The relationship between religious beliefs and attitudes towards climate change has been primarily studied in the United States, leaving a gap in cross-national understanding. This study addresses this gap by examining how trust in the Roman Catholic Church and opinions of Pope Francis influence Latin Americans' views on anthropogenic climate change. The research is timely given the increasing engagement of faith-based actors in high-level climate cooperation, particularly since Pope Francis's encyclical Laudato Si'. Laudato Si' has spurred significant interventions by the Pope into public discourse surrounding climate change, although its impact on public opinion varies across contexts and remains a topic of ongoing investigation. This study aims to provide a more nuanced understanding of how Laudato Si' may have influenced public support for climate policies in Latin America by differentiating between the “Pope Francis Effect” and the influence of general trust in the Catholic Church. Latin America presents a unique case study because, despite religious pluralism, the Roman Catholic Church retains considerable influence, especially given the political significance of Pope Francis in his home country of Argentina. The study is important because understanding the role of faith-based intermediaries, like the Catholic Church, in shaping public opinion is crucial for effective climate policy design and implementation. Their ability to place issues on the political agenda, influence policy design, and shape the behaviors of their members makes them pivotal actors in climate politics.

Existing research on the relationship between religious attitudes and environmental concerns, primarily focusing on the United States, presents mixed findings. Some studies suggest a negative correlation between Christian affiliation and environmental concern, attributing this to skepticism toward science rooted in the creation-evolution debate and a preference for individual over collective action. Other studies, however, find no or even positive relationships. The role of faith-based intermediaries in sustainability transitions has also gained attention, highlighting their function in connecting government actors with citizens and influencing policy design. This study builds upon this research by focusing on the specific context of Latin America, where the Catholic Church and evangelical churches play significantly different roles. Studies concerning Laudato Si'’s impact on public opinion regarding climate change are mostly focused on the United States. Therefore, this study aims to fill a significant gap in the research by focusing on Latin America and disentangling the impact of institutional trust (in the Catholic Church) and individual influence (Pope Francis) on attitudes towards climate change.

This study utilizes individual-level data from the 2017 Latinobarómetro survey, encompassing 18 Latin American countries and 13,472 respondents (approximately 68% of the original sample after listwise deletion for missing data). The outcome variable measures respondents' agreement with the statement that humans are primarily responsible for climate change, coded as an ordinal variable (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Key predictor variables include religious denomination (Roman Catholic, evangelical, other, none), trust in the Church (no trust to a lot of trust), and evaluation of Pope Francis (0-10 scale, very bad to very good). Control variables account for potential confounders such as religiosity, political ideology (left-right self-placement), age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, and education level. Given the hierarchical data structure (individuals nested within countries) and the ordinal nature of the dependent variable, multilevel mixed-effect ordered logistic regression models are employed. The models include fixed effects at the individual level and random effects at the country level to account for the clustered nature of the data. The models are estimated via maximum likelihood. A leave-one-out jackknife analysis is conducted to assess the robustness of findings across countries, and a separate analysis examines whether the Pope Francis effect is particularly pronounced in Argentina. Adjusted predicted probabilities are calculated to facilitate interpretation of the substantive effects.

The analysis reveals several key findings that challenge initial hypotheses. Contrary to expectations, Roman Catholics were less likely to believe in man-made climate change than evangelical Christians or those with no religious affiliation. Trust in the Catholic Church also negatively correlated with belief in anthropogenic climate change. However, a positive “Pope Francis effect” was observed; respondents with more favorable views of Pope Francis were significantly more likely to believe in human responsibility for climate change. Interestingly, the level of religiosity did not significantly affect climate change beliefs once trust in the Church and evaluation of Pope Francis were controlled for. The analysis further demonstrates that the positive evaluation of Pope Francis significantly moderates the negative relationship between trust in the Church and belief in anthropogenic climate change. This means that even those with high trust in the Church were more likely to accept human responsibility for climate change if they held a positive view of Pope Francis. The leave-one-out jackknife analysis confirmed the robustness of the main findings across all 18 countries. A further analysis revealed that the Pope Francis effect was not significantly stronger in Argentina than in other countries.

The findings highlight the complex interplay between religious affiliation, institutional trust, and individual leadership in shaping attitudes towards climate change. The unexpected finding that Roman Catholics are less likely to believe in anthropogenic climate change than evangelical Christians suggests that the institutional doctrine of the Church is not effectively communicated or internalized by its members. This may be due to the significant autonomy of local priests, whose views on environmental issues may diverge from the Vatican's stance. This finding underscores the importance of understanding the views of local priests and their role in shaping parishioners' opinions on climate change. The observation that evangelical Christians in Latin America don't show the same climate change skepticism as their US counterparts calls for further research to explore cross-national differences in the framing of climate change and the role of religious leaders. The study also emphasizes the importance of individual leaders, like Pope Francis, in shaping public opinion, even when institutional messaging may be inconsistent or ineffective. The Pope Francis effect highlights the potential for influential figures to counteract the negative impact of institutional trust on climate change beliefs. This study, focusing on the unique context of Latin America, contributes significantly to our understanding of the role of faith-based intermediaries in climate change politics. It also enhances our understanding of the contextual influences on religious institutions and how they affect public opinion.

This study demonstrates that while trust in the Roman Catholic Church negatively impacts belief in anthropogenic climate change among Latin Americans, the positive influence of Pope Francis significantly moderates this relationship. The findings suggest that effective climate action strategies should consider both institutional messaging and the role of influential individual leaders. Further research should investigate the views of local priests, cross-national differences in the framing of climate change within religious communities, and the impact of the Pope's messaging over time, using panel data. Additionally, studies examining behavioral change in response to religious doctrines would enhance understanding of the effectiveness of faith-based intermediaries in promoting climate action.

The study relies on cross-sectional data from 2017, limiting the ability to analyze changes in attitudes over time and the impact of events like the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of existing survey data restricts the range of questions available, potentially limiting a more comprehensive understanding of nuanced relationships. The focus on belief in anthropogenic climate change, rather than broader measures of climate action support, also limits the scope of the findings. Despite these limitations, the study offers valuable insights into the complexities of religious influence on climate change attitudes in Latin America.