Environment and Politics

Timothy Doyle, Doug McEachern, Sherilyn MacGregor

• Verlag: Routledge
• Jahr: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781135963255
• Auflage: 4
• Thema: Política y relaciones internacionales
• Thema: Política

Environment and Politics 4th Edition is a concise introduction to this ever-expanding interdisciplinary field, explaining and illustrating how concepts, conflicts, movements, political systems and the practices of policy-making can be analysed in a systematic way. This book provides a comprehensive overview of the key themes that shape the field, and examines a diverse range of environmental problems and policy solutions found in different countries and cultures.

The new edition has been extensively revised to include up-to-date explanation of green political theories and traditions and the debates that shape action on the ground. It contains an expanded discussion of environmental movements that work in the Global North, the Global South and transnationally. Greater attention has been given to the roles of corporations, non-governmental organizations, the media, consumers and citizens in order to reflect the changing nature of environmental governance. The text also focuses throughout on debates surrounding the concepts of environmental security, environmental justice and environmental citizenship.

The authors examine the institutional responses of parliaments, administrative, legal and electoral systems; the more informal politics of social movements; and the politics of markets and the corporate sector as they respond to (or resist) the greening of societies. This engaging text has been fully updated to offer readers a greater understanding of international, national and local environmental politics as well as expected future developments at all levels.

Environment and Politics continues to use illustrative examples of conflicts, people and events spanning North and South America, Europe, Asia, Africa and Australia, giving it global perspective and relevance.

Each chapter includes questions for debate as well as a list of key words and resources for independent research. This successful textbook remains a key resource for undergraduate and postgraduate studies across politics, environmental studies, development studies and human geography courses.

1	Politics and environmental studies

• The field of environmental studies

• Politics and the environment

• Studying ‘environmental politics’

• Types of political regime

• Understanding power

• Key themes in environmental politics

Introduction

This book offers an introduction to the politics of the environment. It is rooted in and draws upon the traditional discipline of politics and the newer, much broader field of environmental studies. We begin, therefore, with an explanation of these two bodies of scholarship.

Both environmental studies and the discipline of politics can be conceived of, and practised, in different ways. For example, environmental studies can be treated as a sub-discipline of natural science with specific, empirical approaches to understanding environmental problems and evaluating solutions. But it is equally possible to regard environmental studies as an interdisciplinary field that brings together the methods, knowledge and expertise from a wide range of natural and human-centred disciplines. The study of politics is capable of equally varied conceptions, and there are debates about its basic focus as well as about its methodologies and analytical frameworks. Because there are no simple, uncontroversial definitions, this chapter starts with a delineation of these two fields in order to establish what we take to be at the core of their hybrid area of inquiry: environmental politics. On that basis some of the key, even if contested, concepts of politics are outlined along with sketches of alternative methodologies and assumptions about the workings of power and of the different political processes found across the world today. We end with a brief discussion of three key themes that we think are central to the study of environmental politics: security, justice and citizenship.

What is environmental studies?

Environmental studies can be approached in a number of different ways. It is possible to treat the field as coterminous with ‘ecology’, the study of relationships between organisms and their environments. Ecology is a branch of the biological sciences with the same methodological assumptions as other areas of natural scientific inquiry. Such an approach could generate studies of the ecology of particular geographical regions such as the redwood forests of North America, the moorlands of England, the Great Barrier Reef in Australia or the Karoo in South Africa. While natural scientists would be interested in the part played by humans in these ecosystems (for example how human actions can disturb or destabilize a particular ecological balance) these actions are likely to be noted with the same kind of scientific detachment as for the study of other, non-human disturbances.

Recognizing the human element indicates one of the problems for defining environmental studies only in ecological terms. How are the impacts of actions of humans and human societies on their environments to be interpreted? It is certainly possible to invent a ‘human ecology’ and treat this as a sub-set of other parts of scientific study: it could form part of zoology, biology or human geography. We could gain some understanding of the character of environmental problems by considering population dynamics and the causes and consequences of human ‘overpopulation’, but how good or useful is this approach? Should there be more to understanding the impact and dynamics of human social organization than can be generated from a narrow, scientific perspective? Human impacts on natural environments depend on a whole range of factors: cultural attitudes to nature; modes of social and economic organization; and the kinds of political process that can either protect or harm the environment.

Ecology itself involves forms of interdisciplinary study. To understand the interaction of all life forms in an ecosystem means crossing, at the very least, the boundaries between botany, zoology and soil science. Environmental science is even more interdisciplinary than ecology in that it is a field that studies different aspects of the natural or biophysical environment (including human impacts) with the goal of identifying and solving environmental problems (such as pollution and soil erosion). Yet it seems necessary to enhance this interdisciplinarity so that we are able to cope with the complexities of human–environment relationships over time and in different social and cultural contexts. From this perspective, environmental studies needs to be multi- and interdisciplinary in the sense that it includes and combines understandings from the natural sciences (such as biology, geology and chemistry), the social sciences (such as economics, sociology and politics) and the humanities (such as history, philosophy, theology and cultural studies). It also operates with a broader understanding of ‘the environment’ than is adopted in the natural sciences. Whereas ecology and the environmental sciences are concerned with the biophysical or ‘natural’ world (often meaning not human made), environmental studies includes all kinds of environments, from the natural (animals, flora and biophysical elements and processes) to the human-constructed and invented (dwellings, cities and cyberspace). After all, ‘environment’ comes from the French word ‘environ’, meaning ‘around’ or surroundings.

What is politics?

What is understood as ‘politics’ and ‘political’ varies widely. Often politics has been defined in a particularly narrow way and the word is used to refer to processes of government; decision-making and administration; elections; the machinations of political parties; and the efforts of groups to influence these political processes. According to political theorist Bernard Crick, this limited, ‘government-centred’ view of politics emerged in advanced, complex, usually European, societies:

The establishment of political order is not just any order at all; it marks the birth, or the recognition, of freedom. For politics represents at least some tolerance of different truths, some recognition that government is possible, indeed best conducted, amid the open canvassing of rival interests. Politics are the public actions of free men.

(1964: 18)

This view of politics, which sees government as a public instrument of freedom, is associated with a ‘Western’ tradition, reaching back to the ancient Greeks and illuminated in the writings of Aristotle and Plato. Here politics is seen in a positive light, as part of the way in which citizens are fulfilled and the highest goals of a community are achieved. Involvement in public debate over common problems and their solutions was seen as part of a person’s civic duty: to be involved in politics was a high cultural and social ambition. In essence this is a conception of politics as some variant of democratic politics. Today, democracy and democratic politics are greatly valued but the practice of politics has separated out the role of citizen from that of the politician. Politicians are professionals elected to act on behalf of voters in remote parliaments and governmental processes. It is largely their job to reconcile conflicting and convergent societal interests through compromise and negotiation in a public sphere. In this view, politics exists ‘out there’. Most citizens are removed from its daily reach. We will have more to say about the concept of citizenship and how it relates to politics and the environment later in the chapter.

Politics is often regarded as that peculiar set of relationships that is forged in the parliaments and congresses of national and state capitals. It is important to note that Crick’s limited view of politics, and a related sense of alienation from it, is shared by most people. Given this alienation, politics is often seen in a negative light, as something tawdry, deceitful, largely a battle between arrogant and egotistical men and, worst of all, a waste of time. Nonetheless, a ‘narrow’ view of politics provides workable boundaries for political enquiry. But critics of this perspective see politics in broader terms, as far more universal, capable of crossing cultural boundaries and existing within and outside the institutional boundaries of the modern state (and outside Europe). Politics is not just confined to the actions of government, but is also found in the private sector of business and in the more informal realms that operate outside the state and on which all humans depend, such as the household. In fact, as Adrian Leftwich (1983: 11) argues, politics exists ‘at every level and in every sphere’ of human societies; political activities and relationships should not be treated as separate from other features of social life, rather:

They everywhere influence and are influenced by, the distribution of power and decision making, the systems of social organisation, culture and ideology in society, as well as its relations with the natural environment and other societies. Politics is therefore the defining characteristic of all human groups and always has been.

(Leftwich 1983)

In this sense, politics occurs in homes, sporting clubs, work places and in the street, as well as in parliaments. The strength of Leftwich’s inclusive depiction is its capacity to analyse non-institutional politics. In this way, politics refers to our relationships to one another and our interactions, in many different collective and sub-cultural forms: as individuals; as members of families; as informal networks and groups; as organizations; as governments; as corporations; and in our activities in a range of other institutionalized settings.

All definitions of politics are contested and value-laden. There is no one universal definition. It is important for students of politics to be explicit about the reasons used to justify one definition over another. Either the narrow or the broad definition of politics could be used to frame a consideration of environmental politics, but quite different studies would be produced. Use of the narrow definition would give an account based on the constitutional design of the political process, its institutional characteristics, and the role of political parties and green pressure groups, as well as a consideration of the way in which environmental policy is made and administered. These topics are covered in this book. A broader definition would lead to the inclusion of non-institutionalized forms of environmental concern and activism, which are never simply captured by organized mobilization into ‘normal’ politics with a big ‘P’. Attention is also directed towards the political debates and conflicts that occur within these informal movements and in the more non-institutionalized settings. These, too, are included in the chapters to follow. A narrow definition keeps more things out of consideration, and hence makes the task of analysis more manageable. A broader definition brings in more things that need to be included but at the risk of a more complex, diffuse, and unmanageable study. There are costs involved in the use of either definition: it is good to be aware of what is gained or lost by choices made about preferred definitions.

What is the place of politics in environmental studies?

It is tempting to say that politics is just one discipline that should be incorporated into environmental studies, but far more is required than this: politics is central to environmental studies. The relationships between the two differ, depending on the definitions of each. Like politics, environmental studies is defined in numerous ways to include and exclude various modes of inquiry. Many of these differences emerge around conflicting views as to exactly what the environment entails. For example, if the environment is seen as a biophysical reality existing outside of humans, then environmental studies is the study of the relationships between human and non-human worlds. Often this ‘external’ view of the environment gives birth to instrumentalism; that is, the environment (or nature) ‘out there’ is understood as a collection of resources (natural products) or as a series of processes, which need to be managed by humans in a renewable, sustainable manner. Doyle and Walker argue that:

environmental studies is fundamental in the fullest sense. Human existence depends completely on the continuing availability of inputs such as air, water, foodstuffs and other resources from the natural environment. Without ecology there can be no economy and no society.

(1996: 1)

This instrumental depiction of environmental studies fits snugly with many definitions of politics. For example, Leftwich’s writings on politics portray the interface between humans and ‘natural resources’ as a centrally defining part of politics. In his view,

the major organising activity at the heart of this history of cooperation, conflict, innovation, and adaptation in the use, production and distribution of resources has been and still is politics.

(1983: 12)

Because society is seen as existing outside the environment in this view, the study of politics complements the natural sciences (and the many other disciplines involved in environmental studies) in allowing us to understand and manage our biophysical resources; to manage our environment; to formulate and to implement environmental policies.

The role of politics in environmental studies increases in scope quite dramatically if we consider a different notion of the environment where humanity is part of nature and not distinct from it. Nature is no longer seen as a resource but as a more holistic construct that is far more open to interpretative possibilities. Being considered part of nature, there is a recognition that our relationships with the non-human world are socially and (on occasions) biophysically constructed. So environmental studies now includes those relationships already mentioned between humans and non-humans, between differing non-human entities, and the relationships between humans themselves. Under this rubric, politics meets environmental studies in different ways. For example, issues of social democracy (participatory and representative), non-violence, social equity and justice as well as ecology now dominate the intellectual and green activist agenda. New types of relationship and entire human and non-human societies are analysed and imagined based on this more integrative, non-anthropocentric view of the environment.

Plate 1.1 Environmental studies students at the Centre for Alternative Technology, Wales.

Source: Sherilyn MacGregor

The study of environmental politics

Politics is so central to environmental studies that there is a sub-field within the discipline of politics called ‘environmental politics’. One can look to the large number of academic conferences and university courses on environmental politics as signs of its growing importance. Among the specialized journals devoted to the topic are Environmental Politics (established in 1992) and Global Environmental Politics (established in 2000). It is a sub-field that includes research along a continuum from the abstract and theoretical (as in ‘green political theory’) at one end, through to the applied (as in studies of parties, policies and movements), to the empirical-quantitative (e.g. in public opinion research) at the other end. What ties it all together is a belief that is nicely captured by Neil Carter (2004): it is ‘politics as if nature mattered’.

The phrase ‘politics as if nature mattered’ contains an implicit criticism of the rest of the discipline of politics for being anthropocentric. In other words, it has tended, historically, to focus only on human social actions and organizations without regard to their dependence on a finite and fragile planet. Nature appears as resources to be distributed or fought over by people. The study of environmental politics offers a radical departure from this traditional view. It begins from a normative (as opposed to neutral) position – that the natural world should be protected – and accepts the critique of the status quo of growth without regard for planetary limits, as being unsustainable. Thus, environmental–political scholars are concerned to understand and explain the roots causes and factors contributing to unsustainability in different social contexts as well as to propose potential solutions to a wide range of environmental problems from global climate change and biodiversity loss to waste management and fuel poverty at local and household levels. In doing so, they must be able to appreciate how politics operates in different contexts, such as in different types of political systems, and to carry out systematic, theoretically informed analyses of the workings of power.

Political regimes and environmental politics

The particular way in which a political system is organized has a strong impact on the scope and e...