does the economics of religion just miss the point?

I’ve often heard scholars assert that culture and social structure are really secondary to economics (e.g., see Fukuyama’s discusison of culture in his Trust book). When I hear such arguments, I think: “what about religion?” Religion is present in almost every society. It is a set of ideas that people are willing to do die for. And religious affiliations affect who we marry, how we work, how we vote, and how we live. Yet, it’s hard to chalk religion up to purely instrumental motives. It appears to be a purely cultural, and hugely important, aspect of human culture.

Of course, it doesn’t mean that people haven’t tried. There is the theory of religion as a club good, pushed by  Innaconne and others, which asserts that religious behavior (e.g., church affiliation and attendance) is driven by the desire to belong to exclusive groups. In an nutshell, it’s a rehash of Weber’s theory of status groups. Read Innaconne’s summary JEL article here, which explains his approach and many other topics in the economics of religion.  It would be crazy to dispute the key insight of the club good theory. Lots of people do join churches because of the social benefits and many denominations are set up to provide social and tangible goods to members. Coleman’s famous article on social capital relied on that crucial observation.

At the same time, the club good theory misses the most important thing about religion: it’s religious!! There is nothing in the theory that explains why groups based on spiritual beliefs should be more common, more successful, or more durable than non-religious groups. If religion is primarily a club good, why not just make a big fraternity and dicth God? And of course, secular fraternities to do exist but they don’t seem to be a serious competitor to religion. In fact, some groups, such as Middle Eastern populations, have chosen to become *more* religious in the face of secular Western social organization. God is not impressed with club goods. At this point, I think it would be sensible to appeal to social or psychological explanations of religion. Then one might use the club good theory to explain how social or pyschologically created demand leads to “market structure” (attendence, # of churches, etc).  Very econ soc, not very neo-classical.

[Via http://orgtheory.wordpress.com]