Stewardship as a buoy for the land
Jan van der Stoep, team member of the Soil project and endowed professor of Christian philosophy at WUR, described the concept of stewardship as a buoy that helped him in the 1980s to establish a better connection with the land. Can stewardship still, in 2026, serve as a buoy for the land? A diverse group of participants reflected on this question during a working conference on the subject on 25 February.
Stewardship: abolish or retain?
From churchwardens to sworn land stewards, from academics (ranging from health sciences to philosophy and theology) to members of “green” societal and church groups such as Groene Kerken and A Rocha – all of them bowed their heads during the conference over the notion of stewardship, which generated confusion, debate, but also agreement.
On the one hand, stewardship is a notion that lives and is embodied among farmers, in churches, and in broader society; a notion that helps people to reflect theologically on land. On the other hand, there are examples in which this notion is filled with convictions and practices associated with an attitude of control. In this way, much damage is done to the land. At a time when some people wonder whether it would be better to abolish the term altogether, the research team of the Soil project considers it important, amid all the complexity, to examine the opportunities the notion offers.
Lively conversation
With the Soil research project now halfway through and the team on the verge of publishing a report exploring the field of faith and land, the working conference was an excellent opportunity to exchange and discuss, together with experts from academia and practice, the bottlenecks and possible solutions surrounding stewardship.
The evening resulted in a lively conversation in which participants listened to one another’s perspectives and, without necessarily agreeing, engaged in substantive dialogue. This was possible because the land is a shared interest. In addition, other interests were also brought into the conversation: those of politics, of the church, but also of worms and meadow birds. For stewardship implies accountability – but to whom do we render account? Participants observed a gap between those to whom or to which they actually render account (“creation,” “ourselves,” “previous generations,” “the church congregation,” and even “the wallet”) and those to whom or to which they believe they ought to render account, but do not always do so (such as “society,” “a small-scale farmer in Bangladesh,” “the land itself,” and “above all God”).
Bottlenecks
After discussions in smaller groups, it emerged – interestingly – that researchers and practitioners identified the same bottlenecks: lack of clarity about the meaning of the concept, the many (sometimes insufficiently knowledgeable) parties involved in matters concerning land, and a tension between economic and theological language and interests. Participants therefore saw possible solutions in conceptual clarification, increasing knowledge, weighing interests, and greater recognition of the relational structure of living together, including with non-human creatures. Jan van der Stoep concluded the evening with a reflection on the steward as a serving slave in the economy (oikonomos) of this life.
Fruitful exchange
The Soil project team looks back on a fruitful exchange in a good atmosphere, in which stewardship emerged not only as a complex or problematic term, but also as one that offers opportunities for shared interpretation and responsibility. The team takes these insights into the second half of the research: the guiding phase, in which, together with practice partners, it will seek to identify elements of a responsible, context-sensitive theological vision with regard to land.
