Note: One of the criticisms leveled against the discipline of jurisprudence is that jurists have not issued clear and explicit fatwas to support natural resources, which has led to the gradual destruction of these resources in Islamic countries. However, Hujjat al-Islam Salman Behjat Ardakani holds a contrary view. This author and researcher of environmental jurisprudence believes that jurisprudence, its scholarly heritage, and its sources possess an extraordinary capacity to support environmental protection. As a member of the Environmental Steering Committee of the Seminaries and an expert at the Environmental Jurisprudence Research Desk at the Institute of Advanced Jurisprudence and Islamic Sciences, he highlights several examples of the capacity of jurisprudence to support the environment and natural resources in this exclusive interview. The full text of the interview follows:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: How do you evaluate the fatwas of jurists in support of environmental protection?

Ardakani: To answer this question, two aspects must be considered: 1) The attention of jurists to environmental issues within jurisprudential discussions; 2) The direct focus of jurists on environmental issues and issuing fatwas about them. Regarding the first aspect, it should be noted that environmental elements such as water, soil, plants, and animals have always been considered in the Shia jurisprudential heritage, as several jurisprudential chapters are related to environmental elements. These include chapters on sharecropping (muzāra‘a), tree-sharing contracts (musāqāt), land reclamation (ihyā’ mawāt), food and drink (at‘ima wa ashriba), and pilgrimage (hajj, where harming plants, animals, or insects is among the prohibitions of ihram). Additionally, jurisprudential discussions regarding the ownership of seas, lakes, rivers, groundwater, mountains, valleys, forests, reed beds, natural thickets, and pastures are found in authentic Shia jurisprudential sources under the concept of anfal (public resources). Moreover, certain jurisprudential rules, such as “no harm” (lā dharar), destruction (itlāf), disruption of order (ikhtilāl nizām), and wastefulness (isrāf), can be applied to environmental issues and human activities that damage nature.

Regarding the second aspect, according to the longstanding tradition of seminaries, jurists, who are always accessible to the public either directly or through their representatives, respond to religious questions from the faithful. Thus, fatwas are issued based on inquiries (istiftā’). It is evident that when environmental issues are raised with a jurist, the jurist, after understanding the nature and dimensions of the issue through proper identification of the subject matter, deduces and articulates the ruling based on their jurisprudential reasoning and understanding of religious sources. In this regard, the book Environmental Istiftā’āt by the late Ayatollah al-Uzma Safi Golpaygani was published in the summer of 2020, addressing 215 questions.

It is worth noting that the environmental issues for which a jurist can deduce rulings are numerous and diverse, to the extent that if jurists were asked about them, their responses could fill several volumes.

In summary, the opinions, views, and fatwas of jurists have consistently been oriented toward protecting and preserving the environment.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Could the destruction of some natural resources or the emergence of environmental problems in Iran be attributed to insufficient or unclear fatwas by jurists prohibiting the excessive use of natural resources and environmental elements?

Ardakani: Allow me to address your question based on information I have received from relevant authorities. In line with religious discussions concerning the environment, natural resources, and agriculture, I have held conversations with some provincial managers and national officials. According to their explanations, some of the most significant environmental problems include: 1) Land subsidence due to excessive groundwater extraction; 2) The establishment of polluting and water-intensive industries, such as steel, in desert regions, leading to inter-basin water transfers (reports indicate that some industries, such as tile production in central and desert regions of Iran, illegally use groundwater); 3) Air pollution caused by the concentration of industries in one area or the congestion of polluting vehicles in a region; 4) The rise of dust particles due to the failure to provide environmental water rights or the construction of certain dams without thorough and comprehensive studies (or disregard for study results); 5) The endangerment of certain species and disruptions to the life cycle and ecosystem; 6) Marine pollution; 7) Severe soil erosion (several times higher than the global average).

As you know, preventing such problems and addressing them falls within the purview of governance structures, such as the Ministry of Energy, the Ministry of Industry, Mining, and Trade, the Environmental Protection Organization, the Ministry of Agriculture, and the Natural Resources Organization. These institutions undoubtedly have a clear record of service and management in their respective fields. However, deficiencies in executive regulations, governance approaches, or management practices have contributed to these challenges. Sometimes, officials refer to these challenges or inefficiencies as imbalances in the water sector, energy sector, and so forth.

Regarding the role of jurisprudence in this context, it must be said that if the responsible institutions had utilized jurisprudential frameworks in addition to empirical and natural sciences and technical calculations for the exploitation of natural resources—such as water, soil, plants, and animals—the problems and challenges would have been reduced. For example, jurists have provided precise analyses regarding the ownership of groundwater and have established regulations for the amount of water usage, water rights, and priorities in water use. Systematizing existing jurisprudential data, deducing rulings for emerging issues, and translating them into policy reports is a major approach to preventing and addressing environmental problems. This does not mean that all jurisprudential propositions addressing emerging environmental issues are currently available. Rather, the point is that authorities have not systematically approached jurists and researchers in the seminaries, and consequently, jurisprudential scholars and researchers have lacked sufficient motivation to engage in these issues and present them in accordance with new needs. It is evident that the lack of systematic engagement by governing institutions with jurisprudential research centers to address environmental issues does not indicate a lack of belief in the efficacy of jurisprudence. This lack of engagement is either due to ignorance of the richness of jurisprudential knowledge or the absence of a structured mechanism. A framework must be established wherein an environmental issue is studied not only through technical and empirical research but also through jurisprudential research. In this regard, steps have been taken by the seminaries. First, under the guidance of Ayatollah A’rafi, the director of the seminaries, the Environmental, Natural Resources, and Agriculture Steering Committee has been established to facilitate connections between the governance structure and the seminaries. Second, advanced lessons in environmental jurisprudence have been introduced as part of contemporary jurisprudence in the seminaries, with one jurist taking on the teaching of this specialized field to encourage jurisprudential scholars to focus on it. Now, we must await steps from governing institutions in this regard.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Do you consider the existing jurisprudential foundations sufficient for environmental protection?

Ardakani: The capacity of jurisprudence for environmental protection is extraordinary. For example, today, recycling waste and wastewater is considered a critical issue in environmental management or engineering. When referring to authentic jurisprudential sources, you find that centuries ago, based on narrations from the Infallibles, some jurists deemed wasting impure water as extravagance (isrāf) and religiously prohibited, as such water, while unsuitable for drinking, purification, or achieving ritual purity, can be used for irrigating trees. Another example is that today, emphasis is placed on producing compost from fruit and vegetable waste to prevent their conversion into garbage. Meanwhile, according to a narration, Amir al-Mu’minin Ali (peace be upon him) was committed to collecting one hundred thousand date seeds and planting them. Not only did he prevent waste production, but he also transformed the seeds into a vast palm grove, integrating them into the cycle of life and the ecosystem. These are just two minor examples, and there are numerous authentic and relevant narrations in this field that can serve as a basis for researchers and jurists. Of course, innovation in methods of jurisprudential deduction, while preserving the methodological and substantive heritage of past jurists, is both desirable and necessary in specialized jurisprudential fields. For instance, one jurist (Ayatollah Ahmad Moballeghi) addresses the prohibition of environmental pollution caused by harmful plastics by revisiting the “no harm” (lā dharar) rule, introducing the concept of “processual harm” and applying a social and cultural perspective to employ this rule in deducing environmental jurisprudential rulings.

Based on the above, protecting the environment through jurisprudential propositions requires adherence to jurisprudential foundations, methods, and heritage. This adherence does not conflict with methodological innovation, as establishing new jurisprudential rules or regulations, or highlighting and developing existing ones, is necessary. For example, establishing the rule of “land development” (i‘mār al-arāḍī) based on the verse “It is He who produced you from the earth and settled you in it” (Qur’an 11:61) and related narrations is feasible (see: article “Rules of Environmental Jurisprudence,” Ahmad Moballeghi). Some jurisprudential regulations that can be proposed and emphasized in environmental jurisprudence include: “prohibition of rendering land idle,” “removing the idle from the state of idleness,” “prohibition of ingratitude for blessings,” and “the right to water access.”

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What solutions and suggestions do you have to enhance the support of jurisprudence for environmental protection?

Ardakani: First, the shortage of researchers in the field of environmental jurisprudence and the lack of prominence of environmental jurisprudence discourse in academic circles are among the most significant challenges in this area. Several strategic suggestions include:

• Greater attention from jurists to holding advanced lessons (dars-e khārij) on environmental jurisprudence.
• Commitment from jurists, scholars, and professors to conducting lessons on topics such as “jurisprudence of land development,” “jurisprudence of water,” “jurisprudence of environmental pollution,” “jurisprudence of plants and agriculture,” and “jurisprudence of ecosystems and animals.”
• Establishing a discipline of environmental jurisprudence at levels 3 and 4 in the seminaries.
• Approving dissertation and thesis topics in the field of environmental jurisprudence by the academic degrees section of the seminaries.
• Support from organizations and ministries related to the environment for jurisprudential research by seminary scholars addressing emerging issues, challenges, and needs.

Second, since deducing rulings depends on understanding the subject matter, there must be a two-way relationship between environmental experts and jurisprudential institutes and their researchers. Holding joint brainstorming sessions and scientific meetings is evaluated in this context. Such sessions lead to mutual understanding of ideas, problems, upcoming challenges, and research and practical actions.