This dissertation provides a substantive study of the faith-based Mondragón Cooperative Movement in Spain and the Indra’s Net Life Community in Korea, analyzing and critically comparing the ethical values of Catholic Social Teaching and Socially Engaged Asian Buddhism. By evaluating the extent of their success in dealing with socioecological concerns, the importance of religio-ethical values and principles to the disciplines of social and environmental ethics is stressed, offering a new, religiously sensitive approach to ecological wellbeing. As this dissertation argues, the thought and work of Mondragón and Indra’s Net offer important resources for conceptualizing ecological ethics and social justice in and among human communities. This comparison considers two questions: First, what alternative economic system might engage, in context, socioecological religious values and be implemented as an alternative to neoclassical economics? Second, what socioecological ethical principles provide effective intellectual resources to critically assess today’s global economic and ecological crises, and suggest a way to resolve them? These questions are addressed by a study of the ethical and social implications of modern economic systems, as compared to a worker-owned cooperative movement and a socially engaged Asian Buddhist liberation movement, both of which offer an alternative to current economic configurations. Inspired by the communitarian personalist thought of Mondragón’s priest-founder, José María Arizmendiarrieta, and the ecological thought of the Venerable Tobŏp, based on Huayan Buddhism’s philosophy of "interdependent co-arising" (pratītyasamupāda), these grassroots socio-ecological movements provide relevant, religion-based social and ecological teachings that present concrete proposals for economic and social practice. Social Catholicism and socially engaged Buddhism, as evidenced by these two movements, apply a dynamic social-spiritual ideology consonant with their traditions' developing social-ecological consciousness, thereby striving to promote the wellbeing of Earth, humanity, and all life.

Is it possible to achieve ecological sustainability with our current democratic system? This question constitutes the democracy-environment nexus which has been a core theme in both the public debate as well as in research ever since the climate issue gained status of being a social problem in the 1970s. We are constantly presented with increasingly alarming science about the consequences of global warming. Yet, the coordinated political responses for effective measures against such consequences, are still missing. The question therefore remains highly relevant. One actor in society that certainly raises frustration about the neglected climate change responses, are the social movements. With a new wave of climate movements, we have seen key figures like Greta Thunberg take a seat at the tables during UN Climate summits. Fridays for Future among many other climate movements are criticizing the current democratic system’s lack of effective environmental policies. It is important to analyze their critique to understand if we need to change the current democratic system in order to tackle climate change. This paper aims to make a contribution to this debate by analyzing statements made by the new Swedish climate movement Återställ Våtmarker. For my analysis I use an analytical chart of the ideal types “ecological democracy” and “environmental democracy”, constructed by Jonathan Pickering, Karin Bäckstrand and David Schlosberg. These ideal types are used as a systematic concept of the democracy-environment nexus. The statements are found in my in-depth interview with one of the organization’s press contacts, on their website as well as in media. By categorizing the statements as either ecological democratic or environmental democratic I intend to conclude whether Återställ Våtmarker has an idea of democracy that poses systemic criticism towards our current system. The findings of this study support that Återställ Våtmarker’s view of democracy has more tendencies towards ecological democracy. In this paper, I have therefore found empirical evidence suggesting that Återställ Våtmarker pose systemic criticism towards our current democratic system.