Reimagining Ecofeminism: Religious Hermeneutics and Ecotheology as Conceptual Tools for Intergenerational Climate Ethics

Abstract

The climate crisis is now a defining challenge of the Anthropocene era, underscoring humanity’s profound impact on Earth’s ecosystems and the ethical responsibilities that accompany this influence. This paper explores how religious and philosophical frameworks can provide transformative approaches to the climate crisis, particularly through the lens of intergenerational ethics. Ecofeminism critiques humanity’s exploitative relationship with nature, advocating for an ethos of respect and intrinsic appreciation—a perspective that has evolved into fourth wave feminism, embracing digital activism and intersectionality. Similarly, Pope Francis’ ecotheology calls for a “conversion of heart” that redefines humanity’s relationship with the environment, urging us to view nature not as a mere resource for exploitation but as a fraternal partner deserving of care and respect. Hans-Georg Gadamer’s “hermeneutics of appreciation” further complements this perspective by demonstrating how language and dialogue shape our attitudes and behaviors toward nature. Moreover, contemporary ecofeminist voices have exemplified how historical insights are extended through modern, intergenerational climate justice initiatives. By integrating ecofeminism, Gadamerian hermeneutics, and Pope Francis’ ecotheology, this paper proposes a comprehensive framework for addressing the ethical, spiritual, and philosophical dimensions of the climate crisis. It emphasizes the need for a fraternal and inclusive relationship with nature, aligning with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 13 on climate action. This interdisciplinary approach contributes to the scholarly discourse on religion, spirituality, and sustainability, offering novel insights for meaningful ecological change in a rapidly evolving global context.

1. Introduction

The term ‘ecofeminism’ was coined in 1974 by French feminist Françoise d’Eaubonne (1974) to highlight the potential of feminist perspectives to bring about an ecological revolution. Since then, ecofeminism has emerged globally as a powerful political movement and theoretical framework (Warren 2001). Ecofeminists argue that male-dominated cultures thrive on sexism, racism, class exploitation, and environmental destruction. They strongly oppose the exploitation of both women and nature worldwide. Ecofeminism calls on people of all genders to reimagine the world in non-hierarchical ways, recognizing that diverse perspectives are essential for dismantling oppressive systems (Meierdiercks 2024). In this effort, the feminist movement and the environmental movement work together based on the shared belief in egalitarian, non-hierarchical systems (Anjum 2020). Moreover, ecofeminism integrates insights from both feminism and environmentalism, striving to combat the “devaluation” and oppression of women and nature (Hall 2014). Contemporary ecofeminist scholarship has evolved to embrace intersectionality and digital activism; often referred to as fourth wave feminism (Mohajan 2022; Ozden 2023), thereby extending early ecofeminist insights in order to address the contributions of women and gender minorities while reflecting the dynamic challenges of the 21st century (Balabantaray 2023; Ergas et al. 2021).

Recent feminist engagements with Gadamer’s work, such as Catherine Homan’s Gadamer and Feminism (2021) and the volume Feminist Interpretations of Hans-Georg Gadamer (Code 2003), have critiqued Gadamer’s original formulations for their androcentrism and offered reinterpretations that integrate women’s experiences into the hermeneutical process. These works highlight how Gadamer’s emphasis on dialogue, historical consciousness, and the fusion of horizons can be reconfigured to support ecofeminist principles—specifically, by fostering a “hermeneutics of appreciation” that recognizes the intrinsic value of nature and promotes care. In this paper, we draw on these feminist reinterpretations to demonstrate how Gadamer’s insights contribute to a more inclusive and transformative approach to ecofeminist thought.

In pursuing a more holistic approach to environmental stewardship, ecofeminism aligns harmoniously with the Christian notion of ecotheology, emphasizing the role of theology in shaping humanity’s attitudes toward the environment. According to Laudato Si’ (Praise Be), an encyclical letter by Pope Francis (2015), the Earth is our “common home” and deserves to be treated with the utmost care and respect. Laudato Si’: On Care for Our Common Home is Pope Francis’ appeal to “every person living on this planet” for an inclusive dialogue about how we are shaping the future of the Earth (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops 2024). In this document, Pope Francis calls for an ecological conversion—a transformation of hearts and minds toward greater love for God, one another, and creation. This process involves acknowledging humanity’s contributions to social and ecological crises and acting in ways that foster healing and the renewal of our common home (Laudato Si’ Movement 2022). Moreover, this paper foregrounds intergenerational ethics by emphasizing that our current environmental decisions must safeguard the well-being of future generations. Recent youth-led movements and digital activism, which have become central to contemporary climate justice initiatives, have altogether emphasized the importance of intergenerational perspectives in shaping sustainable futures (Aiello and Di Martino 2024; Trott 2024).

This appeal underscores the vital role of dialogue and conversation in addressing critical global issues and shaping attitudes and behaviors toward sustainable solutions. This aligns with Gadamer’s hermeneutics, which views language as fundamental to the interpretive process. Gadamer posits that understanding is inherently interpretive, as it creates the “hermeneutical horizon” within which a text’s meaning emerges. To express the meaning and subject matter of a text, we must translate it into our own language (Gadamer [1960] 2004, p. 414). Human behavior is profoundly shaped by how we interpret the world, which is influenced by the language we use, thereby affecting actions and responses (Gadamer [1960] 2004, p. 407).

The Gadamerian hermeneutic approach serves as a bridge, connecting ecofeminism and ecotheology to inspire ecological change. This connection begins with mutual understanding, fostering dialogue and conversation as tools to combat environmental degradation. This paper explores a holistic response to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13, which focuses on combating climate change and its impacts. By integrating historical insights with contemporary ecofeminist thought, this framework not only critiques past and ongoing exploitative practices, but also informs current strategies for climate mitigation, adaptation, and resilience—as envisioned in SDG 13. More importantly, it also echoes the work of modern intersectional activists who are expanding on earlier ecofeminist ideas to drive intergenerational climate justice.

This conceptual paper integrates ecofeminism, Gadamerian hermeneutics, and ecotheology to propose a transformative framework for addressing the ethical, spiritual, and linguistic dimensions of the climate crisis. By drawing on these interdisciplinary perspectives, the study highlights the role of language, mutual understanding, and values in fostering a sustainable relationship with nature and in guiding both current and future climate action. To develop this framework, the paper is structured into three main sections. The first section, Ecofeminism: A Transformative Response to Environmental Degradation, examines the critical role of ecofeminism in addressing the interconnected oppressions of gender and ecology, offering a vision for egalitarian and non-exploitative relationships with the environment. The second section, Gadamerian Hermeneutics, explores how Gadamer’s philosophy of interpretation and language informs a deeper understanding of human attitudes toward nature. The third section, Toward Formulating an Ecotheological Response to Addressing SDG 13 on Climate Action: A Hermeneutical Ecofeminist Perspective, integrates the perspectives drawn from the first two sections into a cohesive conceptual framework, advocating for a transformative approach to addressing climate change and fostering ecological justice. Finally, Intersections and Divergences in Addressing Climate Change offers a comparative analysis of where these frameworks converge, where they diverge (including their blind spots around power and exclusion), and how their integration can yield more inclusive and effective strategies for achieving SDG 13.

2. Ecofeminism: A Transformative Response to Environmental Degradation

Ecofeminism has become an essential framework for addressing the escalating environmental crisis. By linking feminist thought with ecological advocacy, it highlights how patriarchal power structures harm both women and the Earth (d’Eaubonne 1974; Shiva 1988). Rather than treating social injustice and ecological destruction as separate issues, ecofeminism insists that they are deeply interconnected, demonstrating how cultural norms—particularly those shaped by patriarchy—have fostered exploitative relationships between humans and nature (Merchant 1980; Warren 2000). Although these foundational insights emerged in the latter part of the 20th century, their relevance has only grown as we confront contemporary challenges such as climate change, pollution, deforestation, and biodiversity loss (United Nations 2015).

From its inception, ecofeminism has not only diagnosed the causes of ecological collapse, but has also advocated for transformative strategies grounded in an ethic of care and mutual responsibility (Plumwood 1993; Warren 2000). Drawing on feminist theory, postcolonial studies, indigenous knowledge, spirituality, and systems thinking, ecofeminism challenges exploitative structures rooted in sexism, racism, colonialism, and capitalism (Shiva 1988). Scholars have expanded the concept of care beyond interpersonal responsibilities to encompass a broader stewardship of the environment. For example, Plumwood (1993) argues that care compels us to reimagine how society interacts with nature, while Warren (2000) maintains that an ethic of care is essential for fostering both social and environmental justice. In addition, feminist theorists such as Tronto (1993) and Noddings (1984) have developed comprehensive ethics of care that advocate for nurturing practices and a transformative reorientation of cultural narratives—asserting that the ‘movement of care’ is not merely sentimental but a robust ethical challenge to existing exploitative structures. Consequently, ecofeminism calls for inclusive policies, transformative cultural shifts, and communal practices that reimagine and strengthen the relationship between humanity and the natural world (LaDuke 1999).

The ecofeminist movement gained momentum during the 1970s and 1980s, a period marked by growing environmental awareness and women’s push for economic and reproductive rights (Merchant 1980). French feminist Francoise d’Eaubonne coined the term “ecofeminism” in 1974, urging women to leverage their collective power to combat environmental harm (d’Eaubonne 1974). She argued that the same forces enabling the marginalization of women also drove the relentless exploitation of nature. Early ecofeminist activism, such as the Chipko Movement in India and the Green Belt Movement in Kenya, exemplified how local women’s knowledge is critical to ecological sustainability (Shiva 1989; Maathai 2006). These movements linked forest conservation and reforestation with community empowerment, highlighting the synergy between environmental advocacy and gender justice (Warren 2000).

Building on these foundational efforts, ecofeminism has expanded to incorporate indigenous perspectives, critiques of colonialism, and concerns about environmental racism (LaDuke 1999; Menchú 1998). Scholars and activists like Vandana Shiva, Winona LaDuke, and Rigoberta Menchú have shown that ecological devastation disproportionately affects marginalized populations, particularly indigenous women (LaDuke 1999; Menchú 1998; Shiva 1989). This reinforces ecofeminism’s insistence on intersectionality, acknowledging that experiences of oppression vary by race, class, culture, and geography (Crenshaw 1989). In doing so, ecofeminism avoids framing “women’s issues” as universally identical, instead recognizing the nuance and complexity of these struggles (Warren 2000).

Central to ecofeminism is its critique of traditional dualisms—mind versus body, culture versus nature, and man versus woman—which have historically enabled the subordination of both women and the Earth (Plumwood 1993). By privileging rationality and culture (often associated with masculinity) over emotion and nature (frequently linked to femininity), patriarchal structures justify exploitation (Merchant 1980). Ecofeminists advocate for a relational understanding of life, emphasizing humanity’s embeddedness within ecological systems rather than a position of superiority (Shiva 1988). This vision resonates with systems thinking, where disturbances in one part of an ecosystem ripple throughout the entire network (LaDuke 1999), and aligns with feminist theories of care that prioritize empathy and cooperation over domination (Warren 2000).

Ecofeminism also critiques capitalist economic systems, highlighting how unbridled capitalism prioritizes perpetual growth and profit at the expense of marginalized communities and the environment (Shiva 1988). Women’s unpaid or underpaid labor—such as caregiving and household management—mirrors nature’s undervalued role in providing essential resources (Merchant 1980). Capitalist profit motives routinely externalize ecological costs, allowing pollution, deforestation, and greenhouse gas emissions to persist with minimal accountability (d’Eaubonne 1974; Warren 2000). Ecofeminists call for production and distribution models rooted in equity, sustainability, and cooperation such as community-driven economies and cooperative agriculture (Shiva 1989).

Spiritual and cultural dimensions also play a crucial role in ecofeminism (Plumwood 1993). Many ecofeminists draw on Earth-based spiritualities, indigenous cosmologies, and religious traditions that regard nature as sacred (LaDuke 1999; Menchú 1998). Rejecting anthropocentrism, which places humans above the natural world, ecofeminists emphasize the intrinsic worth of nature (Warren 2000). By challenging cultural narratives that depict “Mother Earth” as a resource to be exploited, they seek to reimagine symbols and stories to celebrate cooperation, interdependence, and respect for life (Shiva 1988).

The tangible impact of ecofeminism can be seen in numerous grassroots initiatives worldwide. In India’s Chipko Movement, for instance, women physically embraced trees to prevent logging, directly linking forest conservation to their community’s well-being (Shiva 1989). The Green Belt Movement in Kenya, founded by Wangari Maathai, offers another compelling example: by planting millions of trees, women not only restored degraded landscapes but also secured firewood, protected watersheds, and gained leadership skills (Maathai 2006). Similarly, women across Latin America have mobilized against large-scale mining and infrastructure projects that threaten local ecosystems, advocating for community-driven approaches that balance ecological needs with human livelihoods (Menchú 1998).

Such grassroots activism also influences policymaking, demonstrating that women’s leadership yields innovative solutions (Warren 2000). Whether forming water-management committees in rural areas or participating in participatory budgeting at the municipal level, their involvement promotes more inclusive and accountable environmental governance (LaDuke 1999). This synergy between local knowledge and democratic processes often results in fairer resource distribution and more effective conservation strategies (Shiva 1989). Ecofeminist-informed education further advances this cause, as teachers integrate scientific and social-justice perspectives to help students understand how gender, ecology, and power intersect (Crenshaw 1989; Warren 2000). By exposing future leaders to nuanced approaches, ecofeminism equips them to shape institutions in more sustainable and equitable ways (United Nations 2015).

In recent years, ecofeminism has evolved into what many term fourth wave feminism; an approach that embraces digital activism, intersectionality, and intergenerational perspectives (Mohajan 2022; Ozden 2023). Contemporary movements have emerged that build on historical ecofeminist insights while addressing modern challenges. For instance, youth leaders like Greta Thunberg have harnessed the power of social media to mobilize global climate strikes, drawing attention to the urgent need for political action on climate change and thereby amplifying ecofeminist calls for environmental justice (Sabherwal et al. 2021; Thunberg 2021). Meanwhile, established figures such as Vandana Shiva continue to challenge industrial agriculture and promote biodiversity and sustainable, community-based farming practices, emphasizing the importance of indigenous knowledge in combating environmental degradation (Aboorva and Mani 2024; Hrynkow 2018). Similarly, Winona LaDuke has been a steadfast advocate for indigenous rights and environmental protection in North America, demonstrating how ecofeminist principles can inform local economic development and land stewardship (Almassi 2021).

Several new voices like Vanessa Nakate bring critical African perspectives to the global climate dialogue, highlighting the disproportionate impacts of climate change on marginalized communities and the need for inclusive climate policies (Nakate 2021). Autumn Peltier drew international attention to indigenous water rights and the necessity of preserving freshwater resources, underscoring the link between environmental health and social equity (Stefanovic and Atleo 2021). Additionally, Leah Thomas—often known as “Green Girl”—has effectively connected environmental issues with racial and social justice, promoting intersectional strategies that address systemic environmental inequalities (Fishman-Weaver and Clingan 2023). Finally, Xiye Bastida has combined her indigenous heritage with digital mobilization to inspire and organize youth-driven climate action, exemplifying how the next generation is actively engaged in shaping climate policy (Driver 2022). Collectively, these contemporary figures illustrate how ecofeminist principles continue to inspire innovative forms of climate justice and mobilize people of all genders, bridging historical insights with modern, intergenerational activism.

Despite its extensive influence, ecofeminism has faced critiques and challenges. Early formulations risked essentializing women as inherently closer to nature, inadvertently reinforcing stereotypes (Warren 2000). Intersectional ecofeminists counter this by emphasizing that connections between women and nature arise from cultural, historical, and material circumstances—not innate biological links (Crenshaw 1989). These connections vary across societies and are mediated by race, class, and geography (LaDuke 1999). Another challenge is scaling ecofeminist principles. While grassroots movements excel at raising awareness and implementing local solutions, systemic problems like climate change demand large-scale collective action (United Nations 2015). Ecofeminists argue that local activism can inspire broader policy changes by modeling effective practices and pressuring governments to adopt ethical, inclusive regulations (Warren 2000). However, bridging the divide between grassroots efforts and global institutions remains a complex task, further complicated by resistance from entrenched power structures (Merchant 1980).

However, the urgency of environmental degradation makes ecofeminist perspectives indispensable (d’Eaubonne 1974; Shiva 1988). Climate change, in particular, poses a defining challenge of our time, with women—especially those in low-income and indigenous communities—often disproportionately affected by droughts, floods, and resource scarcity (Menchú 1998; United Nations 2015). By linking these inequities to systemic oppression, ecofeminism advocates for integrated solutions that address social vulnerability, ecological fragility, and deep-seated inequalities simultaneously (Plumwood 1993). International recognition of gender equality in environmental stewardship, as reflected in the SDGs (United Nations 2015), further underscores ecofeminism’s critical role in the global sustainability efforts.

In recent years, ecofeminism’s intersection with technology and renewable energy has demonstrated its adaptability. Clean energy projects can empower women in regions with limited infrastructure, but ecofeminists caution that such initiatives must include equitable ownership structures and community input to avoid replicating extractive models under a different guise (LaDuke 1999; Warren 2000). Digital platforms and social media further amplify ecofeminist initiatives by facilitating global knowledge exchange and connecting activists across cultural and geographic boundaries (Crenshaw 1989).

The continued success of ecofeminism depends on its inclusivity, intersectionality, and capacity to challenge oppressive norms at multiple levels (Merchant 1980; Warren 2000). Many ecofeminists are building alliances with labor organizations, indigenous rights groups, and environmental justice movements to amplify their impact and press for systemic transformation (Shiva 1989; Menchú 1998). While overcoming entrenched patriarchal capitalism remains a formidable task, ecofeminism’s holistic perspective offers a vital lens through which to envision a sustainable future.

In summary, ecofeminism is a movement of care—for one another, for ecosystems, and for the flourishing of future generations (Plumwood 1993; Warren 2000). By advocating a shift away from exploitative social and economic relations, it fosters empathy, shared responsibility, and mutual respect (d’Eaubonne 1974; Shiva 1989). The spiritual undertones within the movement remind us that nature deserves reverence, not commodification, and that cultural narratives should celebrate our interdependence with the planet (LaDuke 1999). Local projects, such as women-led agricultural initiatives or reforestation programs, illustrate ecofeminism’s tangible benefits by showing how rethinking gender roles and economic goals can restore both ecosystems and communities (Maathai 2006).

In sum, ecofeminism is a dynamic response to environmental degradation. It centers the experiences of those most affected—marginalized communities, indigenous peoples, and the economically vulnerable—while insisting that sustainable solutions must be grounded in social justice (Crenshaw 1989; United Nations 2015). By blending historical critique with constructive action, ecofeminism bridges theory and practice to foster new ways of relating to the Earth and each other. In an era of intensifying ecological crises, its message of solidarity, interdependence, and reverence for life offers a hopeful vision for a sustainable and equitable future.

3. Gadamerian Hermeneutics

The ecological crisis facing humanity today calls for innovative frameworks that challenge conventional approaches to environmental preservation. Hans-Georg Gadamer’s hermeneutics provides a philosophical foundation for rethinking humanity’s relationship with nature (Grondin 2015). By emphasizing dialogue, openness, and historical consciousness, Gadamerian hermeneutics offers a pathway to reconsider humanity’s role within and responsibility toward the environment (Gadamer [1960] 2004). When combined with ecofeminism, which critiques the interconnected exploitation of women and gender minorities and nature under patriarchal systems, Gadamer’s framework becomes a powerful tool for fostering ethical and sustainable environmental practices (Merchant 1980; Shiva 1988). Together, these perspectives offer a comprehensive approach to ecological challenges, prioritizing mutual respect, relationality, and transformative action.

Gadamerian hermeneutics rests on three core principles: historical consciousness, the fusion of horizons, and dialogue. Historical consciousness recognizes that understanding is shaped by traditions and cultural frameworks, making it essential to examine how historical attitudes, such as anthropocentrism, colonial exploitation, and mechanistic worldviews, have contributed to ecological degradation (Gadamer [1960] 2004). This awareness provides opportunities to reflect on past mistakes and inform sustainable practices that benefit both current and future generations. The fusion of horizons emphasizes the integration of diverse perspectives—encompassing varied cultural backgrounds, all gender identities, and intergenerational voices—to foster a richer understanding of the world (Gadamer [1960] 2004). Applied to environmental ethics, it suggests that humanity must reconcile its own views with the intrinsic value of nature to promote coexistence. Recognizing nature’s intrinsic worth means acknowledging that ecosystems possess value independent of their utility to humans—a concept that challenges dominant anthropocentric paradigms and supports an ethic of care central to ecofeminist thought (Plumwood 1993; Warren 2000). Dialogue, the third principle, underscores the importance of reciprocal engagement and listening. In an environmental context, this involves approaching nature as a partner in conversation rather than as an object of domination and exploitation (Gadamer [1960] 2004).

Ecofeminism complements Gadamerian hermeneutics by challenging dualistic thinking and hierarchical systems that prioritize domination over relationality. Ecofeminism highlights parallels between the exploitation of women and gender minorities and the degradation of nature, critiquing patriarchal systems that have historically devalued both (Merchant 1980; Plumwood 1993; Shiva 1988). It advocates for an ethic of care, empathy, and interconnectedness, encouraging humanity to embrace a holistic worldview that values all life forms. Ecofeminists argue that the domination of nature is not inevitable but rather a product of cultural, historical, and economic systems that can and should be transformed (Shiva 1988). By emphasizing the intrinsic worth of the environment and rejecting exploitative practices, ecofeminism aligns closely with Gadamer’s focus on relationality and mutual respect.

The intersection of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism provides valuable insights into reimagining humanity’s relationship with the natural world. Both frameworks reject dominance-based relationships in favor of dialogue and reciprocity. Gadamer’s dialogical approach complements ecofeminism’s rejection of anthropocentrism, fostering a partnership with the environment rather than a dynamic of control (Gadamer [1960] 2004; Shiva 1988). Gadamer’s emphasis on the role of language in shaping perceptions further enriches ecofeminist critiques of language that objectifies and commodifies nature. For example, terms like “natural resources” reduce the environment to an exploitable object, whereas adopting language such as “living ecosystems” can inspire attitudes that support preservation (Merchant 1980; Warren 2000).

Recent feminist engagements with Gadamer’s work have further illuminated the potential for his hermeneutics to support ecofeminist principles. For instance, Homan (2021), through his feminist interpretative phenomenological analysis, aims to offer voices to the marginalized while Code’s (2003) epistemological approach highlighted the importance of women’s experiences in the generation of knowledge. These ideas critique Gadamer’s original formulations for their androcentrism and offer reinterpretations that integrate women’s experiences into the hermeneutical process. These works illustrate that Gadamer’s core concepts—such as dialogue, historical consciousness, and the fusion of horizons—can be reconfigured to affirm the intrinsic value of nature, thereby fostering what has been termed a hermeneutics of appreciation. Moreover, the transformative power of language—as described above—finds resonance in contemporary ecofeminist activism. Modern voices such as Greta Thunberg, Vanessa Nakate, Autumn Peltier, Leah Thomas, and Xiye Bastida, along with enduring figures like Vandana Shiva and Winona LaDuke, demonstrate how the transformation of exploitative narratives into narratives of appreciation and embracing digital dialogue can further empower marginalized communities and promote intergenerational climate justice. Their work underscores that the hermeneutical process is not only a theoretical exercise, but a dynamic, lived practice that continues to evolve in the 21st century.

Historical awareness in Gadamerian hermeneutics also enhances ecofeminist critiques of historical systems that have perpetuated ecological harm. For instance, colonialism not only subjugated indigenous populations, but also exploited their lands and ecosystems (Plumwood 1993). Recognizing these histories is essential for addressing environmental injustices and fostering ethical approaches to stewardship. Similarly, Gadamer’s fusion of horizons complements ecofeminism’s emphasis on interconnectedness by encouraging the integration of human-centered and nature-centered values, fostering solidarity and promoting a shift from exploitation to stewardship (Gadamer [1960] 2004; Shiva 1988).

The integration of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism offers practical applications for environmental preservation. One such application is the reinterpretation of cultural narratives. Many religious and cultural traditions have justified human dominance over nature such as the Biblical notion of “dominion” over the Earth. Gadamerian hermeneutics encourages revisiting these texts to uncover meanings that align with care and stewardship (Gadamer [1960] 2004). Similarly, ecofeminists reinterpret concepts like “Mother Earth” to emphasize nurturing and reciprocity rather than exploitation. Reframing these narratives can inspire more ethical and sustainable relationships with the environment (Shiva 1988; Warren 2000).

In policymaking, Gadamer’s dialogical approach fosters inclusive discussions that incorporate diverse perspectives, particularly those of marginalized groups such as indigenous communities, women, and gender minorities (Plumwood 1993; Shiva 1988). Ecofeminism complements this by ensuring that relational ethics and social justice remain central to these dialogues. Together, these frameworks promote participatory governance that respects both human and ecological needs. The adoption of ethical language further strengthens this collaboration. Changing how societies speak about the environment can profoundly influence attitudes and behaviors. For instance, referring to wetlands as “vital ecosystems” rather than “unused lands” underscores their ecological significance and fosters preservation (Merchant 1980; Warren 2000).

Educational initiatives also benefit from integrating Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism. Hermeneutics encourages critical reflection on the historical and cultural assumptions about nature, while ecofeminism deepens our understanding of interconnectedness and care (Plumwood 1993; Warren 2000). Together, these perspectives can cultivate ethical and sustainable worldviews among students, equipping future generations to address ecological challenges with empathy and responsibility. Grassroots movements provide compelling examples of these frameworks in action. Initiatives such as the Chipko Movement in India, where communities protected forests by physically embracing trees, and the Green Belt Movement in Kenya, where local leaders mobilized to plant millions of trees, demonstrate the effectiveness of relational and dialogical approaches in achieving environmental preservation (Shiva 1989; Maathai 2006).

The principles of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism align with the United Nations’ SDGs, particularly SDG 13, which emphasizes climate action. Both frameworks advocate systemic change and collaboration to address environmental crises. By fostering dialogue, relational ethics, and inclusive decision-making, they guide humanity toward practices that balance ecological sustainability with social equity (United Nations 2015). Grassroots ecofeminist movements and hermeneutical efforts to bridge diverse perspectives offer valuable contributions to achieving these goals.

In summary, the integration of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism presents a transformative ethic for environmental preservation. Both reject exploitative paradigms, advocating instead for dialogue, mutual respect, and relational understanding. Together, they encourage societies to rethink values and practices, shifting from domination to partnership with nature. This hermeneutical ecofeminist ethic provides both practical and philosophical tools for addressing ecological crises. By fostering ethical language, inclusive dialogue, and relational understanding, it offers a pathway for reimagining humanity’s role within the natural world. As environmental challenges intensify, this collaborative approach provides hope for a more sustainable and just coexistence with the Earth.

4. Toward Formulating an Ecotheological Response to Addressing SDG 13 on Climate Action: A Hermeneutical Ecofeminist Perspective

Climate change stands as one of the most pressing global crises, threatening ecosystems, human well-being, and the sustainability of life on Earth. While the United Nations’ SDG 13 calls for urgent action through mitigation, adaptation, and resilience, addressing the climate crisis also requires a deeper transformation—one that is cultural, ethical, and spiritual. An ecotheological response, grounded in the integration of ecological awareness and theological reflection, offers such a transformative framework. Drawing on Hans-Georg Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics, ecotheology can deepen its impact by cultivating historical consciousness, recognizing how theological traditions have been shaped within specific cultural contexts that often contributed to anthropocentric worldviews. Through the fusion of horizons, ecotheology invites an interpretive openness where past theological insights engage with contemporary ecological concerns, allowing new meanings to emerge from the interplay between tradition and ecological urgency. Central to this process is dialogue, not only among faith traditions and ecological sciences, but also with the more-than-human world—affirming relationality and mutual care as theological imperatives. When enriched by ecofeminism’s emphasis on interconnectedness and justice, this Gadamerian ecotheology becomes a powerful lens for confronting both environmental degradation and the structural inequalities that perpetuate it.

Thus, ecotheology combines ecological awareness with theological reflection, critiquing anthropocentrism and affirming the intrinsic value of all creation. It recognizes the ethical and spiritual dimensions of environmental stewardship, emphasizing principles of care, interconnectedness, and justice (Pope Francis 2015). These principles align with the objectives of SDG 13, which seeks to combat climate change while ensuring equity, particularly for vulnerable populations, women, and gender minorities. Central to ecotheology is the belief that creation is sacred, and that humanity has a moral obligation to protect it. This perspective is rooted in many religious traditions such as the Christian concept of stewardship (Genesis 2:15) and indigenous cosmologies that stress balance and reciprocity (Deloria 1999). By critiquing overconsumption, materialism, and exploitative practices, ecotheology provides a moral framework for sustainable action.

Gadamerian hermeneutics offers a meaningful contribution to ecotheology by emphasizing that understanding is not a fixed interpretation but a living, evolving process shaped by context, tradition, and open engagement. This approach deepens ecotheological reflection by encouraging critical awareness of how historical and cultural forces—such as colonialism, capitalism, and patriarchy—have distorted humanity’s relationship with the Earth. By confronting these inherited worldviews, ecotheology becomes a transformative space for reimagining more just and compassionate ways of inhabiting the planet. Gadamer’s ([1960] 2004) emphasis on the dialogical nature of understanding invites a mutual exchange between theological traditions and ecological wisdom, fostering a posture of humility and receptivity. Rather than approaching nature as a resource to be mastered, this hermeneutical stance calls for an ethic of listening and response—an openness to the sacred presence within creation. In this way, ecotheology grounded in hermeneutical insight promotes a relational spirituality that honors the interconnectedness of all life and seeks ecological justice as an expression of faith.

On the other hand, ecofeminism aligns closely with both ecotheology and Gadamerian hermeneutics by challenging dualistic thinking that separates humanity from nature and hierarchical systems that privilege domination over relationality (Merchant 1980; Plumwood 1993). It emphasizes justice, interconnectedness, and care, promoting a worldview that values all life forms. Ecofeminism also addresses the social dimensions of climate change, highlighting how marginalized groups, particularly women, gender minorities, and indigenous communities, disproportionately bear environmental harm. By integrating Gadamer’s dialogical principles, ecofeminism strengthens its capacity to foster mutual understanding and advocate for systemic change.

The intersection of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism creates a synergistic framework for addressing climate action through an ecotheological lens. Both frameworks reject dominance-based relationships in favor of mutual respect and reciprocity. Gadamer’s fusion of horizons complements ecofeminism’s emphasis on interconnectedness by integrating diverse worldviews. Similarly, both frameworks emphasize the transformative power of language. Gadamerian hermeneutics underscores how language shapes understanding, while ecofeminism critiques language that objectifies and commodifies nature. Reframing terms like “natural resources” to “living ecosystems” fosters a deeper appreciation and more sustainable practices. Historical consciousness within Gadamerian hermeneutics enriches ecofeminism’s critique of systemic oppression, such as colonialism, which subjugated indigenous peoples while exploiting their lands and ecosystems. Recognizing these histories is essential for addressing environmental injustice and developing ethical approaches to climate action. Together, Gadamer’s dialogical principles and ecofeminism’s call for relational ethics provide a pathway for equitable and sustainable solutions.

An ecotheological response informed by Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism offers practical applications for addressing SDG 13. One approach is the reinterpretation of cultural narratives. Many religious and cultural traditions have justified human dominance over nature, such as the Biblical notion of “dominion”, but Gadamerian hermeneutics encourages revisiting these texts to uncover meanings aligned with stewardship and care. Ecofeminism, likewise, reframes concepts like “Mother Earth” to emphasize nurturing and reciprocity rather than exploitation. These reinterpretations inspire ethical and sustainable relationships with the environment.

A hermeneutical ecofeminist framework offers a powerful and integrative approach to ecotheology, combining the interpretive depth of philosophical hermeneutics with the justice-oriented lens of ecofeminism. Rooted in Gadamer’s emphasis on dialogical understanding, this framework fosters inclusive and participatory approaches to climate action that embrace the lived experiences, wisdom, and voices of historically marginalized groups including women, indigenous peoples, and socially excluded communities. This dialogical orientation aligns with ecofeminism’s core commitment to social justice, ensuring that ecological policies are not only environmentally sound but also attuned to the interwoven struggles of gender, class, and cultural inequality.

This framework finds tangible expression in grassroots movements that reflect the relational and dialogical ethos at its core. For instance, the Chipko Movement in India and the Green Belt Movement in Kenya embody ecofeminist principles in action—mobilizing local communities, particularly women, to protect forests, restore ecosystems, and advocate for climate justice (Shiva 1989; Maathai 2006). Recent research from Sikkim, India, demonstrates how community-based tourism and water governance practices incorporate ecofeminist insights to promote equitable development and environmental stewardship (Prakash et al. 2024). Similarly, in Toronto, Canada, urban nature connection programs help participants cultivate meaningful relationships with green spaces while resisting the dominant, extractivist narratives of environmental management (Grimwood 2017). These examples show how ecofeminist-informed hermeneutical engagement leads to context-sensitive, locally driven responses that advance the goals of SDG 13.

Contemporary ecofeminist voices continue to enrich this framework, particularly through digital and intersectional activism. Figures such as Greta Thunberg, Vanessa Nakate, Autumn Peltier, Leah Thomas, and Xiye Bastida, alongside enduring advocates like Vandana Shiva and Winona LaDuke, exemplify how intergenerational, gender-inclusive, and culturally rooted activism reclaims space in global ecological discourse. Their efforts bridge historical ecofeminist insights with present-day challenges, highlighting the urgency of reimagining climate justice through relational, inclusive, and dialogical approaches.

Furthermore, the integration of ecofeminism and Gadamerian hermeneutics encourages the adoption of sustainable lifestyles as a moral and spiritual imperative. Ecofeminism’s ethic of simplicity and sufficiency resonates with hermeneutical calls for self-reflection and transformation. Practices such as mindful consumption, waste reduction, and support for renewable energy are not merely technical solutions but expressions of a deeper relational ethos—one that respects the Earth as a co-participant in the moral community. Ethical language and symbolic action rooted in relationality can help catalyze wider behavioral shifts toward ecological responsibility.

Despite its transformative potential, this integrative framework faces considerable challenges. Resistance from dominant political and economic systems, the diversity of religious and cultural worldviews, and the often-fragmented interface between secular and spiritual discourse in policy arenas can hinder its wider adoption. However, the opportunities are equally vast. Religious institutions—endowed with moral authority, cultural capital, and extensive grassroots networks—are uniquely positioned to inspire ecological consciousness, advocate for justice-centered climate policies, and nurture cultural transformation. As such, a hermeneutical ecofeminist ecotheology not only offers a critical framework for interpreting the ecological crisis, but also a hopeful, embodied path toward healing and renewal.

In essence, a hermeneutical ecofeminist response to SDG 13 integrates ethical, spiritual, and practical dimensions of climate action. By emphasizing relationality, dialogue, and justice, this approach addresses both the root causes of environmental crises and their social consequences. As humanity confronts the urgent challenges of climate change, the complementary insights of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism offer a transformative pathway for reimagining relationships with the Earth. This holistic vision fosters sustainable practices, equitable policies, and a deeper sense of moral responsibility, paving the way for a just and harmonious coexistence with the natural world.

5. Intersections and Divergences in Addressing Climate Change

In examining the theoretical contributions of Gadamerian hermeneutics, ecofeminism, and ecotheology, several common themes emerge. All three frameworks emphasize the importance of dialogue and relationality in understanding human interactions with the environment. Gadamer’s concept of the “fusion of horizons” advocates for an open exchange of perspectives, enabling a deeper, more inclusive understanding of complex social and ecological issues. Ecofeminism similarly stresses the need for care and mutual responsibility, asserting that the exploitation of nature is intimately linked with the marginalization of women and other oppressed groups. Ecotheology, as articulated in Pope Francis’ Laudato Si’, calls for a “conversion of heart” that redefines humanity’s relationship with the Earth as a sacred, fraternal bond rather than a mere resource for exploitation. However, notable divergences also exist. Gadamer’s original formulations have been critiqued for their androcentrism and limited attention to gender, as highlighted by recent feminist scholarship. Ecofeminist theorists argue that integrating women’s experiences and those of other marginalized groups is essential for a full understanding of environmental degradation. In this sense, ecofeminism challenges Gadamer’s traditional perspective by insisting that the “fusion of horizons” must incorporate voices that have historically been excluded. Moreover, while ecofeminism emphasizes an ethic of care, extending care beyond interpersonal relationships to include stewardship of nature, ecotheology grounds its arguments in religious and spiritual narratives, which sometimes remain anchored in traditional interpretations that may not fully account for contemporary socio-political complexities.

The synthesis of these approaches in our framework is where the novelty emerges. By critically comparing their convergences and divergences, we reveal how Gadamer’s emphasis on language and dialogue can be reinterpreted through ecofeminist lenses to overcome historical omissions and incorporate a “hermeneutics of appreciation” that affirms the intrinsic value of nature. This integrated approach not only challenges exploitative paradigms, but also highlights the need to address power dynamics and cultural biases; issues that ecofeminist scholars have long argued are central to achieving social and environmental justice. Furthermore, while each framework individually contributes valuable insights, their intersection yields a robust, actionable strategy for addressing climate change. For instance, ecofeminism’s focus on care and intersectionality complements Gadamer’s call for the integration of diverse perspectives, and together, they offer practical pathways such as reinterpreting cultural narratives and fostering inclusive dialogues that are directly applicable to the SDGs, particularly SDG 13. By engaging with both historical and contemporary voices, our framework not only bridges past insights with modern challenges, but also identifies gaps, such as the need for greater attention to power relations, that can inform more inclusive, transformative strategies for climate action.

6. Conclusions

As the world grapples with the accelerating impacts of climate change, it is increasingly clear that technical solutions alone cannot address the profound ecological and social crises at hand. The United Nations’ SDG 13 underscores the urgent need for transformative action to mitigate climate change, adapt to its effects, and build resilient communities. Achieving these goals requires more than technological advancements; it demands a fundamental reorientation of humanity’s values, attitudes, and practices toward the environment. This paper explored the potential of an ecotheological response, grounded in the complementary insights of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism, to foster such a transformation.

Gadamerian hermeneutics provides a dialogical framework for understanding, emphasizing openness, historical consciousness, and relationality. By challenging exploitative paradigms, it fosters mutual respect and understanding between humanity and nature. Ecofeminism, meanwhile, critiques patriarchal systems that perpetuate environmental degradation and social injustice, advocating for interconnectedness, care, and justice. Together, these frameworks offer a powerful lens for reimagining humanity’s relationship with the natural world.

The integration of Gadamerian hermeneutics and ecofeminism creates a holistic response to SDG 13, emphasizing relationality, ethical language, and inclusive dialogue. This approach not only critiques the roots of ecological crises, such as anthropocentrism, unchecked industrial expansion, and social inequities, but also provides actionable strategies for building sustainable and equitable systems. From reinterpreting cultural narratives to fostering grassroots movements and promoting sustainable lifestyles, this combined framework offers practical and transformative pathways for ecological renewal. Moreover, the dynamic contributions of contemporary ecofeminist voices—exemplified by youth-led climate movements and digital activism—demonstrate the intergenerational urgency of this transformation. Figures and initiatives representing people of all genders, such as those inspired by Greta Thunberg, alongside enduring advocates like Vandana Shiva, Winona LaDuke, Vanessa Nakate, Autumn Peltier, Leah Thomas, and Xiye Bastida, illustrate that the framework remains both relevant and forward-looking in the 21st century.

Ultimately, an ecotheological response rooted in hermeneutical ecofeminism invites humanity to undergo a profound ecological conversion. By recognizing the intrinsic value of all creation and fostering a shared sense of responsibility, this approach encourages the development of policies, practices, and cultural shifts aligned with the goals of SDG 13. In an era of unprecedented environmental challenges, the integration of these philosophical and ethical frameworks provides hope for a future where humanity lives in harmony with the Earth, fostering sustainability, justice, and mutual flourishing for generations to come.