Shallow Ecology

6 Key excerpts on "Shallow Ecology"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  Understanding Poverty and the Environment

  Analytical frameworks and approaches

  • Fiona Nunan(Author)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  2  Political ecology Introduction

  In Chapter 1 it was suggested that relationships between poverty and the environment are complex and context specific. Being ‘context specific’ suggests that the political and economic situation matters. A multitude of political and economic factors from the household to the global level can affect how people gain and maintain access to natural resources, what benefits they derive and the condition of those resources. The influence of such factors on the status of natural resources, and on who benefits and how, can be investigated through taking a ‘political ecology’ approach.

  Of all the frameworks and approaches considered in this book, political ecology is particularly difficult to define and pin down. It can be viewed as an umbrella term, that is, an overarching term encompassing a diverse range of conceptual analyses and underlying assumptions. At its heart is a concern with the nature and influence of power in influencing how environmental degradation is understood, explained and manifested. In taking a political ecology approach, a researcher recognizes that natural science understanding and solutions will not suffice on their own. Science, knowledge and policy are influenced by power, political processes and economic factors – in combination forming ‘political ecology’. Political ecology has strong roots within rural environmental issues in developing countries, having been used to investigate and challenge dominant explanations of the causes of soil erosion, desertification and forest degradation. It can, however, be used in many settings, in any part of the world.

  This chapter reviews definitions of the term ‘political ecology’, identifies key characteristics of the approach and provides examples of its application. It then goes on to examine how environmental science and ecology is viewed within a political ecology perspective. Political ecology analysis is often premised on a critique of dominant thinking (Robbins, 2012; Stott and Sullivan, 2000). Examples of such dominant thinking are set out, with three key themes identified from these. Explanation of the political ecology critique of these themes follows. Political ecology analysis may be undertaken and presented as a ‘chain of explanation’, bringing out the local, national and global context of people–environment relations. The discussion on ‘chains of explanation’ is followed by a reflection on feminist political ecology. A more detailed example of political ecology critique of dominant thinking is then presented for the case of desertification, followed by shorter examples of application of political ecology analysis. The chapter concludes by identifying key debates and issues that have arisen within the broad area of political ecology, before a summary of key points. Box 2.1

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Environmental Ethics

  Readings in Theory and Application

  • Louis Pojman, Paul Pojman, Katie McShane, , Louis Pojman, Paul Pojman, Katie McShane(Authors)
  • 2016(Publication Date)
  • Cengage Learning EMEA

    (Publisher)

  An exposition of an ecosophy must necessarily be only moderately precise considering the vast scope of relevant ecological and normative (social, politi-cal, ethical) material. At the moment, ecosophy might profitably use models of systems, rough approximations of global systematizations. It is the global character, not preciseness in detail, which distinguishes an ecosophy. It articulates and integra-tes the efforts of an ideal ecological team, a team comprising not only scientists from an extreme variety of disciplines, but also students of politics and active policy-makers. Under the name of ecologism , various deviations from the deep movement have been championed— primarily with a one-sided stress on pollution and resource depletion, but also with a neglect of the great differences between under-and over-developed countries in favour of a vague global approach. The global approach is essential, but regional differences must largely determine policies in the coming years. NOTE 1. [E.E.C. stands for European Economic Community.] ARNE NAESS • THE SHALLOW AND THE DEEP, LONG-RANGE ECOLOGICAL MOVEMENT 221 Copyright 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. STUDY QUESTIONS 1. Is deep ecology a good name for Naess’s theory? Does the theory justify the positive values its name invokes? If not, what should it be called? 2. Are the seven principles of the deep ecology movement good ones? Examine each one, compare it with the corresponding principles of Shallow Ecology. For each comparison, explain which you think is better and why.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Engineers, Society, and Sustainability

  • Sarah Bell(Author)
  • 2022(Publication Date)
  • Springer

    (Publisher)

  Deep ecology, social ecology and ecological feminism are three prominent schools of thought in environmental philosophy, politics and activism, each concerned with how to arrange societies in order to avoid human domination and destruction of nature. 3.2. DEEP ECOLOGY 37 3.2 DEEP ECOLOGY Deep ecologists hold that the anthropocentrism (human centred view) of dominant western value systems is at the root of the ecological crisis. They call for an ecocentric system of values and society that places ecological concerns at the heart of all human culture and politics. Since human systems are part of ecological systems, our primary concern should be the preservation and maintenance of nature. Moreover, an ecocentric world view values nature for its own sake, in contrast to an anthropocentric view which values nature only in terms of its use for humans. Non-human nature, particularly in wilderness areas, has a right to exist on its own terms, irrespective of potential economic or other value to humans. Deep ecology is closely associated with wilderness preservation, is generally anti- industrialist and supports strict control of human populations. The term ‘deep ecology’ was first coined in 1972 in a paper by Norwegian philoso- pher Arne Naess (1995a). He contrasted ‘deep ecology,’ based on a deep questioning of human relationships to nature, to ‘Shallow Ecology’ which characterises more conventional scientific and reformist approaches. Shallow Ecology is anthropocentric, focuses primarily on pollution and re- source depletion, and is ultimately concerned with the health and affluence of people in developed countries. Deep ecology involves a deep questioning of the goals and viability of industrial society, focuses on the interconnectedness of all life, and aims at restructuring society to achieve greater local autonomy and decentralisation. Together with American George Sessions, Naess outlined an ‘8 point platform’ for deep ecology in 1984 (Naess and Sessions, 1995b).

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Reimagining Political Ecology

  • Aletta Biersack, James B. Greenberg, Aletta Biersack, James B. Greenberg, Arturo Escobar, Dianne Rocheleau(Authors)
  • 2006(Publication Date)
  • Duke University Press Books

    (Publisher)

  Soil erosion was not to be explained in terms of ‘‘characteristics of soil, geology and climate, and . . . purely physi-cal constraints’’ (ibid.), for ‘‘land degradation should by definition be a social problem’’ (1987b:1). They called their approach a ‘‘regional political ecology’’ (ibid.:17, emphasis removed), the term political ecology referring to the com-bined ‘‘concerns of ecology and a broadly defined political economy. Together this encompasses the constantly shifting dialectic between society and land-based resources, and also within classes and groups within society itself ’’ (ibid.). Acknowledging the limits of ‘‘the populist approach’’ (1987c:243), Blaikie and Brookfield nonetheless inserted local land managers, with their toolkit of local knowledges and practices, into this array of otherwise imper-sonal forces, pursuing an approach that was ‘‘highly conjunctural’’ (1987c:239), global but also local. These innovations—the focus on local-level decision 12 aletta biersack making but within the context of ‘‘ecological ‘marginality’ ’’ within a wider sys-tem (Castree and Braun 1998:12; Watts 2000:262), the conjunctural approach, the attention to local knowledge and practices—all continue to be produc-tive today. Geographers were by no means the only social scientists to contribute to the growing consensus that ecology was political economy or it was noth-ing. The anthology Lands at Risk in the Third World: Local-Level Perspectives , edited by the anthropologists Peter Little and Michael Horowitz, brought together various scholars keen to render ecology a social science (1987:5). The contribution of the anthropologist Marianne Schmink and the sociolo-gist Charles Wood, ‘‘The ‘Political Ecology’ of Amazonia,’’ was particularly indicative of the emerging neo-Marxist synthesis within ecology.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Studies in Political Economy of Development

  • Ignacy Sachs(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Pergamon

    (Publisher)

  Whatever the merits of this attitude, politically, it is one to be taken into account. 20 M. Bookchin, Ecology and Revolutionary Thought, New York, 1970, p. 6. Bookchin goes on to say that ecology is also an integrative and reconstructive science and that by insist-ing on the crucial role of diversity it lends itself to a libertarian interpretation, in which appear the concepts of a balanced community, face-to-face democracy, humanistic technology, and de-centralized society. Approaches to a Political Economy of Environment 301 it narrowly as being merely the economics of pollution, but this means abandoning the most precious part of the concept of environment, namely its all-inclusiveness. The alternative is, therefore, to include in the political economy of environment all the side-effects of economic activities which are disregarded by economic agents, as well as the economic feedback of the environmental changes thus provoked. In other words, the political economy of environment should explore the consequences of insulating, for the purpose of economic decisions, a given subsystem and of referring exclusively to it as a framework for economic rationality. This is in line with the social and historical nature of political economy, since in different historical contexts and under different socioeconomic regimes the isolation of subsystems takes different forms. Wildavsky is, therefore, correct in saying that the old economics was mostly economics. The new economics is mostly politics. 21 But two other difficulties are likely to arise. On the one hand, the political economy of environment broadens its scope to the point of including both the economics of natural resources and social conditions of life—subjects which are not new at all. On the other, it may prove a dismal science if people are persuaded to use more comprehensive models for their decision-making.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Political Ecology

  System Change Not Climate Change

  • Dimitri Roussopoulos(Author)
  • 2019(Publication Date)
  • Black Rose Books

    (Publisher)

  (There is already a considerable descriptive and analytical literature on the origins and nature of the new social movements.) Here, we will simply enumerate some of the principal contributions of political ecology. Although it is critical of science as traditionally understood, political ecology does affirm that the ecological crisis can be scientifically verified. In contrast with environmentalism, however, political ecology advances the idea that the science of ecology itself cannot be divorced from and indeed implies certain political conceptions. For 99 Political Ecology and Social Ecology example, inasmuch as the ecological crisis affects the Earth as a whole isolated attempts to solve the problem cannot but fail; there must be a coordination of efforts and this on a global scale. However, political ecology privileges action at the local and regional levels against what has been called the “imperialism of the state”. In Europe, the Greens advocate the creation of a continent of regions against the pre-eminence of the nation-state, and call for concrete expressions of solidarity with the peoples of the Southern hemisphere. Another theme of political ecology is the redefinition of the quality of life in opposition to the ideology of limitless growth and endless accumulation of commodities on which the existing consumer society is founded. A snapshot of a green worldview can be developed by contrasting green values and objectives with elements of the prevailing belief system. 1. An ecological framework for sustainable development. 2. Search for spiritual values. 3. Attempt at synthesis and organic analysis. 4. Flexibility and emphasis on personal autonomy. 5. Toward a communitarian and cooperative society. 6. Biocentric humanism. 7. Personal motivation and personal growth. 8. Reason informed by intuition. 1. Capitalist (whether state or private) industrialism. 2. Predominance of materialist values. 3. Reductionist analysis.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book