continuous sequence of new wants’

(Haddon, 1992; 52). Richard’s contention that “want and use without regard is kinda how we got into this mess in the first place as a society” certainly seems to support this.

It is important to note, however, that the Thomas’s do not reject the ownership of entertainment media and information and communication technologies (ICT). Instead, the family reject the ‘constantly raising standards’ associated with technological advancement (Håkansson & Sengers, 2013), and choose instead to focus on relationships and being satisfied with what they have.