Envisioning

Environmental UNIT 4 SOCIAL ECOLOGY

Sociology
Structure
4.0 Objectives
4.1 Introduction
4.2 What is Social Ecology?
4.3 Origins of Social Ecology.
4.4 Social Ecology- A Radical View
4.5 Social Ecology- The Indian Scenario
4.5.1 Social Ecology Concerns in India
4.6 Let Us Sum Up
4.7 References
4.8 Specimen Answers to check your progress

4.0 OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit, you should be able to:

 Explain the nature of Social Ecology as a perspective;

 Trace the evolution of Social Ecology as a sub discipline;
 Give an account of the radical twist given to Social Ecology;
 Examine emergence and course of development of Social Ecology as an
involving perspective in India.

4.1 INTRODUCTION
Traditional focus of sociology has been various aspects of society but rarely
has it concerned itself with larger ecological world. Sociology as a discipline
studies the society from four vantage points- the economy the polity, social
ions, social structure and culture. Studying man and nature interactions add
another dimension to the sociology. And social ecology as a term captures
this interaction between human and the biological world of ecology. This unit
discusses the term social ecology. The term has been used by many
disciplines from its disciplinary vantage point and perspective. Here we try to
understand the term from a largely sociological perspective. The term will
also be discussed in the Indian context in section 5

4.2 WHAT IS SOCIAL ECOLOGY?

‗Social Ecology‘ is a compound of ‗social‘ and ‗ecology‘. The term ‘social‘
refers to human society and the way is is organized. It includes the study of


Written By Dr. Bhawana Sharma Jha, Associate Prof. Lady Shriram College , Delhi
40 University
all the constituent elements of society of the economy, the polity, social Environmental
Sociology: Nature
structure and culture. The term ‗ecology‘ refers to the study of relationship and Scope
between living things and their environment. Therefore, ‗social ecology‘ is
the study of interactions between human beings and the environment around
them, and how those interactions have a reciprocal impact on the society and
the environment. It is an interdisciplinary approach to study, ― the
interrelationship between human social institutions and ecological or
environmental issues.‖ ( John Clark, 1997). Philosophically, it is a dialectical
approach which examines ‗the ecological dimensions of all social
phenomena‘ holistically, to arrive at practical wisdom to guide human society
to face challenges and opportunists in its historical evolution. Furthermore,
the ―social‘ her pertains to strong ‗communitarian‘ tradition (where an
individual personality and social identity are primarily shaped by the
community in which he/she lives). thus, social ecology may also be described
as a social practice base in Eco-authoritarianism. ( John Clark, 1997).

Sociologically, social ecology has been identified as an ‗environmentally

oriented sociology‘ ( RamchandraGuha, 1994). Traditionally, sociology as a
discipline studies the society from four vantage points- the economy the
polity, social institutions, social structure and culture- an analytical device to
facilitate systematic comparisons within a society or between two or more
societies. An ‗ecological perspective‘ adds another vantage from which the
human society can be studied. According to RamchandraGuha. The
ecological infrastructure of human society (soil, water, flora, fauna, climate,
etc.) significantly conditions the evolution and direction of human economic
life, political relations, social structure, and ideology (culture). Simultaneous,
the human engagement with nature, in turn models the natural environment in
its own image, to suit its own purpose. Thus, social is the study of reciprocal
relations between the ecological infrastructure on the one hand, and
economy, polity, social structure and culture on the other. Hence, the sub
discipline of ‗social ecology‘ is based on the interdependence of the
biophysical and sociocultural spheres. (RamchandraGuha, 1994).

4.3 ORIGINS OF SOCIAL ECOLOGY

Though Murray Bookchin has been considered the quintessential social
ecologist of the 20th century, whose influence continues into the 21st century,
yet the history of social ecology as a social and ecological philosophy traces
its lineage to the ecological communitarianism of the Russian anarchist
geographer P.A. Kropotkin(1842-1921) in the 19th century. A proponent of
decentralised communist society, based on voluntary associations of self-
governing communities and worker-run enterprises, Kropotkin believed in
mutual aid, voluntary cooperation ( instead of competition and survival of the
fittest espoused by Darwinist), critiqued the controlling tendencies of
feudalism and capitalism to espouse political and economic decentralisation,
democratic devolution and communitarian values--all strands of his thought
41
Envisioning and political actionisim-- contributed to the philosophical beginnings of
Environmental
Sociology social ecology.

Another anarchist geographer, a contemporary apolitical actionist to P.A.

Kropotkin, was the French thinker and political activist Jacques Elisee
Teclus(1830-1905), whose studies in long-range ‗social geography‘ is
supposed to have laid the foundation of social ecology. It explored the history
of interaction between human society and natural world, since its evaluation
to the present times. His social geography traces the historical development
of modern centralised state based in capital and authoritarian ideologies,
through ― the long record of experiments in cooperation, direct democracy
and human freedom, from the ancient Greek polis, through Icelandic
democracy, medieval free cities and independent Swiss cantous …..to an
analysis of the destructive ecological effects of modern technology and
industry allied with the power of capital and the state.‖ ( John Clark, 1997).
Critiquing capitalism and authoritarian socialism, Reclues envisioned a ‗free,
communitarian society living in harmony with nature‘. thus, putting forward
an environmental philosophy in reflects the respect for all life forms on earth
--be it human or non-human nature.

Patrick Geddes (1854-1932), a Scottish botanist, a sociologist, a geographer

and urban planner, believed in centrality of relationship between people and
their physical environments for individual and social well-being. Believing in
‗biosphy‘ (the philosophical study of biosphere), Geddes puts forward the
ideal of ‗eutopia‘ (good community) based in decentralised communities
living in harmony with cultural and ecological regions, developed through
‗neotechnics‘ (new technologies). Labelling has approach as
‗Sociogeography‘ (the synthesis of sociological and geographical studies),
Geddesapplies this perspective to community planning evolving out of
regional particularities (rooted in natural and cultural realities) organically.
Thus, contributing to the field of social ecology through empirical and
bioregional studies.

Highly influenced by Patrick Geddes, the American historian, social theorist

and urban planner, Lewis Mumford (1895-1992) has been recognised as a
social ecologist of repute and influence. The basis of socio-ecological
philosophy, put forward by Mumford, is an ‗organic new of reality‘ – ―… the
evolution of human society as a continuation of a cosmic process of organic
growth, emergence and development (John Clark, 1997) – an ecological
viewpoint, rooted in the experience of an organic community. However,
similar to Recluse, before him, Mumford sees within human history a
counter-movement towards increasing mechanization, development of
despotic power, domination through diverse political, economic and cultural
expressions, beyond human comprehension and even control. With this
pessimistic indictment of a technologically advanced industrial society, he
sees the dissolution of organic community, a retreat from the self-sustaining

42
environment, loss of creativity and unity with nature and fostering a Environmental
Sociology: Nature
destructive relationship to the natural world. and Scope

Nonetheless, Mumford envisions a social ecological solution to those

annihilating process, by reversal of these historical tendencies. Following
Geddes understanding of ‗bioregionalism‘ , Mumford visualises, ― a process
of social decentralization in which democratic institutions are recreated at
local and regional levels as part of organic but diverse communities rooted in
the natural and cultural realities of the region.‖ (John Clark,1997). Thus,
reinforcing the communitarian spirit of social ecology through his concept of
regionalism, which is economic political, cultural and ecological as well.

With a focus on ‗dialectical analysis‘, Murray Bookchin (1921-2006), an

American communalist, social ecologist and an anarchist libertarian socialist,
takes forward the social ecological theories developed by Reclus, Geddes and
Mumford. Developing a more critical and theoretically sophisticated
ecological perspective regarding organic society leading to the emergence of
diverse form of domination in hierarchical society, Bookchinemphasised the
central role of global capitalist economy in ecological crisis, examining the
democratic, decentralist, regionalist solutions provided by his predecessors,
Bookchin proposes politics based on ‗libertarian municipalism and
confederalism‘ (John Clark, 1997).

Though in the next few sections, we move on to consider social ecology from
diverse vantages, yet social ecology as a theoretical perspective to analysis
specific social and ecological regeneration, remains an evolving theory to be
reckoned with.

Box 1

The Institute of Social Ecology (ISE) was established at Goddard College in

Plainfield, Vermont, USA, IN 1974 by cultural anthropologist Daniel
ChodorKoff and author Murray Bookchin. ISE experimented with ideas of
decentralization, explored ecological forms of food production, alternative
technologies, and urban design and planning. It has been involved with the
Anti-Nuclear Movemerk of 1970‘s, affiliated with Occupy movement and
climate movement.

Check Your Progress 1

Complete the following sentences by following in the blank spaces:-

a) Traditionally, sociology studies the society from four vantage points,

namely, …………………………..

b) According to RamchandraGuha, the …………………… significantly

conditions the evolution and direction of human society.

c) The term ……………… refers to study of relationship between living

things and their environment. 43
Envisioning The French thinker and political actionist ……………………………
Environmental
Sociology whose studies in ‗social geography‘ laid the foundation of social
ecology.

4.4 SOCIAL ECOLOGY – A RADICAL VIEW

―Far from adhering to the claim that many environmentalist demands are too
radical, I would argue that they are not radical enough. Confronted by a
society that they are not radical enough. Confronted by a society that is not
only polluting the planet to a scale unprecedented in history, but
undermining its most fundamental biogeochemical cycles, I would argue that
environmentalists have not posed the strategic problems of establishing a new
and lasting equilibrium with nature‖ ( Murray Bookchin, 1980). An excerpt
taken from MurrayBookchin‘s book. Toward an Ecological Society (1976)
reflects a utopian socialists radical views regarding the state of relationship
between the social and natural words. A pioneer of left ecological thought
and action, a reviver of a tradition of social anarchical‘ beginning in the
1950‘s and 60‘s. Murray Bookchin (1921-2006) sought to offer a coherent
theoretical perspective to a generation of ecological and libertarian socialist
activists and writers. He identified the roots of environmental crisis in the
very constitution of a global capitalist society, modern technology which
tended to foster diverse forms of domination, and the rise of a hierarchical
society. He fervently believed in the creation of a news equilibrium between
the natural world and the social world fundentally based in revolutionary
reconstitution of society along ecological lines.

A scathing critique of capitalism‘s logic of existence- 'economic growth‘

being fundamental to social progress, adhered to even by left Marxists – has
led to ecological crisis of pollution, urban concentration, chemical agriculture
and many other related problems. According to Bookchin, ecological issues
have to be holistically contextualized as social issues rooted in the very
system of social organization. The ‗domination of nature‘ by man as a
necessary co-relate to economic development and social progress, as a
fulfillment of human destiny in historical evolution, according to liberals and
Marxists, was resoundingly critiqued by Bookchin. According to him, the
inevitable ‗domination of nature‘ is a myth perpetuated by the hierarchical
mentality of the various elites comprising economic classes, the state,
patriarchy, and gerontocracy. He juxtaposes the understanding of non-
hierarchical ‗organic communities‘ to be part of balance of nature, an ‗Eco
community peculiar to its ecosystem, as against the modern capitalist society
characterised by hierarchy and domination. Whereas, these organic
communities are characterised by cooperative spirit, interdependence Unity
in diversify, spontaneity, usufruct and complementarity Thus, all participants
in the ecocommunity contribute to mountain the balance and integrity of the
natural world in which they live .

44
The role of social hierachies in shaping social evolution and wants Environmental
Sociology: Nature
relationship with the natural world led Bookchin in the direction of and Scope
‗dialectical philosophy‘ – a dialectical outlook on human history. With the
help of concept like justice, ideal of freedom, equality, rule of equivalence,
Bookchin follows the logic of evolution in the natural and social world which
seems a pessimistic indictment of what has happened till now, to an expanded
view of what could be, based on what ought to be. This means that Bookchin,
an ever-optimist has traced an evolutionary potential based on a dialectical
(reciprocal) relationship between the natural and social evolution, which
inheres in itself the emancipator potential for both.

This emancipator potential is the political praxis of ‗libertarian municipalism‘

, arrived at realising the ecological reconstruction of society. In this book,
The Next Revolution (2015), .Bookchinvisualises, ―Libertarian Municipalism
constitutes the politics of social ecology, a revolutionary effort in which
freedom is given institutional form in public assemblies that become
decision-making bodies.‖ viewing the underlying conflict between
communities and the state, Bookchin sought a redefinition of citizenship and
a reinvigoration of the public sphere through the creation of Confederation.
These confederations are the libertarian institutions of direct citizen
assemblies (direct democracy) in towns, cities and villages, aimed at
undermining the state taking back control of essential political and economic
decisions. These libertarian institutions, then become potential sites of
freedom and universalism, educating the citizens in the values of humanism,
cooperation and public service. Thus, ‗liberatarianmunicipalism‘ offers a
political strategy, as well as the structure of directly democratic communities
challenging state power while evolving in harmony with all of nature –
fulfilling social ecology‘s reconstructive vision. (Brain Tokar, 2010)

Box 2 Green Politics is a political ideology that aims to faster an

ecologically sustainable society, often rooted in environmentalism, non-
violence, social justice, and grassroots democracy. It emerged in the 1970s in
the West. Since then, Green parties have developed an established themselves
in many countries through articulating an ecological critique of public policy,
from urban design, energy use and transportation to nuclear disarmament and
support for emerging democratic movements in eastern Europe.

Translation of Bookchin‘swriting played an influential role in the

development of this Green Political Agenda.

4.5 SOCIAL ECOLOGY – THE INDIAN

SCENARIO
‗Environment‘, the problem of ecological survival‘, ‗sustainable
development‘ are some of the catch phrases which characterise the universe
of sociological and social anthropological research in India too. Historians
45
Envisioning and economists have also made their contribution to this field of enquiry. In
Environmental
Sociology India, as elsewhere, research in the field of ecology and environment is
closely linked to the rise and maturity of the environmental movement.
Environmentalism in India has gone through two waves-- the first wave
peaked in the inter-war years, when pioneering writers in the field published
a series of now forgotten studies which foregrounded the ecological
infrastructure of India society. Radhakamal Mukherjee was one such pioneer.
The second is a more recent one has emerged during the early 1970‘s, as a
consequence of post-independence concern with industrialisation to ‗catch
up‘ with the developed world relegated environmental concerns to the
background. However, popular social movement, in the wake of massive
ecological destruction, allied with intellectual concerns about the
environment has led to the creation of an ecologically informed social science
(RamchandraGuha, 1997).

In this section we will be getting to know one such Indian pioneer in the field
of ‗social ecology‘ (1889-1968).

4.5.1 Radha Kamal Mukherjee

All the time when R.K.Mukherjee wrote about his concern for ecology and
environment there were hardly any takers in India, both scholarly of
popularly. However the ecological approach in social theory has gradually
assumed significance. Radha Kamal Mukherjee was influenced by social
ecologist. Patrick Geddes, and the French historian LucienFebvre in his
understanding, ‗regional basis of social life‘. In his book Regional Sociology
(1926), Mukherjee conceives of ‗man and the region as mutually
interdependent entities, plastic, fluent and growing‘. the ‗region‘ and the
‗web of life‘ within the region comprising of ―plant animal and human
communities, which are systems of correlated working parts in the
organization of region‖, (R.K.Mukherjee, 1926) create a harmonious working
balance, by mutually influencing each other.

According to Mukherjee, man‘s mastery of the region consists in a mutual

give and take between the human and biotic world, and not of one-sided
exploitation by man. He conceptualises the ‗region‘ as a living organism
exhibiting the harmonious working together of different living systems -- the
vegetable, the animal and the human world. These mutually influence each
other through chains of actions and interactions, establishing some kind of
balance. Such a balance can be witnessed in old countries like, India and
China. Here one can discern, in the mature, densely-populated plains, every
stage of the process by which the regional balance is kept stable. Also, one
can see lions this balance is upset both, by natural fluctuation cause by cycles
of rainfall changes of landscape and river, or by long continued human
actions such as the destruction of forests, non-conservative agriculture, and
artificial Interference with natural drainage. Thus, ‗human region‘ , according
to Mukherjee, constitutes the basic because, only within the regional area can
46
one best understand the complex interrelations between culture bearing Environmental
Sociology: Nature
human groups and the plant, animal and non-living environments with which and Scope
they interact. (R.K.Mukherjee, 1926)

Recognising the disturbance brought about by human and animal species in

the natural ordering in a given region at a particular time leads to complex
sequences in ‗ecologic succession‘ (the process by which the structure of an
ecological community changes over time). For instance, overgrazing and
trampling by domestic animals in the river plains of Indo-Gangetic region in
India has resulted in complete destruction of the vegetable cover, and the
appearance of perennial or thousand weeds, harmful for the flora and fauna of
the region, or, by burning the forests and clearing the land for cultivation, sets
up a train of consequences in which an entire series of plant species, animals
and human communities are implicated. Thus, the study of human
interference in ecologic succession has led to harmful effects, which in turn
has threatened his food-supply, health and living conditions.

Examining thus, the intricacy of ‗web of life‘, Radha Kamal Mukherjee‘s

social ecology, highlights the role of man in maintaining the ‗ecological
balance‘ - by conservation of land along with its flora, fauna, in the use of
water, management of forests and rivers, domestication and use of livestock,
and the control of insects. Bacteria and parasites. Therefore, maintaining a
balance and rhythm of growth for all.

ACTIVITY

Observe your neighborhood and the activities performed therein to make a

list of activities or practices which foster ‗ecological imbalance‘ in your
immediate environment.

Check Your Progress 2

Complete the following sentences by filling in the blank spaces:

a) Labeling his approach as Socio-geography, …………………………

applies this perspective to community planning evolving out of regional
particularities.

b) With a focus on dialectical analysis ………………………………

American communalist and social ecologist, developed a critical,
ecological perspective.

c) The emancipator political praxis put forward by Murray Bookchin is

known as ……………………………..

The Indian pioneer in the sub discipline of social ecology was

………………………………..

47
Envisioning
Environmental 4.6 SOCIAL ECOLOGICAL CONCERNS IN
Sociology INDIA
The consequences of unrestrained industrial development to achieve
economic growth and catch up with the developed countries, unwittily
compelled up to ignore ecological concerns. It was only in the 1970s that
popular social movements like the chipko movement and other which
followed later alerted disciplines like sociology and social anthropology
about the emerging grounds well of public support for environmental issues
and ecological regeneration of the devastated locales.

A social-ecological perspective inheres within itself the concerns of ecology

in interaction with the economic, political and cultural aspects of the ‗social‘.
An ecological problem like the Chipko movement or the Narmada
BachaoAndolan, are against on an environmental wrong, compounded by
economic, political and cultural correlates of the stakeholders in the issue. It
is not a simple question of the indigenous marginalised people receiving what
is justifiably right of access to the natural resources which they had been
using for generations, with the undesirable claims made by the Indian state to
all the natural resources of the country granting access to those who can help
it in its project of economic growth and development (industrialists and rich
farmers), the state, by its very logic of operation marginalises those (rural
population, landless laborers, tribal population and all the ‗pre-modern‘
survivals in a modern world) who had unlimited access to these resources
traditionally. You shall be reading more about these issues in our unit on
political ecology and subsequent ecological movements

To understand this impasse created in the understanding of ‗social‘ and

‗ecological‘, and aid in searching for a solution in ‗sustainable development‘,
MadhavGadgil and RamchandraGuha have developed a framework. This
framework rests on the fundamental opposition between two groups of
people, distinguished on the basis their ‗access to resources‘. They are - a)
‗Omnivores‘, including industrialists, rich farmers, state officials and the
growing affluent middle -class. The Privilegedand, b) ‗Ecosystem People‘,
comprising of rural population, tribal people, landless labourers, animal
herders, wood-working artisans, it the Marginalized. Furthermore, the
‗development process‘ in independent India has been characterized by a basic
asymmetry between the two groups. A few aspects of this development
process are:-

a) The concentration of economic and political power in the hands of the

Omnivores (the privileged) ;

b) The use of state machinery- policy making (granting of subsidies) and

executive powers (power of implementing those polities) - to divert
natural resources to benefit the Omnivores. For instance, wood for paper
mills, fertilizers, water and electricity for rich farmers and industrialist is
48 provided at subsidized rates.
c) This has led to an indifference towards the plight of the Ecosyotem Environmental
Sociology: Nature
people, as the Omnivores pass on the costs of ecosystem degradation to and Scope
the marginalised ecosystem people.

d) Government projects like the building of dams on various rivers across

India, mining operations on agricultural lands, plantation projects for
wood have dispossessed the Ecosystem people enmasse from their
sources of livelihood. This has led to a groundswell of popular protests
by the victims of development.

e) These development projects, of big dams, mining, monoculture

plantation, genetically modified seeds etc. leave as a corollary not only
dispossess but also displace and dislocated large numbers of Ecosystem
people. Some call them project affected people (PAPs), others refer to
them as Ecological Refugees.

Thus, dividing the Indian population into three socio-ecological classes –

Omnivores, Ecosystem people and ecological refugees, thus providing an
insight into the social and ecological debate that development process in
India has turned out to be (R. Guha, 1997)

However, Godgil and Guha have put forward the measures to be taken to
achieve the goal of ‗sustainable development‘ and overcome the asymmetry
between the three classes, mentioned above. A new developmental strategy
with the following elements has been suggested:-

a) A strengthening of institutions of local governance to bring about a

genuine participatory democracy.

b) Introduction of natural resources use process which is open, accessible

and accountable to all interested.

c) Removing subsidies from resources use by decentralising the entire

process. This will allow proper valuation of the resources.

d) Encourage private enterprise/ market access to these resources for

producing goods and services, but hold them accountable for their
ecological damage.

e) It is only in an equitable society that this framework of development case

succeed. To enhance the social power of the marginalized sectors of the
society (ecosystem people and ecological refugees). He state will need to
introduce – land reforms, literacy and health care. Thereby making
sustainable development successful through the contributions of the state
and the market, added to a renewal and revitalisation of the civil society.
Thus, this framework synthesis the insights of ecology with sociology –
a genuine social ecology (R. Guha, 1997).

49
Envisioning Check Your Progress 3
Environmental
Sociology
1) What are some of the central ideas of Rdhakamal Mukherjee on social
ecology?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

2) Who are omnivores and ecosystem people according to Guha and

Gadgil?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

4.7 LET US SUM UP

Beginning with an understanding of the social – ecological perspective we
trace the origins of this perspective from the writings of P.A. Kropotkia in the
19th century to Murray Bookchains anarchist socialist social ecology of 20th
and 21th century. Next, we examine the origins of social-ecological
perspective in India through the writings of Radhakamal Mukherjee, during
the first phase of environmental awakening in India. However, the second
phase of environmentalism in India inaugurated by popular social movements
in the wake of unabated ecological destruction caused by development led
industrialization, has alerted the social scientists to investigate and find
solutions in the framework of ‗sustainable development‘. Thus, indicating the
evolving nature of ‗social ecology‘ as a paradigm.

4.8 REFERENCES
Bookchin, Murray. 1980. Toward An Ecological Society. 2nd Edition Black
Rose Books.

Bookchin, Murray. 2007. What is Social Ecology? In Social Ecology and

Communalism. Book by Murray Bookchin. A.K. Press

Clark, John. 1997. A Social Ecology. In Capitalism Nature Socialism. 8:3. 3-

33. DO&:10.1080/ 10455759709358746
50
Guha, Ramchandra (ed.). 1998. Social Ecology. Oxford Univ. Press Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
Guha, Ramchandra. 1997. Social-Ecological Research in India: A ‗Status‘
Report. In Economic and Political weekly. February 15-21. 1997 Vol. 32.
No.7. Pp. 345-352

Oomen, T.K. 2015. Radha Kamal Mukherjee on Social Ecology: Filling up

some Blanks. In Sociological Bulletin. January-April 2015, Vol. 64 No.1. Pp
15-35.

Tokar, Brain. 2010. Bookchins Social Ecology and its contributions to the
Red-Green Movement. In Q. Huan (ed.) Eco-Socialism Politics.
10.1007/978-90-481-3745-9-8

4.9 SPECIMEN ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR

PROGRESS
Check Your Progress 1

a) Economy, polity, social structure and culture

b) ‗Ecological infrastructure and human society
c) Ecology
d) J.E. Reclus

Check Your Progress 2

a) Patrick Geddes
b) Murray Bookchin
c) Libertarian Municipalism
d) Radha Kamal Mukherjee

Check Your Progress 3

1) In his book Regional Sociology (1926), Mukherjee conceives of ‗man

and the region as mutually interdependent entities, plastic, fluent and
growing‘. the ‗region‘ and the ‗web of life‘ within the region comprising
of ―plant animal and human communities, which are systems of
correlated working parts in the organization of region‖, (R.K.Mukherjee,
1926) create a harmonious working balance, by mutually influencing
each other.

According to Mukherjee, man‘s mastery of the region consists in a

mutual give and take between the human and biotic world, and not of
one-sided exploitation by man. He conceptualises the ‗region‘ as a living
organism exhibiting the harmonious working together of different living
systems -- the vegetable, the animal and the human world. These
mutually influence each other through chains of actions and interactions,
establishing some kind of balance.
51
Envisioning 2) To understand this impasse created in the understanding of ‗social‘ and
Environmental
Sociology ‗ecological‘, and aid in searching for a solution in ‗sustainable
development‘, MadhavGadgil and RamchandraGuha have developed a
framework. This framework rests on the fundamental opposition between
two groups of people, distinguished on the basis their ‗access to
resources‘. They are - a) ‗Omnivores‘ , including industrialists, rich
farmers, state officials and the growing affluent middle -class. The
Privileged and, b) ‗Ecosystem People‘, comprising of rural population,
tribal people, landless labourers, animal herders, wood-working artisans,
it the Marginalized. Furthermore, the ‗development process‘ in
independent India has been characterized by a basic asymmetry between
the two groups.

52
 Environmental
UNIT 5 TREADMILL OF PRODUCTION Sociology: Nature
and Scope
Structure
5.0 Objectives
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Emergence of the Treadmill of Production Theory
5.2.1 The ‗Treadmill‘ Metaphor

5.2.2 The Logic of the Treadmill

5.2.3 Impact of the Treadmill of Production

5.3 The Treadmill Theory Focus onProduction Rather Than Consumption
5.3.1 The Argument for Production

5.3.2 Social Construction of Material Desires

5.3.3 The Role of Consumers, Citizens and Workers

5.4 The Treadmill of Production in The Era of Globalization
5.4.1 Globalization and Its Consequences

5.4.2 Advantages and Disadvantages of Overseas Investment

5.4.3 Global Dimensions of Environmental Problems

5.4.4 Criticism Against the Treadmill of Production

5.6 Let Us Sum Up
5.7 References
5.8 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress

5.0 OBJECTIVES
After going through this unit, you should be able to:

 Discuss the aspects of treadmill theory

 Explain the context for the emergence of treadmill theory
 Narrate how material desires are socially constructed
 Discuss treadmill of production in the globalised world and its
consquences

5.1 INTRODUCTION
The treadmill of production theory is a critique against the dominant
(capitalist) mode of production in industrialised society. The treadmill theory
laid bare some of the assumptions in the dominant mode of productions.
According to this theory, new investments in the dominant mode of

Written by Dr. Kamminthang Mantuong, Assocate Prof. Miranda House College, Delhi
University
53
Envisioning production are almost inevitable and necessary for higher level of resource
Environmental
Sociology extraction, which will yield higher dividends/profits. This will allow the
creation of further new investments and new job opportunities for the
workers (Gould et al 2004: 297). However, new rounds of investment, with
new technologies, would result in ecosystem depletion and pollution.It also
means higher level of natural resource extraction with no corresponding
increase in wages and social expenditures. In spite of these, workers continue
to believe that increase investment is necessary for employment and creation
of new jobs (Gould et al 2004: 297).

In this unit, we will rely mostly on the work by Kenneth A. Gould, David N.
Pellow and Allan Schnaiberg titled ‗Interrogating the treadmill…‘ and the
critical comments given by Erik Olin Wright in response to their work.
Before we go further, under section 5.2, we will first examine the ‗treadmill‘
metaphor and its logic. Here, we will explore the contribution of Gould,
Pellow and Schnaibergonthe treadmill and its impact on the environment and
society. Under section 5.3, we will highlight the argument for production and
the role of the treadmill elites in the social construction of material desires.
This section will also explain why the treadmill theory emphasisescitizen-
worker over consumer. Under section 5.4, we will study the treadmill under
globalisation and its consequences. This section will look into the growing
hegemony of the treadmill and how it has led to the emergence of
transnational environmental movement. We will conclude this section with
some of the criticisms against the treadmill theory.

5.2 EMERGENCE OF THE TREADMILL OF

PRODUCTION THEORY
It was the treadmill theorists like Gould, Pellow and Schnaiberg, who
advocated the treadmill of production theory. While Schnaiberg was its
earliest advocate, Gould and Pellow popularize the treadmill theory. The
treadmill theorists gave us the context for its emergence, while explaining the
logic of the treadmill andits impact on environment and society.

The treadmill theorists seek structural solutions to the problems of

environment (Gould et al 2004: 312). They are critical of the dominant mode
of production. It is in exploring the emergence of the treadmill theory that we
will be able to understand it better. Let us first begin by explaining the
‗treadmill‘ metaphor.

5.2.1 The ‘Treadmill’ Metaphor

The ‗treadmill‘metaphor in the treadmill of production theory depicts a
society ―running in place without moving forward‖ (Gould et al 2004: 297).
―It represented‖, according to Gould and others,―a decrease in the social
efficiency of the productive system. This decreased social efficiency of
natural resource utilisation produced a shift towards vastly increased rates of
54 ecosystem depletion (resource extraction) and ecosystem pollution (dumping
wastes into ecosystem)‖ (Gould et al 2004: 297). Apart from the ecological Environmental
Sociology: Nature
crisis it engendered, the treadmill of production weakened employment and Scope
opportunity for workers. It benefits the small minority of shareholders
(investors and managers) at the cost of stakeholders (workers and
community-residents) (Gould et al 2004: 297). As workers were laid off by
growing treadmill, there isan increased political support,rather than decreased
social support for new round of investment,as workers and their families
believed that it was necessary for their employment and social progress
(Gould et al 2004: 297). In order to understand this paradox, Schnaiberg
introduced the termed ‗treadmill of production‘ in 1980 (Gould et al 2004:
296).

5.2.2 The Logic of the Treadmill

The treadmill theory emerged in the context of increased environmental
degradation after Second World War II. The United States, after Second
World War, has seen rapid industrialisation and increased growth in
production and profit. This has led to new rounds of investment and increase
demand on natural resources extraction (Gould et al 2004: 296). The
demands for increase productive capacities of industries were met with new
technologies from public funded universities, research institutes and private
research lab (Gould et al 2004: 296). These new technologies were ‗sunk
capital‘ as it increases profits through higher levels of production (Gould et al
2004: 296).

As human labours have limited productive capacity, introduction of new

technologies in productive system have a multiplier effect. New technology
increase sustains production at a higher level. It is important to note that cost
cutting always took place at the expense of labour.The reason islabour can be
easily replace as opposed to the fixed cost of operating a machine, which is
more inflexible (Gould et al 2004: 297). In spite of the displacement of
workers, trade unions and government still support new round of investment
as they believed that it would bring in new job and employment
opportunities. This further enhances the political and economic power of the
investor-managerial group. The clout and influence of the investor-
managerial group can be seenin their contributions to political parties during
election.Consequently, politicians give direct and indirect support to
‗economic development‘ pursue by the investor-managerial group (Gould et
al 2004: 297). Public also support such economic development as it is
consider to be the only path to social progress. Therefore, any group that
opposes ‗economic development‘ is bound to fail (Gould et al 2004: 297).
With the treadmill,as the model, there is bound to be an increasein profits/
dividends at the cost of eco-system and natural resources.

5.2.3 Impact of the Treadmill of Production

The rapid expansion of the treadmill, after the Second World War, was
driven by promises of unlimited energy (nuclear energy) and access to natural 55
Envisioning resources (petroleum). It has led to inattention to the limits of ecology and
Environmental
Sociology support for economic expansionat the cost of environment. In the process, the
utilitarian approach of ―sustained yield‖to natural resource of the early 20th
century was sidelined (Hays, in Gould et al 2004: 298).

With the deterioration of the environment, the idea of ―limits to

growth‖emerged (Meadows et al, in Gould et al 2004: 298). However,
environmental degradation was overlooked due to increasing differentiation
of population along class lines. The emerging middle class was insulated
from the deteriorating environmental pollution as they live upstream and
upwind of polluting units. While the majority of the blue-collar workers,due
to decreased cost of property and limited wages of the workers, lived
downstream and downwind of polluting units.As a result, this has adverse
consequences on the health of the workers (Gould et al 2004: 298).

Barry Commoner talks about the decline in ―capital productivity‖ and its
impact on the environment (Gould et al 2004: 298). According to Commoner,
the precursor to the treadmill theorywas found in the idea of capital
productivity. Capital productivity aims at increasing physical capital per
worker so as to increase production and profit. This was in sharp contrast to
the economic and managerial focus on ―worker productivity‖in the 1970s
(Gould et al 2004: 298). Worker productivity aims at reducing expenses so as
to increase corporate profitability. While the increase in worker productivity,
that is the acceleration of treadmill, gave little/ no benefitsto the workers at
the given rate of extraction of natural resources; the increase in capital
productivity, withthe introduction of new production technologies, led to
higher rate of production and extraction of natural resources.This has led to
increase energy needs and discharge of chemical waste. The impact of the
acceleration of the treadmill can be seen in the destruction of natural
habitat,which is a sign of the expansion of the treadmill of production (Gould
et al 2004: 298).

As the treadmill expands, with increase capital productivity, it eventually led

to the decline in wages and job opportunities. Harrison calls this as the ―low
road to development‖ (Harrison, in Gould et al 2004:299). This led tounrest
among workers and trade unions. The management, however, tried to curtail
this unrest through ―job blackmail‖ (Gould et al 2004: 299). They threatened
workers in the US with shut down and plan to move its production units to
the global South, where there is cheap labour and workers are not unionised.
At the same time, politicians and workers from the global Southwelcome
such move,as it would bring them new employment opportunities. With the
expansion of the treadmill, increase profits for the corporates come at the
expenses of economic volatility and environmental protection (Gould et al
2004: 299).

In the course of treadmill expansion, for a small minority of workers, the

same low road to development is experience as the ―high road to
56 development‖as it brings increasewages, upgradation of skills and
advancement in careers. These are workersengaged in marketing, financial Environmental
Sociology: Nature
analysis and customer service (Gould et al 2004: 299). They are the few and Scope
beneficiaries, apart from the shareholders, in a globalised world.

Check Your Progress 1

i) What are the underlying assumptions of the dominant mode of

production?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

ii) Briefly explain the treadmill of production theory.

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

iii) Why is cost cutting always at the expense of labour?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

5.3 TREADMILL THEORY FOCUS ON

PRODUCTION RATHER THAN
CONSUMPTION
In the treadmill theory, there is a focus on production rather than
consumption. This section will look at the work of Gould, Pellow
andSchnaiberg in order to understand the argument for production in the
treadmill theory. In the following sub-sections, we will examine the political
economy of the treadmill and how material desires are socially constructed.
We will also look at the role of non-treadmill elites in the productive system.
57
Envisioning 5.3.1 The argument for production
Environmental
Sociology
The treadmill theorists like Gould, Pellow and Schnaibergfocus on
production rather than consumption. They argue that consumers may be the
ultimate purchaser, but it is production manager and owners who decides the
allocation of technologies for the productive system. Producers decide the
type of technologies, the use of labour andthe volume of production. These
are outside consumer decision-making process (Gould et al 2004: 300).
Consumers may accept or reject products, but they do not have influence over
the allocation of capital to productive technologies (Gould et al 2004: 300).

However, one may argue that supply is dependent on demand. For the
treadmill theorists, decision to provide supply and the means for supply is
first taken at the production level (Gould et al 2004: 300). It is within
production process that man first interacts with nature and production may or
may not be influence by consumption pattern (Gould et al 2004: 300).
According to them, consumer choice depends on ―previous production
decisions‖ and ―prior social distribution decisions‖ (Gould et al 2004: 301).

The treadmill theorists argue thatit would be a fallacy to put consumption

decision first, instead of production, because it would obscure the power
relations existing in society. In fact, according to Gould and others, to ignore
the political and economic relations embedded in the political economy is to
reinforce the existing status quo, where consumer choice is already constraint
by decisions taken by the treadmill elites (Gould et al 2004: 301).

5.3.2 Social Construction of Material Desires

In exploring the nature of consumer choice, which is beyond the biophysical
needs of man, Gould and others observe that human needs and desires are
largely determined by pre-existing conditions of production (Gould et al
2004: 301). Following Schiller, they argue that ―Desire is socially
constructed and material desires are largely constructed by material
producers‖ (Schiller, in Gould et al 2004: 301). According to Gould and
others, transformations of material desires into human needs isa social
process involving production decisions. And the contour of the markets is
shaped by the industry rather than by consumer preferences (Gould et al
2004: 301). In this, captain of the industry collaborated with the leaders of the
advertising companies to create a culture of mass consumption. This is one of
the reasons why,with the rise in productive output, there is a corresponding
increase in personal consumption (Gould et al 2004: 301).

5.3.3 The Role of Consumers, Citizens and Workers

In a culture of mass consumption, it may be possible to alter or terminate
specific forms of production. However, even if boycottswere to be successful,
consumersdo not determine the meansof production nor the alternativethat
could be produced (Gould et al 2004: 301). Gould and others argued that
58 even if consumers succeed to boycott specific products, it might simply free
capital for production of other products(Gould et al 2004: 301). In theory, it Environmental
Sociology: Nature
is possible to terminate specific products/ specific forms of production. and Scope
However, in reality, very few have succeeded. It is the politically organised
consumersgroup who are most likely to succeed.Even here, they might
mostly end up in raising social awareness (Gould et al 2004: 301).

According to Gould and others, the treadmill elites,with production

capital,determine the forms of production. They have access to natural
resource and waste sinks in the environment (Gould et al 2004: 302). They
also assess the liability, marketability and profitability of a product (Gould et
al 2004: 302). Since consumers are at the tail end of the productive system,
the treadmill elites gave more emphasis and importance to citizens (polity)
and workers (labour) (Gould et al 2004: 302). In fact, the non-elite treadmill
participants (citizen-workers) may be able to influence state decision makers
or capital to produced environmentally friendly products (Gould et al 2004:
302).For instance, workers may use their direct engagement with the
production process to stall or altered the production processes.

Check Your Progress 2

i) What shapes consumer‘s choice?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………

ii) How are material desires transformed into human needs?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………

iii) Why do the treadmill elites give more importance to workers than the
consumers?

…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………
59
Envisioning Box 1. Was the treadmill theory a dialectical theory?
Environmental
Sociology
The treadmill model initially was a historical model of change(Gould et al
2004: 304). Schnaiberg argues that whenever workers face social and
economic restrictions, they will act politically. In the face of environmental
degradation, citizen-workers would act to reduce the access to ecosystem by
treadmill institutions (Schnaiberg, in Gould et al 2004: 304). According to
him, there is dialectic between economic growth and environmental impact
(Schnaiberg, in Gould et al 2004: 305). Based on this dialectic, there are three
possible syntheses: (i) an ―economic synthesis‖, (ii) a ―managed (planned)
scarcity synthesis‖, and (iii) an ―ecological synthesis‖. And the treadmill
forces would be at varying level of dominance depending on the kind of
synthesis that took place (Schnaiberg, in Gould et al 2004: 305).

The treadmill by its nature and concept was essentially an ―economic

synthesis‖ (Gould et al 2004: 305). This can be seen in the post Second
World War economy of the United States from 1945 to 1960, which saw an
unprecedented growth of industries and expansion of the treadmill. However,
from 1975 to 1980, there were environmental movements and shift in policy
towards environmental protection, which is labeled as―managed (planned)
scarcity‖ (Gould et al 2004: 305). Here, the state limits the treadmill
institutions access to the ecosystems (Gould et al 2004: 305). Unlike the
―manage (planned) scarcity‖ phase, the more extreme form of the dialectic
can be seen in the ―ecological synthesis‖ (Gould et al 2004: 305). In
ecological synthesis, the state control access to the ecosystem without regards
to profits, wages, or employment. It means the economic goal is made
subservient to the ecological goal. Consequently, treadmill institutions have
to adjust their activities to the demands of environmental protection.At the
same time, they are expected to deliver production, wagesand employment
(Schnaiberg, in Gould et al 2004: 305). The idea of ecological synthesis
comes very close to the idea sustainable development (Gould et al 2004:
305). However, there was hardly any movement towards the sustainable
development after 1980. (Gould et al 2004: 305). This can be discerned from
the Kyoto Conference on greenhouse emission, which failed to get the
support of the United States. In spite of the drawbacks on sustainable
development, there were modest achievements in terms of increase energy
efficiency and reduction in pollution in industrial societies (Gould et al 2004:
305).Study by Gould and others have shown that the treadmill of production
is inherently dialectic (Gould et al 2004: 305). According to them, there is a
contest between social force benefitting out of the treadmill and those who
getdiminished as it expands.

5.4 THE TREADMILL OF PRODUCTION IN

THE ERA OF GLOBALISATION
In the context of globalisation, it will be interesting to look at how the
60 treadmill of production shapes the global economy and ecology. Before we
proceed further, it‘s important to look at the US economy and ecology. With Environmental
Sociology: Nature
globalisation, the US has emerged as the largest debtor nation in the world. and Scope
Does this have any implications? What are some of the advantages and
disadvantages of overseas investment? Gould, Pellow and Schnaibergtried to
explain the puzzle behind the balance of trade payments deficit in the US and
how this has implications for the ecology. We will end this section with some
of the criticisms against the treadmill theory.

5.4.1 Globalization and Its Consequences

In his initial work The Environment, From Surplus to Scarcity (1980),
Schnaiberg have partially analysed the implications of globalisation on the
US economy and ecology. He talked about how the rise of investment in less
developed economies would lead to reduced consumption in the US and
reduced production of the US-based industries for the domestic market.
Ultimately, this would lessen the impact on the environment and helped the
ecosystem to recover (Schnaiberg, in Gould et al 2004: 306).

Under globalisation, the US economy face balance of trade payments deficit.

This makesthe US the largest debtor nation in the world. However, the US
treadmill economy does not seem to suffer a major collapse. In fact, the US
seems to be least bothered about its indebtedness. Then the question is to
whom is the US indebted?

Gould and others explain that the US-based investor and managers have
shifted their production units abroad and importedthe finished products from
these units back to US (Gould et al 2004: 306). It means that the return of
investments from abroad isreaped back by the US-based investors and
managers. In other words, the US-based investors and managers are the ones
to whom the US is indebted to (although recently the number of foreign
investors‘ share in US investment is increasing) (Gould et al 2004: 306).

5.4.2 Advantagesand Disadvantages of Overseas Investment

Study by Gould and others have shown thatUS-based investors and managers
are attracted by overseas investment as it meanslower wages and lower
environmental protection for the production units. It also means US investors
and managers would notface stiff opposition from environmentalistsback
home because of the drop in local production and pollution (Gould et al 2004:
307). In fact, withdownsizing and wage reduction, the less affluent US
workers would be able to benefit from cheaper imports (Gould et al 2004:
307). At the same time, the US-based investor and managers can claim more
concessions from the workers and the state in order to remain
competitivefrom overseas producers and organizations (which are often
owned by them!) (Gould et al 2004: 307).

61
Envisioning Another advantage is that the impact of capital on the environment would
Environmental
Sociology have shifted abroad.However, the problem of ecological damageremains due
to logging, mining and agriculture (Gould et al 2004: 307). Whatever
ecological gainsin the US in terms of clean air and streams has been offset by
habitat destruction and species extinction (Gould et al 2004: 307).

In the global South, population growth has often been blame for the loss of
habitat and species. However, studies have shown that environmental
degradation is due to increasedinvestment in natural resource extraction and
pollution from processing and manufacturing plant (Rudel; Sonnenfeld, in
Gould et al 2004: 307). Thus, it is clear that the flow of global capital from
developed countries to the global South have accelerated the treadmill
anddisrupted the ecosystem (Gould et al 2004: 307). This flow of global
capital was induced by abundant natural resource, low environmental
protection and cheap labourin the global South (Gould et al 2004: 307).

5.4.3 Global Dimensions of Environmental Problems

The global dimensions of the environmental problems discussed at the Earth
Summit of 1992, in Rio de Janeiro, highlighted the relationship between the
growing transnational production and accelerating ecological destructions
(Gould et al 2004: 308). Soon after the conference, Schnaiberg and Gould
came out with their work: Environment and Society (1994), which
contextualises the treadmill model and its effect on global history and
transnational economy (Schnaiberg and Gould, in Gould et al in 2004: 308).
In this study, they bring out the rising global inequality between the global
North and South.And how the global South is seen as a destination for cheap
labour, raw materialand waste sink (Schnaiberg and Gould, in Gould et al
2004: 308). They also observed that human experience at the local level is
increasingly shaped by globalisation, where every locality is brought into a
competition. This has damaged their political will to protect the environment
(Schnaiberg and Gould, in Gould et al 2004: 309).

Withincreasing globalisation, there is a growing hegemony of the treadmill

values and economic form (Schnaiberg, in Gould et al 2004: 309). The
treadmill is no longer a US phenomenon, but a global phenomenon. It has
becomeentrenched and no longer easily dismantles. In fact, the treadmill
model has defeated all other alternatives (Schnaiberg, in Gould et al 2004:
309). In opposition to this transnationalised treadmill, transnational political
coalitions are emerging. This has beenattributed tothe undermining of labour
security and increasing ecological degradation (Gould, Robert, & Lewis;
Buttel& Gould, in Gould et al 2004: 309).

5.4.4 Criticism of Treadmill Production

Erik Olin Wright, a Marxist scholar, gave critical comments on Gould,
Pellow and Schnaiberg‘s work on the treadmill.Wright makes it clear from
the beginning that he agrees with the core argument of the treadmill
62
theory.He says, ―Capitalism is anti-ecological due to its structural Environmental
Sociology: Nature
characteristics, not due to the personal characteristics of individuals within and Scope
the systems‖(Wright 2004: 317). He is critical ofthe used of the term
treadmill instead of capitalism and producer instead of owner/ capitalist/
investor, in the work of Gould and others,which he finds it misleading
(Wright 2004: 318).

Another point Wright brings out was that just because production is logically
prior to consumption doesn‘t mean that it is more important than
consumption (Wright 2004: 318). According to him, it is the logic of capital
(maximizing profit) and market dynamics (free competition) that explains the
damaging effect of production (Wright 2004: 318). He further explains that
market competition, under private ownership,generates incentive to
externalized cost of production.This, according to him, has a damaging effect
on the environment (Wright 2004: 319)

Wright also points out that the treadmill theory assumes ecological
sustainability with ―no growth‖ economy (Wright 2004: 319). According to
him, growth of output need not necessarily mean growth of physical output.
There can be improvement in quality of product without increase in quantity
of raw material used. It also means that there can be economic growth with
certain kind of service (Wright 2004: 319).

Treadmill theorists are not very clear on the possibility of green capitalism or
green economy (Wright 2004: 320). One argumentgiven is that capitalism as
a system of accumulation would be unsustainable under green constraints
(Wright 2004: 30). The other argument is that green capitalism is not an
obstacle per se to the logic of capital (Wright 2004: 320). According to
Wright, capitalist could be force to internalise some of these constraints and
focus on service and quality of output (Wright 2004: 320).

In fact, Wright observes that capitalist system is much more flexible and
adaptable as an institutional logic. What could go against the institutional
logic of the capitalist system could actually be the ―instrumental power‖ of
the capitalists and not necessarily the ―functional logic‖ of capitalist
accumulation and reproduction (Wright 2004: 320). According to him, it is
not clear whether treadmill theorists are referring to the instrumental power
of the capitalist or the functional logic of capitalism (Wright 2004: 320).

The discussion on green capitalism alsoraises the issue of the alternative.

Wright opines that the normative principle and the criteria for an alternative
is not difficult to find out, but what is not clear is the kind of institutional
principle and social mechanismthat has to be put in place (Wright 2004: 320).
Treadmill theorists, like Gould and others,in their work alluded to ―ecological
synthesis‖, which meansstate‘s control over the ecosystem without regard to
profit, wages, or employment (Gould et al, in Wright 2004: 321). Wright
questions whether it is possible to do this in a capitalist society. He argues
that even if there is centralised bureaucratic planning to minimise 63
Envisioning environmental impact, it will still produce ecological destruction of its own
Environmental
Sociology kind (Wright 2004: 321). According to him, the implicit vision of the
alternative should be sketch out and not leave it as a black box (Wright 2004:
321).

Wright also observes that there is no clarity on the kind of empirical evidence
that can be used against the treadmill theory (Wright 2004: 321). For
instance, if there were ecological destruction in the past, that could be
consider as a triumph of the treadmill theory. However, if there were not
much of an ecological destruction, that could be taken as a sign of
―managed/planned scarcity‖. Wright wonders what could be the credible
evidence against the treadmill theory. He argues that if the capitalist
voluntarily curtailed capital accumulation and internalised environmental
externalities without external pressure, this could be taken as the evidence
against the treadmill thesis. But this was never propounded by the treadmill
theory, or by any other theory (Wright 2004: 321).

One last criticism of Wright is the used of the metaphor ‗treadmill‘.

According to him, Gould and others used the notion of the ‗treadmill‘ as a
―society running in place, without moving forward‖ (Gould et al, Wright
2004: 321). At the same time, they explain that there is decrease in social
efficiency of natural resource utilisation, which increase the rate of resource
extraction and ecosystem pollution (Gould et al, Wright 2004: 321). This,
according to Wright, is a sign of ―moving backward‖ and the used of the
‗treadmill‘ metaphor do not capture theessence of the argument (Wright
2004: 322).

Check Your Progress 3

i) Complete the following sentences by filling in the blank spaces

a) US-based investors and managers are attracted by overseas

investment as it means lower ………………………. and lower
…………………….. for the production units.

b) Whatever ecological gain in the US in terms of cleaner air and

streams has been offset by ……………………….. and
……………………………………

c) ―Capitalism is anti-ecological due to its ……………………………,

not due to the personal characteristics of the individuals within the
systems‖.

d) It is the ………………………….. (maximising profit) and

………………………………. (free competition) that explain the
damaging effect of production.

e) If the capitalist voluntarily curtailed ………………………….. and

internalised ………………………………………. without external
64
 pressure, this could be taken as the evidence against the treadmill Environmental
Sociology: Nature
thesis. and Scope

5.6 LET US SUM UP

In this unit, we first tried to understand the ‗treadmill‘ metaphor used in the
treadmill of production theory within the context of industrialisation in the
west. We then examined the logic of the treadmill and its impact on society
and environment.

Next, we explored why the treadmill theorists focus on production rather than
consumption in their theoretical framework. We also examined how material
desires are socially constructed by the treadmill elites and the role of citizen-
workers in the productive system.

Finally, we examined the treadmill of production within the context of

globalisation. Here we explored the implications of globalisation on the US
economy and environment. We also looked at the nature of global capitalism
and its implications on ecology and transnational environmental movement.

5.7 REFERENCES
Gould, Kenneth A., Pellow, David N. and Schnaiberg, Allan (September
2004). ‗Interrogating the Treadmill of Production: Everything You Wanted to
Know About the Treadmill but Were Afraid to Ask‘, Organization &
Environment, Volume 17, No. 3, pp. 296-316.

Wright, Erik Olin (September 2004). ‗Interrogating the Treadmill of

Production: Some Questions I Still Want to Know About and Am Not Afraid
to Ask‘, Organization & Environment, Volume 17, No. 3, pp. 317-322.

Schnaiberg, Allan (1980).The Environment: From Surplus to Scarcity. New

York: Oxford University Press

Schnaiberg, Allan and Gould, Kenneth A. (1994). Environment and Society:

The Enduring Conflict. New York: St. Martin‘s Press

5.8 SPECIMEN ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR

PROGRESS
Check Your Progress 1

i) The underlying assumptions in the dominant mode of production are that

new investments in the dominant mode of production are almost
inevitable and necessary for higher level of resource extraction, which
will yield higher dividends/profits.

ii) The treadmill of production theory depicts a society ―running in place

without moving forward‖. ―It represented‖, according to Gould and
others, ―a decrease in the social efficiency of the productive system. This 65
Envisioning decreased social efficiency of natural resource utilization produced a
Environmental
Sociology shift towards vastly increased rates of ecosystem depletion (resource
extraction) and ecosystem pollution (dumping wastes into ecosystem)‖.

iii) Cost cutting took place at the expense of labour because labour can be
easily replace as opposed to the fixed cost of operating a machine, which
is more inflexible.

Check Your Progress 2

i) Consumer choice depends on ―previous production decisions‖ and ―prior

social distribution decisions‖.

ii) Transformations of material desires into human needs are social

processes involving production decisions. And the contour of the
markets is shaped by the industry rather than by consumer preferences.
In this, captain of the industry collaborated with the leaders of the
advertising companies to create a culture of mass consumption.

iii) Workers may use their direct engagement with the production process to
stall or altered the production processes.

Check Your Progress 3

i) Complete the following sentences by filling in the blank spaces

a) wages;environmental protection
b) habitat destruction; species extinction
c) structural characteristics
d) logic of capital; market dynamics
e) capital accumulation; environmental externalities

66
 Environmental
UNIT 6 ECOLOGICAL Sociology: Nature
and Scope
MODERNISATION
Structure
6.0 Objectives
6.1 Introduction
6.2 What Is Ecological Modernisation?
6.2.1 Definition and Assumptions

6.2.2 Joseph Huber on Ecological Modernisation

6.2.3 Arthur Mol on Ecological Modernisation

6.2.4 Revision in Ecological Modernisation

6.3 Perspectives on Ecological Modernisation
6.3.1 The Four Views on Ecological Modernisation

6.3.2 Why ecological modernisation is popular?

6.3.3 Ecological Modernisation as An ‗Embedded Autonomy‘

6.4 In an Age Of Globalisation
6.4.1 Political Modernisation

6.4.2 Market Induced Environmental Reform

6.4.3 Emergence of Global Environmentalism and Global Governance

6.4.4 Criticism
6.5 Let Us Sum Up
6.6 References
6.7 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress

6.0 OBJECTIVES
After going through this unit, you should be able to:

 Discuss the notion of ecological modernisation

 Explain the perspectives on ecological modernisation
 Grasp howecological modernisation operates underglobalisation

6.1 INTRODUCTION
Ecological modernisation, also known as ―eco-restructuring,‖ emerged in the
West in the mid-1950 due to increased ecological crisis.This crisis developed
side by side with the growth in the economy (Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 324;
Mol 2002: 93). So, ecological modernisation is a response to radical

Written by Dr. Kamminthang Mantuong, Associate Prof., Miranda House College, Delhi
University
67
Envisioning environmental movement that has developed in Europe. It is also seen
Environmental
Sociology as‗improved‘version of sustainable development. Proponents of ecological
modernisationtheory believed that environmental reform could take place
only through further industrialisation. They believed that ecological
modernisationwould lead to efficient use of natural resources andless
emission of pollution.

Before we go further, under section 6.2, we will first define ecological

modernisation and its underlying assumptions. We will also look at the
contribution of Joseph Huber and ArthurP.J. Mol and brings out theirrevision
on ecological modernisation theory. In section 6.3, the four views on
ecological modernisationwould be highlighted and the reasons for its
popularity. This section also takes into consideration the idea that ecological
modernisationtheory is parallel to the notion of ‗embedded autonomy.‘ In the
next section (6.4), we will elaborate on ecological modernisationunder
globalisation and the challenges thrown by globalisation. We will also look at
the institutional changes that are taking place and highlight some of the
criticisms on ecological modernisation.

6.2 WHAT IS ECOLOGICAL

MODERNIZATION?
It was Joseph Huber and Arthur Mol who propounded ecological
modernisation as a theory. While Huber was its earliest advocate, Mol was
the one who popularised the theory with his emphasis on market driven
environmental reform. Later on, Arthur Mol and GertSpaargaren made a
revision of the ecologicalmodernisation theory, which was seen as a more
balance understanding of ecological modernization. This revision helps them
to avoid the trap of essentialising capitalism as necessary for ecological
modernisation or seeing capitalism as obstructing environmental reform.

Ecological modernisationas a theory takes the ‗middle path‘ between the neo-
Marxist and neo-liberals. It is by first understanding the contributions of
ecological modernisation theorists that we will be able to appreciate how
ecological modernisation has progress in its theoretical formulation. This can
be seen in the following sub-sections. Let us first begin by examining the
definition and assumptions of ecological modernisation.

6.2.1 Definition and Assumptions

Ecological moderniSation, according to Arthur Mol, can be defined as the
growing independence or autonomy of ecological perspective and the
emergence of ecological rationality as the basis of production and
consumption (Mol 2002: 93). In other words, it means the growing
institutionalisation of ecological rationality in the domain of economic (Mol
2002: 109). This institutionalisation gets manifested in social practices and
institutional developments (Mol 2002: 109).
68
According to F. H. Buttel, ecological modernisationassumes that institutions Environmental
Sociology: Nature
are malleable and industrial capitalism has the technological capabilities to and Scope
bring about ―eco-efficiencies‖ or ―improved‖ sustainable development
(Buttel 2000: 63). This would take place through ―ecological switchover‖ in
the industrialisation process, which would maintain the sustenance base of
production and consumption. According to Huber, the ecological switchover
would take place through innovative technologies thatwould benefit the
environment (Huber, in Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 334-335). According to
Spaargaren and Mol, it also means the shift from traditional ―ends-of-pipe
technologies,‖ associated with chemical and manufacturing industries, to
―clean production processes‖such as microelectronics and gene technology
(Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 335). Spaargaren and Mol calls this
transformation in the production process as the ―ecologization of the
economy‖ (Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 335). For York and Rosa, it isthe
―greening of business‖ or ―sustainability from within,‖ where environmental
impact is internalised so that future productions and ecological stability
would be maintained (York and Rosa 2003: 273). According to Spaargaren
and Mol, similar to the concept of ―ecologisation of the economy‖in the
production cycles is the concept of ―economizing ecology‖ in the
consumption cycles. It means putting economic value on nature, which forms
the sustenance base of production and consumption (Spaargaren and Mol
1992: 335).

Check Your Progress 1

i) Define ecological modernisation.

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

ii) What are the underlying assumptions of ecological modernisation?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

69
Envisioning 6.2.2 Joseph Huber on Ecological Modernisation
Environmental
Sociology
Joseph Huberwas the one who makes it clear that ecological modernisation
belongs to industrial society theory as he explains the historical phase of
industrial society and the logic of industrialism (Spaargaren and Mol 1992:
335). The three phases of industrial society, according to Huber, are the
―industrial breakthrough,‖ ―construction of industrial society,‖ and
―ecological switchover‖(Huber, in Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 335). These
three phases, according toSpaargaren and Mol, correspond to ―invention,‖
―inauguration,‖ and ―diffusion‖ of new technologies (Spaargaren and Mol
1992: 335). If steam engine was associated with the first phase, chip
technology is associated with the third phase (Spaargaren and Mol 1992:
335).

To understand modern society, Huber differentiates three analytical

categories: ―industrial system‖ (technosphere), ―life world‖ (sociosphere),
and ―nature‖ (biosphere) (Huber, in Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 335). The
problem with modern society, according to Huber, is that the sociosphere and
the biosphere are colonised by the technosphere. According to him, this fault
in the ―structural design‖ can be overcome/corrected with ecological
modernization (Huber, in Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 336). For Huber, unlike
other scholars, the point of departure in ecological modernisationis
industrialism rather than capitalism (Huber, in Spaargaren and Mol 1992:
336).

6.2.3 Arthur Mol on Ecological Modernisation

While Joseph Huber see ecological modernisation taking place in the context
of industrialism and as part of the historical phases of industrial society,
Arthur Mol see ecological modernisation as market induced environmental
reform, especially in the developed countries. Mol argues that ecological
modernisation is the outcome of the interplay between ―economic market‖
and actors, on the one hand; and the citizen-consumer and political
institutions, on the other (Mol 2002: 102). In other words, ecological
modernisation is the institutionalisation of environmental interest and
concern in the economic domain (Mol 2002: 102). Here Mol emphasis on
economic domain for market driven environmental reform seems to be in
sharp contrast to Huber‘s idea of industrialism, which seeks environmental
solutions in technological innovation.

The other factor that needs to be considered is the emergence of

globalisation.The free flow of global capital tends to weaken the institutions
of the state. This has implication for environmental reform. At the national
level, the state is indispensable in the fight against environment degradation
(Mol 2002: 94-95). According to neo-Marxist scholars, it is this unchecked
global capitalism that will ultimately destroy the sustenance base of
production and consumption (Mol 2002: 95). In other words, globalization
would end up destroying the capitalist economic order itself. The destruction
70
of capitalist order due to the destruction of the sustenance base of production Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and consumption is known as the ―second contradiction of capitalism‖ (Mol and Scope
2002: 95). Perhaps, this is one of the reasons for the popularity of the
‗treadmill of production theory.‘ Mol attributed the popularity of the
treadmill of production theory to the emergence of globalisation (Mol 2002:
94). In fact, many neo-Marxist scholars believed that economic growth and
expansion are inherent in global capitalist economy, which will ultimately
destroy the sustenance base of production and consumption (Mol 2002: 95).

6.2.4 Revision in Ecological Modernisation

In recent years, Mol and Spaargaren haveoffered a revision of ecological
modernisation theory. They see the initial debates on environment and
environmental sociology in the late 1970s and the early 1980s as an over-
reaction to the dominant schools of thought led by neo-Marxist and counter-
productivity thinkers (Mol and Spaargaren, in Hannigan 2006: 26). Initially,
Mol and Spaargaren challenge the neo-Marxists and counter-productivity
thinkers, like Rudolph Bahro and Barry Commoner, for claiming that
modernisation project was dying and its ecological deterioration could be
salvage by recognising the core institutions of modern society like the
economic market and industries (Mol and Spaargaren, in Hannigan 2006: 26-
27). However, according to Mol and Spaargaren, this is no longer the case
todayas capitalism has evolved in a green direction. For instance, market-
based instruments like tradable pollution credits have displaced state
regulation and enforcement (Mol and Spaargaren, in Hannigan 2006:27). In
fact, ecological modernisation theorists have incorporated some of the critical
comments of the earlier environmental debate and in the process reforming
and refining their analysis (Hannigan 2006: 27). Today, capitalism is no
longer seen as essentialor an obstruction to radical environmental reform
(Hannigan 2006: 27).

Ifinitially the neo-Marxists were seen as the rivals of ecological

modernisationtheorists, Mol and Spaargarenobserved that ecological
modernisation theoristsare now seen asmaking a theoretical alliance with the
neo-Marxists against their common rivals – post modernists and social
constructionists (Mol and Spaargaren, in Hannigan 2006: 27). The reasons
are not far to seek. Post modernists like Bluhdorn see the ecological crisis as
merely a ‗grand narrative‘ that needs to be deconstructed. For him, the idea of
ecological rationality is about power, politics and big money (Bluhdorn, in
Hannigan 2006: 27). Similarly, ecological modernisation theorists reject
strong social constructionists because they believe that environmental
problem has no ‗real‘ existence (Hannigan 2006: 27). Hannigan observed that
in spite of the apparent understanding between the neo-Marxists and the
ecological modernisation theorists, Moland Spaargaren, unlike the neo-
Marxists,continue to repose their faith in ‗responsible capitalism‘ and the
primacy of the ‗market‘(Hannigan 2006: 27). This can be seen in Mol‘s study
of the Dutch chemical industry, a notorious polluter, which now 71
Envisioning useenvironmentally friendly new technologies (low organic solvent paints)
Environmental
Sociology and new corporate instruments (like the annual environmental reports,
environmental audits and environmental certification system) under pressure
from environmental groups (Hannigan 2006: 27). The Dutch chemical
industry transformation from notorious polluters to environmentally friendly
industry has been touted as a shining example of successful ecological
modernisation.

Check Your Progress 2

i) What is the point of departure in ecological modernization for Joseph

Huber?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

ii) What is the basis of environmental reform in ecological modernisation

for Arthur Mol?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

iii) What revised theoretical positionhas been taken by ecological

modernisation theorists?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

Box 6.1: EMT Scholars Response to Treadmill of Production Theory

Arthur Molmakes a comparative analysis of ecological modernisationtheory

and the treadmill of production theory. According to him, scholars of
ecological modernisation theory advocate environmental radicalism rather
than social radicalism (i.e. radical change of capitalism/ treadmill form of
72
production)because they believed that small change could be made, which are Environmental
Sociology: Nature
substantial, rather thanbig change, which are limited in nature(Mol 2002: 96). and Scope
In other words, radical change in the economic relations of production might
not necessarily be environmentally beneficial (Mol 2002: 96).

Ecological modernisation theorists see any change in the capitalist mode of

production and consumption as relative rather than absolute (Mol 2002: 96).
It means they believe in environmental reform and improvement rather than
radical change and de-modernisation. So they will go for incremental change
at production and consumption level (Mol 2002: 96). In a way, it also means
capitalist form of production, along with ecological criteria, would continue
to play an important role in the organisation and design of global production
and consumption (Mol 2002: 96).

Scholars of ecological modernisation theory see any changes in the

institutions and social practices, due to ecological interest in mind, as
structural change; whereas scholars of treadmill of production theory see any
changes as window dressing with no lasting environmental improvement
(Mol 2002: 97). As a result, advocates of treadmill of production theory are
pessimistic of the future, whereas scholars of ecological modernisationare
optimistic of finding solutions to ecological problem (Buttel 2000: 63-64).

Ecological modernisation theorists show a close link between the analysis of

the changes in production and consumption and the expected trajectory for
environmental improvement (Mol 2002: 98). Whereas, in treadmill of
production theory, the analysis of its destructive nature do not match the
countervailing strategies suggested by its proponents (Mol 2002: 97-98). In
fact, Mol found the neo-Marxists suggestion for environmental improvement
as highly utopian (Mol 2002: 98).

One of the reasons, according to Mol, why scholars of ecological

modernisation theory and treadmill of production theory has major difference
with regard to environmental improvement may have to do with the object of
study. Mol observed that ecological modernisation theorists deal with
conventional environmental problems like water pollution, solid waste, etc.,
which are local and national in nature; whereas treadmill scholars deals with
high risk environmental problems like climate change, ozone layer depletion,
etc., which are regional and globalin nature (Mol 2002: 98-99).

6.3 PERSPECTIVES ON ECOLOGICAL

MODERNIZATION
There are different perspectives on ecological modernisation. F. H. Buttel has
given us four views on ecological modernisation. In the following sub-
sections, we will examine why ecological modernisation has become popular,
especially in the developed countries. Some of the reasons, as given by
Buttel, are a response to a variety of circumstances. He also
showedecological modernisationas close to the concept of ‗embedded 73
Envisioning autonomy‘ advanced by Evans and originally found in Karl Polanyi‘s
Environmental
Sociology ‗disembedding.‘

6.3.1 The four views on ecological modernization

Buttelpoints out four views on ecological modernisation. The first view on
ecological modernisationis known as ‗objectivism.‘ Arthur Mol and
GertSpaargaren from North America and Britain contributed the most. The
others are from Germany and Netherlands led by Joseph Huber and Martin
Janicke (Buttel 2000: 58). The second view is that of constructivism. This
view looks at ecological modernisation as the dominant discourse of
environmental policy in advanced countries (Buttel 2000: 58). One of its
proponentsHajer believes that ecological modernisation may dilute the
impulse for environmental reform, as it tends to obscure the role of capital,
technology and consumer culture (Buttel 2000: 58-59). For this reason,
Hajer‘s idea is seen as hostile to ecological modernisation (Buttel 2000: 59).
The third view is that of the environmental management, which is closely
associated with industrial ecology and eco-restructuring in the private sector
(Buttel 2000: 59). One example is that of waste recycling which increase
efficiency and minimises pollution and waste (Buttel 2000: 59). The fourth
view on ecological modernisation is associated with environmental policy
innovation. Scholars like Murphy see the incorporation of environmental
policy as an instance of ecological modernisation (Murphy, in Buttel 2000:
59).

6.3.2 Why Ecological Modernisation is Popular?

According to Buttel, ecological modernisationpopularity has to do with its
effective response to a variety of circumstances rather than theoretical clarity.
First, ecological modernisation was seen as a respond to the radical
environment movement in Northern Europe in the 1980s, which see
globalisation leading to environmental degradation (Buttel 2000: 59).
Second, there was also a realisation that sustainability and sustainable
development has its own limitation, as it lacks guidance and vision for future
environmental policy (Buttel 2000: 60). In fact, the concept of sustainability
is more applicable to global South, which rely more on primary renewal
sectors in rural areas.In contrast, the global North rely moreon secondary
non-renewal (―transformative‖) sectors in metropolitan region (Buttel 2000:
60). In other words, in developed countries, ecological modernisation was
seen as an alternative to sustainability. Third, ecological modernisation was
also seen as a respond to biases and despair in the North American
environmental sociology, which tends to over-theorise the disruption in
environment (Buttel 2000: 60). In such a situation, ecological modernisation
was able to give a new perspective and hope for environmental improvement
(Buttel 2000: 60).

74
6.3.3 Ecological Modernisation as An ‘Embedded Environmental
Sociology: Nature
Autonomy’ and Scope

In spite of ecological modernisation‘s weak theoretical formulation, Buttel

argues that it parallels influential theories (Buttel 2000: 62). According to
Buttel, ecological modernisationparallels Evans‘ Embedded Autonomy, which
was derived from Karl Polanyi‘s notion of ‗disembedding‘ (Buttel 2000: 62).l

Evans‘ ‗embedded autonomy‘ reflects a neo-Weberian perspective, which is

different from the Weberian notion of ―state centredness.‖ It is also against
the neo-Marxist structuralist notion of ―large centralized states‖ (Buttel 2000:
63). The idea of embedded autonomy is in sharp contrast to the idea of state
centredness or state autonomy as the property of the state (Buttel 2000: 63).
In the Weberian and neo-Marxist structuralist tradition, centralised state,
which is autonomous from class and groups, were seen as suited for
authoritative policies (Buttel 2000: 63). However, for Evans, state
effectiveness is derived from the nature and quality of the relations between
the state and civil society. For Evans, embedded autonomy, as a state
structure, represents coherence and connectedness between agencies, officials
and civil society groups (Evans, in Buttel 2000: 63).

According to Evans, the benefits of ‗embedded autonomy‘ and ‗state-society

synergy‘ is that the state becomes more effective and civil society groups are
better able to achieve their goal (Evans, in Buttel 2000: 63). Evans measured
state effectiveness in terms of economic growth and industrial development.
This also means (urban) sustainability and livability (Evans, in Buttel 2000:
63). However, for Janicke, embedded autonomy and state-society synergy are
important for effective environment policy and to overcome state failure
(Janicke, in Buttel 2000: 63).

While we talk of ‗embedded autonomy‘as a form of state structure, according

to Spaargaren and Mol, we should also not forget the role of state
intervention at various levels. State intervention at the national and
international level is necessary sometime to ‗repair‘ the shortcomings of free-
market competition, which often exclude environmental issues and
consideration (Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 337). However, Huber was against
state intervention to promote ecological modernisation, as it tends to be
counterproductive in the long run. He believes that state intervention tends to
frustrate any innovation process (Huber, in Spaargaren and Mol 1992: 337).
So for Huber, innovation in technology has no central role in the innovation
process at the level of production and consumption (Huber, in Spaargaren
and Mol 1992: 337). However, for Spaargaren and Mol, the international
nature of environmental problems and the need to harmonise economic
interest with environmental policies makes it almost impossible to think of an
‗ecological switchover‘ without state intervention (Spaargaren and Mol 1992:
338).

75
Envisioning Check Your Progress 3
Environmental
Sociology
i) The four views on ecological modernisation are:

a) ………………………………………

b) ………………………………………

c) ………………………………………

d) ………………………………………

ii) Why is sustainability/ sustainable development more applicable to the

global South rather than global North?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

iii) Why is the idea of ‗embedded autonomy‘ and state-society synergy

beneficial for the environment?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

6.4 IN AN AGE OF GLOBALISATION

Arthur Mol in his article ‗Ecological Modernization and the Global
Economy‘ attempts to understand environmental reform in the context of
globalisation. Before we proceed further, let us ask few important questions.
If environmental policy becomes effective because of state-society synergy at
the national level, how do we deal with environmental decay at the global
level? What are the institutional changes that are necessary to fight against
environmental decay in an age of global capitalism? Arthur Mol seems to
suggest that ecological modernisation is the answer to environmental
degradation. Let us try to examine some of his argument on how to tame the
ill effect of global capitalism on environment and its consequences for
ecological modernisation. For this, we will have to look at some of the actors,
institutions and mechanisms that are emerging at the global level in the wake
of global capitalism.
76
6.4.1 Political Modernisation Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
Arthur Mol suggested that one of the ways of taming global capitalism was
through political modernisation. This he believes was taking shape through
Multilateral Environmental Agreement (MEA) on issues like protection of
ozone layer, oceans, etc.(Mol 2002: 99). In fact, such MEAs were leading to
a common denominator in terms of law and policy principle, which
ultimatelywill lead to universal environmental law and policy (Mol 2002:
99). Mol also argues that regional institution like European Union (EU) has
environmental protection as important component in its economic integration.
This would serve a long way in coming up with global governance on
environment (Mol 2002: 99). Further, Mol pointed out that supra-national
institutions like the European Commission, European Parliament, and
European Court of Justice could effectively counter environmental
degradation where member state or transnational companies (TNCs) are
directly a party to it (Mol 2002: 100).

6.4.2 Market Induced Environmental Reform

One of the ways of bringing ecological modernisation is through the
institution of the market. According to Mol, market induced environmental
reform can be carried out across the globe through the logic and rationality of
the market (Mol 2002: 103). However, this does not mean that environmental
innovation and reform originates in the economic domain (Mol 2002: 102).
Market induced environmental reform, according to Mol, is the result of
―political decision, civil pressures and citizen-consumer demand‖ (Mol 2002:
103). These are in the domains outside that of the market. One should note
that environmental reform through the market is not permanent (Mol 2002:
103). Market induced environmental reform is still at its nascent stage (Mol
2002: 103). It still needs to be propelled by environmental institutions and
environmental movement (Mol 2002: 104). Sometimes environmental reform
becomes ambivalent because different economic actors have different
economic interest (Mol 2002: 104). The problem gets accentuated when
developed countries design environmental standards and underdeveloped
countries are left out (Mol 2002: 104). It also gets accentuated when
countries vied with each other for global capital (Mol 2002: 104). How then
do we tame global capital?

We know that global capital may be mobile but economic actors and
mechanisms, which are part and parcel of markets, are localised (Mol 2002:
104-105).This means that the material operation of global capital requires
political legitimisation, both at the national and international level (Mol 2002:
105). In fact, market exists because of political legitimation and it is the
material basis of its operation that allows the localisation of the market. It is
thislocalised nature of the market, which permits environmental scrutiny
(Mol 2002: 105).

77
Envisioning 6.4.3 Emergence of Global Environmentalism and Global
Environmental
Sociology Governance
Mol argues that global environmentalism is gaining momentum as the ethics
and principles of environmental behaviour are increasingly applied
worldwide. Moreover, the monitoring of TNCs and global institutions for
environmental violation has moved beyond the developed countries and, with
increase communication, any environmental damage and information is
quickly transmitted across the globe. It alsomeans that sanctions against
erring corporation/ institutions have transcended local boundaries and global
economic players have moved beyond mere formal compliance (Mol 2002:
108).

According to Mol, there is an emergence of global ‗sub-politics‘ within the

global environmental movement.He attributes this to nation states losing
control over national and global developments.Molobserves that scientists no
longer enjoy monopoly over scientific ‗proof.‘ In fact, scientific proofhas
become the object of social interest and conflict. Often, public intellectuals
and scientists questioned the dominant discourse on environmental issues.
And with increased transparency worldwide,global economic actors can no
longer ignore civil society protests and their sensibilities (Mol 2002: 108). As
a result, there is an increased felt need for consultations with various
stakeholders, which has led to the emergence of global environmental politics
and global environmental governance (Mol 2002: 109).

Box 1. Why Divergent Perspective on Environmental Reform?

According to Mol, there is a divergent perspective on the success or failure of

the environmental movement due to difference in the location of global actors
and the stages of economic development (Mol 2002: 106). For instance,
leaders of transnational industries, international economic institutions, and
neo-liberal scholars are likely to see the growing power of civil society as a
counter movement. On the other hand, environmental activists, social
scientists and political commentators are more likely to be cautious,
ambivalent and skeptical of the success of the environmental movement (Mol
2002: 106).

Mol also explains the divergent perspective on two grounds. He is of the

view that, on the one hand, civil societyas one of the actor is playing the role
of the underdog so as to gained sympathy and support against global
capitalism (Mol 2002: 106). On the other hand, people who support global
capitalism overstate the strength and power of the civil societies,
spearheading the environmental movement, which in the process legitimised
backlash against the green movement (Mol 2002: 107).

Further, in evaluating the environmental movement, Mol points out that the
divergentperspective has to do with our point of reference. Mol observes that
in developed countries, like the OECD countries, there is an increasing
78
environmental movement and environmental consciousness (Mol 2002: 107). Environmental
Sociology: Nature
Whereas, in developing countries, like the Sub-Saharan Africa, the and Scope
environmental movement and environmental consciousness is scattered or
poorly integrated (Mol 2002: 107).

However, Mol also cautioned that the discourses on environmental

movement and global civil society should not be construed as the existence of
worldwide network of local NGOs nor the existence of common frame of
reference (Mol 2002: 107). In fact, environmental priorities are different in
different countries. As pointed out by Mol, environmental movements and its
discourses are shape by the specificity of the locality, its history and
traditions (Mol 2002: 108).

6.4.5 Criticism
While Mol argues that ecological modernisation theory brings environment
back into the fold of social theory (Mol 2002: 110), Buttel critiques
ecological modernisation theory as not well-developed social theory as it is
shaped by broader political and economic factors (Buttel 2000: 58). Buttel
also criticises ecological modernisation theory as an indistinct social theory
because the logic of ecological modernisation is dependent upon political
processes and practices (Buttel 2000: 58).

One weaknesses of ecological modernisation, as pointed out by Buttel, is its

Eurocentric perspective, where the theoretical roots and empirical examples
are derived mainly from North European countries (Buttel 2000: 64). The
other weaknesses of ecological modernisationis its excessive emphasis
onsecondary non-renewal (―transformative‖) sectors and its pre-occupation
with efficiency and pollution control,while ignoring the excessive resource
consumption and its consequential impact on environment (Buttel 2000: 64)

The other criticism against ecological modernisation theory, according to

Hannigan, is its ―unflappable‖technological optimism(Hannigan 2006: 26).
Ecological modernisation theory suggests that environmental problem can be
solved through ―super-industrialisation‖ (Hannigan 2006: 25). However, this
has its risk and limitations. For instance, as pointed out by Hannigan, the use
of silicon chip, which is the basis of modern industrialisation, is by no means
environmentally neutral (Hannigan 2006: 26).Hannigan also argue that
nuclear technology, which was once considered to be a source of ‗clean‘
energy, has its own risk and undesirable outcome (Hannigan2006: 26).

Another trenchant critique on ecological modernisation comes from the

treadmill theorists like Schnaiberg, who suggested that the difference
between ecological modernisationand treadmill theory could arise from the
difference in their ―sampling approach‖ (Schnaiberg, in Hannigan 2006: 28).
According to Schnaiberg, ecological modernisation theoristsfocus on ‗cutting
edge‘ technology or ‗best practice‘ industry and assume that change will
happen eventually (Schnaiberg, in Hannigan 2006: 28). In other words,
79
Envisioning whatever changes or environment improvement took place was because of
Environmental
Sociology selective sampling and may not give the true picture of the industries.

Treadmill theorists are also skeptical of ecological modernisation theorists

claim that greener production practices would eventually lead to
sustainability (Hannigan 2006: 28). According to treadmill theorists,
industries make ecological improvement under pressure from the state and/ or
green activists and therefore claims of improvement are not always real. In
fact, according to Schnaiberg, they are achieved through ‗creative
accounting‘ or ‗misreporting‘ (Schnaiberg, in Hannigan 2006: 28).In other
words, it means that claims of ecological improvement are made through
fudging or manipulating of data.

Check Your Progress 4

i) Complete the following sentences by filling in the blank spaces.

a) In fact, such MEAs (Multilateral Environmental Agreement) were

leading to a common denominator in terms of ………………….. which
ultimately will lead to ………………………………..

b) According to Mol ……………………………… can be carried out

across the globe through the logic and rationality of the market.

c) With increase communication, any ……………………. and

…………………………… is quickly transmitted across the globe.

d) The other weaknesses of ecological modernisation is its excessive

emphasis on secondary non-renewal (―transformative‖) sectors and their
pre-occupation with ……………………… while ignoring the
………………………….. and its consequential impact on the
environment.

6.5 LET US SUM UP

In this unit, we first tried to understand ecological modernisation. We then
examined the contributions of various ecological modernisation theorists and
the revision that has taken place in ecological modernisation theory.

Next, we explored the different perspectives on ecological modernisation and

also tried to explain the reasons behind the popularity of ecological
modernisation. We also examined the idea of ‗embedded autonomy‘ in order
to better understand ecological modernisation theory and its implication for
environmental reform.

Finally, we explained the conditions of ecological modernisation under

globalisation. Here we examined how various stakeholders could bring
institutional changes, which would mitigate the ill effect of global capitalism.
At the end, we highlighted some of the criticisms on ecological
modernisation theory.
80
 Environmental
6.6 REFERENCES Sociology: Nature
and Scope
Mol, Arthur P. J. (May 2002). ‗Ecological Modernisation and the Global
Economy,‘ Global Environmental Politics, Volume 2, No. 2, pp. 92-115.

Buttel, F. H. (2000). ‗Ecological Modernisation as Social Theory,‘

Geoforum, Volume 31, pp. 57-65.

Mol, Arthur P. J. (Summer 1996). ‗Ecological Modernisation and

Institutional Reflexivity: Environmental Reform in the Late Modern Age,‘
Environmental Politics, Volume 5, No. 2, pp. 302-323.

Spaargeren, Gert and Mol, Arthur P. J. (January 1992). ‗Sociology,

Environment, and Modernity: Ecological Modernisation as a Theory of
Social Change,‘ Society and Natural Resources: An International Journal,
Volume 5, pp. 323-344.

York, Richard and Rosa, Eugene A. (September 2003). ‗Key Challenges to

Ecological Modernization Theory: Institutional Efficacy, Case Study
Evidence, Units of Analysis, and the Pace of Eco-Efficiency,‘ Organization
& Environment, Volume 16, pp. 272-288.

6.7 SPECIMEN ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR

PROGRESS
Check Your Progress 1

i) Ecologicalmodernisation can be defined as the growing independence or

autonomy of ecological perspective and the emergence of ecological
rationality as the basis of production and consumption.

ii) Ecological modernisation assumes that institutions are malleable and

industrial capitalism has the technological capabilities to bring about
―eco-efficiencies‖ or improved sustainable development.

Check Your Progress 2

i) For Joseph Huber, the point of departure in ecological modernisation is

industrialism rather than capitalism.

ii) Market induced environmental reform is the basis of ecological

modernisation for Arthur Mol.

ii) The revised theoretical position was that capitalism is no longer seen as
essential or an obstruction to radical environmental reform.

Check Your Progress 3

i) a) Objectivism
b) Constructivism
c) Management 81
Envisioning d) Policy innovation
Environmental
Sociology
ii) Sustainability/sustainable development is more applicable to the global
South as it rely more on primary renewal sectors in rural areas. In
contrast, the global North rely more on secondary non-renewal
(―transformative‖) sectors in metropolitan region.

iii) Embedded autonomy and state-society synergy give rise to effective

environmental policy and help to overcome state failure.

Check Your Progress 4

i) law and policy principle, universal environmental law and policy

ii) market induced environmental reform
iii) environmental damage, information
iv) efficiency and pollution control, excessive resource consumption

82
 Environmental
UNIT 7 RISK Sociology: Nature
and Scope
Structure
7.0 Objectives
7.1 Introduction
7.2 The Notion of Risk
7.2.1 The Origin of the Notion of Risk
7.2.2 The Evolution of Risk in History
7.3 The ‗Risk Society‘
7.3.1 What is ‗Risk‘?
7.3.2 What is ‗Risk Society‘?

7.3.3 What is ‗World Risk Society‘?

7.3.4 Enlightenment Function of Risk

7.4 Similarities and Differences Among Scholars on the Notion of Risk
7.5.1 Parallels Between Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens

7.5.2 Different Traditions of Risk

7.5 Let Us Sum Up
7.6 References
7.7 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress

7.0 OBJECTIVES
After going through this unit, you should be able to:

 Explain the origin and evolution of risk in history

 Discuss the contribution various scholars to the sociology of risk
 Note the similarities and differences among scholars on the notion of
‗risk‘

7.1 INTRODUCTION
The notion of risk is something we are all aware of in our everyday lives. It
could mean different thing for different people. It is also associated with
‗chance‘, or ‗probability‘, or ‗danger‘. People take ‗chance‘ in the hope of
achieving something bigger and better. It could also mean ‗probability‘, in
the sense of uncertainty, over a certain outcome. Risk could also mean
unforeseen ‗danger‘ – possible loss of life and property – due to unfavourable
circumstances.

If uncertainty is the outer dimension of risk, vulnerability is the inner

dimension of risk. As a social phenomenon, sociologists are interested in how
the notion of risk is embedded in our culture and history and how it continues
83
Envisioning to shape our civilization. In trying to understandrisk associated with techno-
Environmental
Sociology scientific world, sociologists look at risk within the framework of modernity.
In this regard, the contribution of Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens are of
seminal importance.

In this unit, we first tried to understand the notion of risk in human history.
Its origin and how it has evolved over the years. So, in the first section, we
will discuss aboutthe emergence of risk and how risk has become of
sociological interest. In the second section, we look at the contribution of
Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens to the overall understanding of risk within
the framework of modernity and how the notion of risk has made a sharp
departure from the usual everyday understanding of risk. In the final section,
we have highlighted some of the similarities and differences among scholars
on the notion of risk and how they are sociologically significant.

7.2 THE NOTION OF RISK

The emergence of risk has been much of an interest to scholars of sociology
of risk. Sociologists are interested in finding out how risk has become a part
of our history and culture. Scholars like Peter Taylor-Gooby and Jens O. Zinn
in their work Risk in Social Science (2006) traced the origin of risk in history
and how it enteredthe vocabulary of everyday language. By tracingits origin
and evolution in history, the authors gave us a picture of how risk is integral
to our history and culture – right from the beginning of mercantile capitalism
to contemporary global capitalism. It also tells us the pervasive influence of
risk and risk analysis as a tool in different fields of study ranging from the
study of epidemiology to the study of crime. This work also put into sharp
contrast the risk of everyday living and risk born out of modern institutions;
of science, business and politics.

7.2.1 The Origin of the Notion of Risk

The origin of the notion of risk has been under much debate. One scholar
observes that it is derive from the Arabic ―risq‖ (i.e. ―something from which
you draw profit‖) (Wharton, in Taylor-Gooby and Zinn 2006: 3). Another
scholar pointsout the Latin ―riscum‖ (an expression that describes the
―challenge of barrier reef to sailors‖). In the mid-sixteenth century,the
Germans have used the same term (Luhmann, in Taylor-Gooby and Zinn
2006:3). However, scholars like Anthony Giddens suggested that it might
have come from the Spanish ―risco‖ (which means ―a rock‖) (Taylor-Gooby
and Zinn 2006: 3). Risk, therefore, seems to have emerged in the context of
exploring sea voyage and medieval mercantilism. In fact, it refers to the
uncertainty of the outcome of a sea-faring voyage (Taylor-Gooby and Zinn
2006: 3). It is suchuncertainty that led to the emergence of the concept of
insurance, which gradually entered the world of money lending and finance
(Taylor-Gooby and Zinn 2006: 4). Insurance, in the earlier form, was based
on experience and personal judgment (Taylor-Gooby and Zinn 2006: 4).
84
 Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
7.2.2 The Evolution of Risk in History
By the eighteenth century, the mathematics of probability was developed and
applied to risk issues (Taylor-Gooby and Zinn 2006: 4). With the application
of probability and economics in risk, it began to affect investment decision
and market behaviour. It was in the eighteenth century that insurance in trade
and finance was also extended to life insurance.Initially, insurance started off
in the form of shared insurance and friendly societies among the upper
working class (Taylor-Gooby and Zinn 2006: 4). This risk-sharing scheme in
the late nineteenth and early twentieth century ultimately developed into
social insurances. Under political pressure, social insurance became the basis
of European welfare state (Taylor-Gooby and Zinn 2006: 5). With the
emergence of census and mortality statistics and establishment of the Institute
of Actuaries in 1848, probability assessment laid the foundation for modern
banking, investment and insurance. Subsequently, in the 20th century with the
coming of globalisation, it has led to the growth of international financial
market (O‘Malley; Baker and Simon, in Taylor-Gooby and Zinn2006: 4).
Probability assessment is now widely used in the study of epidemiology,
environment and crime.

Check Your Progress 1

i) Complete the following sentences

a) Risk seems to have emerged in the context of.……………………

b) Insurance, in the earlier form, was based on....................................

c) Social insurance became the basis of European Welfare state

under………………….

ii) How did probability assessment become established in the world of

modern banking, investment and insurance? Answer in one or two
sentences.

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

7.3 THE ‘RISK SOCIETY’

Unlike all otherknown form of risks, the notion of ‗risk‘ in late modernity as
analysed by Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddensas being different from all
previous risks. ‗Risk‘, in late modernity,is born out of modern institutions – 85
Envisioning like politics, business and science – which are supposed toprevent, control
Environmental
Sociology and manage risk (Beck 2006: 336). These modern institutions, according to
Beck, are the source of new risk. This shift in perception happens because
any possible loss or danger can now be traced back to human decision. Man
is now seen as somehow responsible for even natural event or disaster.
Earlier, the occurrences of natural event like earthquake, flood, famine, etc.,
are attributed to supernatural forces. But today, with increasing
secularisation, God is banished from the picture and is replace with human
rationality. Any impending catastrophe or risk is now explained, justified and
legitimised on the basis of human rationality and decision-making (Beck
2006: 333). Since man has replace God as thecause of a catastrophe, there is
an increasing fear and anxiety about the future.

In the pre-modern, any catastrophe or natural event was attributed to an ‗act

of God‘ and the explanation and justification of an event flow from
this.Therefore, risk would mean the possibility of a potential loss or damage
due to ‗natural event‘ consider to be an ‗act of God‘ (Lupton 1999: 5). This
concept of risk absolves man of any responsibility or fault.So, in that sense,
this pre-modern notion of risk is different from the modern notion of risk.
With the coming of modernity, any disaster is explained and traced back to
human decision-making. As a result, insurance and compensation were given
on the basis of calculable risk and disaster. However, in late modernity, ‗risk‘
is no longer calculable and hence not compensable. There is a breakdown in
the logic of compensation. This, according to Beck, is the condition of
‗reflexive modernisation‘.

Ulrich Beck -1944-2015

Beck wasa well-known German

Sociologist who was particularly sized
with trying to understand modern society
which he summarized was characterised
by uncertainly, ignorance and fear which
he termed Risk Society. He is also
introduced the concept of reflexive
modernisation to understand the self-
criticality in the new phase of modernity.
He studied modernisation, globalization,
individualisation and also new work
forms in the wake of flexible production
and labour in global capital.

(Pic source: Wikipedia)

7.3.1 What then is ‘Risk’?

‗Risk‘ is the condition of radicalised modernisation. In other words, it means
radicalization of rationalisation, which is reflexive in nature. Reflexive
86
modernisation can be seen in the critique of science, which has its origin in Environmental
Sociology: Nature
the Green Movement of the 70s in the west. This reflexivity gained and Scope
momentum among the lay public in opposition to the scientism of science,
which tends to make false claims and expectations in society (Lash and
Wynne, in Beck 1992: 2).

This reflexive modernisation is neither post-modern nor modernist; but falls

mid-way between the two. As the term indicates the condition of modernity
itself becomes a subject of reflection and reexamination. The very aspects of
modernity technological advances, rational institutions etc. have also been
found to be the cause of self-destruction leading to environmental
catastrophes and risks, makes one question the project of modernity.

Box 1.Reflexive Modernisation

The German Tradition, starting from Max Weber to Jurgen Habermas, to

various scholars of the Frankfurt School had questioned the Modernity
project of enlightenment and emancipation. Beck's theory represents a
continuation of the German tradition of an ethical questioning of modernity,
including science and technology.―In contrast to postmodern theories that
present late twentieth-century social transformations as going beyond
modernism, Beck argues that modernity is going through an unintended and
unseen phase that is forcing it to confront the premises and limits of its own
model. Modernisation has become, in his words, "reflexive." The concept of
reflexive modernization, which was introduced by Beck and developed in a
subsequent work with Anthony Giddens and Scott Lash (Beck, Giddens, and
Lash 1994), propounds a "radicalization" of modernity in which the dynamics
of individualization, globalization, gender revolution, underemployment, and
global risks undermine the foundations of classical industrial modernity and
make old concepts obsolete‖

(https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/risk-
society)

In defining risk, Beck said, ―Risk does not mean catastrophe. Risk means the
anticipation of catastrophe‖ (Beck 2006: 332). Risk remains ‗virtual‘ and
becomes part of a discourse as long as it is anticipated. The moment risk
becomes ‗real‘; it becomes a catastrophe and ceases to be risk (e.g. terrorist
attack). In that sense, risk is not real but more of ‗becoming real‘ (Van Loon,
in Beck 2006: 332). In other words, ‗risk‘ is an event that is consider to be
threatening (Beck 2006: 332).

The new risk, as can be seen in the work of Beck and Giddens, is radically
different from the risk generally known to us. In this regard, we can say that
Mary Douglas and Michel Foucault notion of risk comes from a more
empirical and instrumental understanding of risk. However, for Beck and
Giddens, the new risk cannot be capture by the usual nation-state framework.
For them, it emanates beyond modern science or human experience, as it
87
Envisioning stands outside scientific rationality and human experience. It actually has its
Environmental
Sociology origin in advanced industrialisation and reflexive modernisation, where
modernity has extended itself. In fact, the new risk is a consequence of
‗hyper-rationality‘. As risk emanates outside the nation-state framework, and
beyond scientific rationality and human experience, it creates a sense of
pervasiveness. In order to control and manage such risk, one needs to prepare
for the ‗unknown unknowns‘ (Beck 2006: 335). For what can be known is
‗unknown‘ and hence not knowable, therefore, there is an element of
incalculability. As a consequence, one has to consider all kinds of fear,
fiction, and imagination in tackling ‗risk‘. The option of ignoring risk is not
viable as the damage or loss due to ignorance could be incalculable as it
could lead to a catastrophe.In fact, ‗risk‘is a sign of growing connectivity and
interdependency in an age of globalisation.

7.3.2 What is ‘Risk Society’?

If ‗risk‘ is the anticipation of a catastrophe (in the Beckenian sense), risk
society is the structural conditions of an advanced industrialisation. It is
marked by increased secularisation and potential danger of a disaster. For
instance, the risk of nuclear radiation due to meltdown in nuclear reactor can
no longer be limited in time as future generation can be affected. Its effect
can no longer be limited within national border, as radiation can spread far
and wide across border through wind, rain, and water. The Chernobyl nuclear
accident in 1986 in the erstwhile Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republicof the
Soviet Union has affected western USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist
Republic) and Europe. More recently, the nuclear radiation leaked in 2011
from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Fukushima (Japan),in
the aftermath of the tsunami following the Tohoku earthquake, hasreached
the west coast of the United States. Moreover, if anyone or any living being
is affected, no one can be held accountable, as it is a problem unforeseen.
Also, it is impossible to compensate the victims or lives lost due to the
problem of incalculability. No nation or company can pay enough, and the
whole idea of insurancesimply breaks down, due to the exorbitant cost
involved (Lash and Wynne, in Beck 1992: 2).

Beck in his 1986 publication described ‗risk society‘ as a structural condition

of an advanced industrialisation (Beck 2006: 333). Such society is defined by
risk, rather than class, as the principle of inequality in modern society. Risk
being a social construct, some people has a better way of defining risk and
benefitting from it. The way of defining ‗risk‘between people and countries
reveals the kind of power relations that exist in society and between
countries. In other words, defining risk is a power game. Beck argues that
even the most restrained and moderate discourse on risk has its own hidden
implications,with its own politics, ethics and morality (Beck 2006: 333).

88
7.3.3 What is ‘World Risk Society’? Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
If ‗risk society‘ is a condition of advanced industrialisation marked by
increased secularisation and anticipation of risk, ‗world risk society‘ is
shaped by new kinds of risks where there is increased worldwide anticipation
of a global catastrophe (Beck 2006: 333). Global risk perception, according
to Beck, are characterised by de-localisation (i.e. cases and consequences of
risk are not limited to geographical location or space), incalculableness (i.e.
the consequences of risks are incalculable due to not knowing in risk
calculations) and non-compensability (i.e. the logic of compensation breaks
down and is replaced by the principle of precaution through prevention)
(Beck 2006: 333-4). This has led to not only prevention taking precedence
over compensation; but also attempt to anticipate and prevent risk whose
existence has not been proven (Ewald, in Beck 2006: 334). Some of the
possible examples of world risk society are if the climate changed
irreversibly, if terrorists have nuclear weapons in their hands, or if progresses
in human genetics have made irreversible intervention in human existence.

Box 2. Skepticism on Science and Experts

Science, as an intellectual activity and as a modern institution, has failed in

dealing with the problem of new risk. This is because ‗rationality‘ that
emerged from the Enlightenment in Europe is the basis of science, and in
order to critique science we still need scientific rationality. This is an irony
and a paradox. ‗Risk‘ itself is the product of modern institutions and
organisations, which are supposed to manage and control risk. The problem
of risk further got accentuated due to the ‗faith‘ in scientific institutions and
communities, who are invisible, inaccessible and whose languages are
esoteric to most lay public (Beck 1992: 4). On top of that experts in scientific
institution tend to have the final say, and they decide the agenda and premises
a priori in any risk discourse. In most cases, people feel alienated from the
expert system; while, at the same time, unable to escape the power of
definition of the expert system (Beck 2006: 336).The other problem is that
scientific research and institutions are often supported and funded by
industrial and commercial enterprise, which could have undue influence in
any risk conflict. These raised the issue of ‗trust‘ and ‗credibility‘ of
scientific institutions and experts. However, scholars like Anthony Giddens
argued that institutions and experts can ‗repair‘ their credibility through
adaptation of procedure or better presentation of their knowledge. This has
led to the emergence of the sub-field of risk communication (Beck 1992: 4)

7.4 ENLIGHTENMENT FUNCTION OF RISK

Apart from its negative aspect, ‗risk‘ could also serve an enlightenment
functionin world risk society (Beck 2006: 330). In order to understand the
enlightenment function of world risk society, we need to understand what
Beck meant by the ―cosmopolitan moment‖(Beck 2006: 331). The
89
Envisioning cosmopolitan momentbegins as a response to the experience of risk. It is
Environmental
Sociology made possible by the self-destructiveness of modernity, which is not only
physical but also ethical as well (Beck 2006: 330). This, according to Beck,
led man to outgrow both the nation-state and the international order. It also
means the abrupt and full confrontation of the excluded other, where national
boundaries are no longer relevant and the ‗distant other‘ become the
‗inclusive other‘, through risk and not through mobility (Beck 2006: 331). As
a result, everyday life becomes cosmopolitan and the meaning of life is found
in the exchange with others and not in the encounter with those who are alike
(Beck 2006: 331). This cosmopolitan momentthat opens up creates the
possibility of a new beginning.

With the advancement in industrialisation, universalisation of modern

technological institutions and the coming of neo-liberal policies, ‗risk‘ has
transcended border, time and space. ‗Risk‘ is no longer a problem of the
Global North alone.It is a problem of the Global South too due to increasing
integration and interdependency on a global scale. The problem of new risk
cannot be solved by the usual national politics and international co-operation.
For example, the outbreak of BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy),
commonly known as mad cow disease, in UK in 1986 and the subsequent
banned on the import of beef and its product in EU and other countries. What
started as a public health event affects the business and economy of many
countries. Another example isthat of the outbreak of avian influenzain 1997,
where the first known transmission of H5N1 to human took place in Hong
Kong. There is a fear that, with increased connectivity in a globalised world,
local outbreak could easily become pandemic risk using the same network of
connectivity and efficiency.

Another global risk that needs to be considered is that of globalised capital,

which has a tendency to destabilised market and in the process activate
opposing global civil society. While global risks exposed the order of power
of the neo-liberal (capital-state coalition) regime, global civil society tries to
connect civil society with the state to create a ―cosmopolitan form of
statehood‖ (Beck 2006: 343). This cosmopolitan form of statehood is marked
by ethnic and cultural diversity. Beck believes this as a ―post-national order‖
(Beck 2006: 343). Although the goal of capital is to instrumentalised the state
so as to optimised and legitimised its interest worldwide, but in the process, it
also weakens capital by creating its opposing protagonist – the global civil
society, who questions the legitimacy and order of the global capital. One of
the agenda of the global capital is to create its own space, autonomous and
free from outside interference. This has its legitimacy. However, the agenda
of the civil society is concern with human rights, global justice and
democratisation (Beck 2006: 343).

With the coming of global crisis and risk, according to Beck, nation-based
realpolitik is replace by ―Cosmopolitan realpolitik‖ (Beck 2006: 343). Beck
suggests that individual freedom and national autonomy could best be
90
preserved through transnational alliances and networking. However, the dark Environmental
Sociology: Nature
side of this ―Cosmopolitan vision‖ is invasion and war waged in the name of and Scope
justice and human rights. Beck believed this to be the unwanted ‗side-effects‘
of the cosmopolitan vision because the rhetoric of cosmopolitanism – peace,
human rights and justice – becomes the basis for national hegemony and
imperial ambition (Beck 2006: 344). He gave the example of the Second Iraq
War, where the idea of cosmopolitanism can be abused and instrumentalised
by the state and global capital for its own ends.

Further, world risk society also opens new lines of conflict. If the first
modernity was marked by socio-economic conflicts between labour and
capital, the second modernity (i.e. world risk society) is marked by cultural
ones between different ‗risk culture‘ or ‗risk religion‘ (Beck 2006: 337). For
instance, the dominant risk belief and risk tendencies of Europe and US are
different because they have a different ‗risk culture‘ and ‗risk religion‘. For
Europeans, the risk of climate change is more than the risk of terrorism. But
for American, terrorism is a bigger threat than climate change. Just as there is
‗class conflict‘ in first modernity, there is ‗clash of risk cultures‘ in second
modernity (Beck 2006: 337). And this clash is not a matter of life and death
for individuals or nations but for everyone. For the physical and moral
survival of mankind depends on the decision made based on ‗not-knowing‘.

It is a well-known fact that the experimental logic of trial and error failed in
the face of new form of risks (Beck 2006: 337). Due to cultural difference in
risk perception in the west, two contradictory risk philosophies have
emerged. The philosophy of laissez-faire, that it is safe, as long as it has not
been proven to be dangerous. And the philosophy of precaution, that nothing
is safe, as long as it has not been proven harmless (Beck 2006: 337). These
two philosophies continue to guide risk prevention and management today.

Box3. Irony of risk

Urich Beck captures the anxiety and dilemma of the age, when he said, ―The
narrative of risk is a narrative of irony‖ (Beck 2006: 329). This is because, as
he puts it, ―We do not know what it is we don‘t know – but from this dangers
arise, which threaten mankind!‖ (Beck 2006: 329). This danger is best
exemplified by the discovery in 1974 that CFCs (Chloroflurocarbons) used in
the last 45 years destroysthe Ozone layer. The Ozone layer in the stratosphere
prevents ultraviolet radiation from reaching the earth. The consequence of
Ozone hole could be in the form of increased incidence of skin cancer and
climate change, which threatened human survival. The CFCs coolant used in
refrigeratorsand other appliances deplete the Ozone layer. For this reason,
CFCsepitomised the kind of unforeseen danger that modern technological
society has to deal with. Therefore, ‗not knowing‘ or ‗ignorance‘ is not an
option because it increase the danger of a catastrophe, which is often
irreversible (Beck 2006: 330). This is the irony that mankind has to deal with
in world risk society.
91
Envisioning The irony also lies in the fact that danger does not arise from human
Environmental
Sociology experience or rationality but from what we do not know and cannot calculate
(Beck 2006: 330). Sometime the bitter irony is that, in order to prevent the
impending disaster, the state ended up limiting civil right and liberties,
thereby putting in danger the survival of an open and liberal society without
really circumventing it (Beck 2006: 330). The threat of terrorism is one good
example. The irony does not end here because sometime risk induce doubts
in the benevolence of the state and the criticism of the inefficient state
authorities could lead to the establishment of an authoritarian regime (Beck
2006: 330).

Check Your Progress 2

Answer the following questions in two sentences each.

i) Why is there an increasing fear and anxiety about the future in

contemporary modern society?

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

ii) What is ‗risk‘ in the Beckenian sense?

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

iii) How did risk society emerge?

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………
92
iv) How is the ‗cosmopolitan moment‘ different from cosmopolitanism? Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

….…………………………………………………………………………

7.4 SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

AMONG SCHOLARS ON THE NOTION OF
RISK
The notion of risk has been of much debate among the sociologists. A
comparative study of different perspective on risk reveals two distinctive
approaches – one within the ‗nation-state‘ framework and the other beyond
(i.e. within ‗modernity‘ framework). The distinctive approaches on risk
undertaken by the sociologists are also shape by their intellectual background
that defines the trajectory of their risk discourses. In the previous section of
the block, we have seen how Beck and Giddens work within the same
framework of modernity, but their risk discourses diverged due to different
object of sociological enquiry and intellectual background.

In the next section, we examined the different perspectives on risk and how
they relate to each other.

7.4.1 Parallels between Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens

Looking at the work of scholars like Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens on
risk and modernity, Scott Lash and Brian Wynne points out the parallels of
their ideas.They observed that the divergent backgroundsof Beck and
Giddens shape the trajectory of their discourse on risk and modernity. Beck‘s
Risk Society (1992), originally published as Risikogelsellschaft in 1986, made
him popular in the Anglophone world. Subsequently, he also later published
World Risk Society in 1999. Giddensparallel work on risk and risk society
were published asConsequences of Modernity (1990) and Modernity and Self
Identity (1991). For Beck, the study of risk and identity led to the theory of
‗reflexive modernization‘ – an extension of modernity rather than a break
with modernity (as advocated by the postmodernist). However, for Giddens,
the notion of ‗reflexive modernity‘ is a social construct born out of the
reflexive shaping of one‘s own biographical narrative (Lash and Wynne, in
Beck 1992: 7). Much of Beck‘s idea on reflexive modernisation is born out of
his long period of study on institutions (Lash and Wynne, in Beck 1992:
8),whereas Giddens‘ idea on reflexive modernity developed from his study
on agency in social theory and his rejection of structural functionalism(Lash
and Wynne, in Beck 1992: 8).
93
Envisioning 7.4.2 Different traditions of risk: Mary Douglas, Michel
Environmental
Sociology Foucault and Ulrich Beck
Beck‘s notion of ‗risk‘ is different from the earlier two traditions on risk by
Mary Douglas and Michel Foucault. Douglas and Foucault‘s idea of risk
reproduce the social order of power. They see risk as an ally, rather than
unreliable ally or potential antagonist, as opposed to Beck (Beck 2006: 344).
This difference emerged out of their difference in theoretical approach.
Douglas and Foucault‘s approach to risk has to be understood within the
nation-state framework (also known as ―methodological nationalism‖) (Beck
2006: 344), while Beck approach to ‗risk‘ is within the framework of
modernity that isglobal in nature. Douglas and Foucault approach to risk help
to redefine the state and scientific power (Beck 2006: 344). However, it
cannot deal with the change and conflicts, ambivalences and ironies inherent
in ‗world risk society‘ (Beck 2006: 344). For Beck, risk is a potential force
hostile to both nation-state power and global capital. In other words, the
nation-state framework approach cannot adequately conceptualise risk as it is
caught in the society and institutions of the first modernity (i.e. simple
modernity) (Beck 2006: 345). However, global risk that emerges in the wake
of second modernity (i.e. reflexive modernity) calls for a different
understanding of risk.This risk is outside the nation-state framework and
cosmopolitan in its logic and irony.

Check Your Progress 3

i) Complete the following sentences by filling in the blank spaces

a) Reflexive modernization is an ……………… rather than a break with

modernity.

b) Beck‘s idea on reflexive modernization is born out of his long period

of study on………………

c) Giddens‘ idea on reflexive modernity developed from his study on

………………. in social theory and his rejection of structural
functionalism

d) Mary Douglas and Michel Foucault‘s idea of risk ……………… the

social order of power

e) Mary Douglas and Michel Foucault‘s idea of risk has to be

understood within the ………………………..

Activity 1

Collect information of on recent catastrophe. Write a note of about two pages

covering (a) how it happens, (b) when and where, and (c) its impact on
environment and human population.

94
 Environmental
7.5 LET US SUM UP Sociology: Nature
and Scope
In this unit, we tried to understand the emergence of the notion of risk by
tracing briefly its origin and evolution over a period of time in human history
and culture.

Next we look into the contributions of Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens to
the understanding of new risk, which has its origin in modern institutions of
science, business and politics. We saw how this ‗risk‘ is different from all
previous known form of risks due to its potential for catastrophe. Their work
shows how risk is a product of reflexive modernisation and how it is
pervasive and global in nature.Finally, we examined the similarities and
differences between Beck and Giddens. And comparison is also made
between the different scholarly traditions of risks.

7.6 REFERENCES
Beck, Ulrich 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Trans by Mark
Ritter. Sage Publications: London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi.

Beck, Ulrich 2006. ‗Living in the World Risk Society‘. In Economy and
Society, 35:3, 329-345.

Taylor-Gooby, Peter and Zinn, Jens O. 2006. Risk in Social Science. Oxford
University Press: New York

Lupton, Deborah 1999. Risk. Routledge: London and New York

7.7 SPECIMEN ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR

PROGRESS
Check Your Progress 1

i) a) exploring sea voyage and medieval mercantilism

b) experience and personal judgment
c) political pressure

ii) With the coming of census, mortality statistics and the establishment of
the Institute of Actuaries in 1848, probability assessment become
established in the world of modern banking, investment and insurance.

Check Your Progress 2

i) The moment Man replaces God as the cause of any catastrophe;it creates
anxiety about the future. This happens because of increasing
secularisation in modern society.

ii) ‗Risk‘, in the Beckenian sense, means the anticipation of catastrophe.

The moment risk becomes ‗real‘; it ceases to be risk.
95
Envisioning iii) Risk society emerges with increased secularisation and anticipation of
Environmental
Sociology risk due to advanced industrialisation. This is the consequence of
radicalised modernisation.

iv) The ‗cosmopolitan moment‘ is a response to the experience of risk,

where man outgrows both the nation-state and the international order. In
this, the meaning of life is found in the exchange with the ‗distant other‘,
who becomes the ‗inclusive other‘, rather than one who are alike.

Check Your Progress 3

i) a) extension of modernity
b) institutions
c) agency
d) reproduce
e) nation-state framework

96
 Environmental
UNIT 8 ECOFEMINISM AND FEMINIST Sociology: Nature
and Scope
ENVIRONMENTALISM 
8.0 Objective
8.1 Introduction
8.2 What is Ecofeminism?
8.2.1 Gender ,Environment and Patriarchy
8.2.2 Radical Ecofeminism and Cultural Ecofeminism
8.3 Ecofeminism and the Contribution of Vandana Shiva
8.3.1 The Feminine and the Masculine Principles
8.3.2 Gender and Environment

8.3.3 Maldevelopment

8.3.4 Nature as a Resource and the Devaluation of Women‘s Work

8.3.5 Significance of Ecofeminism
8.4 What is Feminist Environmentalism?
8.4.1 The Work of Bina Agarwal

8.4.2 A Critique of Ecofeminism

8.4.3 Feminist environmentalism

8.4.4 Significance of Feminist Environmentalism

8.5 Let Us Sum Up
8.6 References
8.7 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress

8.0 OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit you should be able to:

 Reflect on the close relationship between gender development and the

‗environment‘
 Discuss the core debateswithin environmental sociology on Gender and
Environment
 Explain from a sociological point of view, the complex interplay and
linkages between the different dimensions that constitute Ecofeminism
and Feminist Environmentalism
 Narrate thework of Vandana Shiva and Bina Agarwal


Written by Dr. Vandana Madan, Delhi University 97
Envisioning
Environmental 8.1 INTRODUCTION
Sociology
We are living today in a world where it is increasingly being recognised that
the survival of the human species is dependent upon a balanced relationship
between society and the environment.This balance of life can only be
possible when a consciousness arises about the intersection between nature
and culture and we understandthe different ideas and systems that constitute
this reciprocity.Clearly, there are different dimensions to the emergence of
such a consciousness in which society and nature are tied together. The need
for an ecological awakening as well as the various strategies through which
anecological balance between "us and our world" can be achieved is of
paramount importance today.

This unit will address one critical aspect of this relationship and
accompanying strategies, namely, the relationship between gender,
development and the environment.

We will do this by engaging in a critical examination of the debates on

gender environment and development in the following manner: In section 8.2
and its subsections we will define Ecofeminism. Following this we will
discuss the relationship between gender, environment and development from
an Ecofeminist perspective with the help of the work of Vandana Shiva. And
in the final section 8.4 and its subsections, we will look at the critique of
Ecofeminism as presented by Feminist Environmentalism with the help of the
work of Bina Agarwal

8.2 WHAT IS ECOFEMINISM

Ecofeminism or ecological feminism is a discourse that has also been called a
branch of feminism. The term ―ecofeminism‖ was coined in 1974 by the
French feminist Françoise d‘Eaubonne, and became popular in the
environmental movements of the late 1970s and 1980s.

Its aim has been to address the ideas that:

 women and nature are deeply entwined and connected in multiple ways
 they are treated similarly and hierarchically by patriarchal structures and
institutions across cultures and societies
 women are embedded in nature and thus the exploitation of nature could
be or should beseen as an exploitation of women as well
 patriarchal forces dominate, exploit and violate women and the
environment in the name of development.

8.2.1 Gender, Environment and Patriarchy

As said, Ecofeminism aims to look at how women and the environment are
related in multiple ways. It is important to remember that this relationship is
98
not new because in almost all cultures, women and nature are recognised as Environmental
Sociology: Nature
having an intrinsic bond. This bond is found and is representedhistorically, and Scope
culturally and mythologically. For instance, in India, women are represented
often as ―nature‖ or ―Prakriti‖ in both imagination and practise.

Ecofeminism becomes important as it adds another dimension to this

relationship between women and nature, namely, that of hierarchy and
domination. By creating this interconnection, Ecofeminism highlights the
close connection between the domination of women by patriarchy and the
exploitation of the environment by development.

Thus, using a feminist lens, Ecofeminism highlights:

 Themany ways in which both nature and women are treated by

a patriarchal society
 how social norms exert unjust dominance over women and nature
 the role of development and destruction of nature and the patriarchal
exploitation of women as parallel processes.

BOX 1. Origins of Ecofeminism

Early work on ecofeminism was devoted to documenting the relationships

between women and the environment. An important ecofeminist Rosemary
Ruether, insisted that if women wanted to be liberated and free they would
have to think of the need to end the domination of nature.This would only
happen when women and environmentalists worked together and questioned
patriarchal structures and ideas.

By the late 1980s, Ecofeminism had become a popular movement largely due
to the work of the feminist theorist Ynestra King who wrote an article titled
―What Is Ecofeminism?‖King raised questions about how belief systems
allow an exploitation of the earth and linked this to the oppression of women.
Through work such as King‘sarticle, Ecofeminismcame to propose an
alternate world view where the earth is valued as sacred, an ecological
consciousness is invoked and women and nature are understood as
interconnected and entwined in myriad ways.

8.2.2 Radical Ecofeminism and Cultural Ecofeminism

As ecofeminism continued to develop, it also branched out and by the late
1980s two distinct schools of thought emerged: Radical ecofeminism and
Culturalecofeminism. Put simply:

 Radical ecofeminists argue that patriarchal society and ideologies of

domination, equate nature and women so that both can be oppressed and
exploited. This was done by describing both women and nature as
‗commodities‖, thus enabling their exploitation and degradation.

99
Envisioning  Cultural ecofeminists, on the other hand, stressed the association
Environmental
Sociology between women and the environment as being based on an inherent bond
of nurturance that women and nature share. This shared experience
makes women more aware and alert to the destruction and degradation of
the environment.

Check Your Progress 1

1) Ecofeminism highlights the …………………….. of women by

……………………. and exploitation of environment by
………………………….

2) What are the two types of Ecofeminism that developed in the 1980s?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

3) What are three points highlighted by the feminist lens used by

Ecofeminism?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

8.3 ECOFEMINISM AND THE CONTRIBUTION

OF VANDANA SHIVA
Ecofeminism and environmental understanding and theory, received a new
lease with the work of Vandana Shiva who addressed this need to question
and understand the link between environmental degradation and the
oppression of women from a cultural perspective. Her main argument was for
the need to have an awareness of the close bond between gender and the
environment and the need to adopt an integrated and holistic view of humans
and nature. In the following sections, we look at this relationship between
women and the environment as discussed by Shiva in her seminal work,
Staying Alive, and her other writings on women and nature.

100
8.3.1 The Feminine and the Masculine Principles Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
Historically in most cultures women are seen as an embodiment of the
feminine principleand a nurturer of life. And yet almost always patriarchal
ideology has rendered them invisible and marginalised.

In the Indian context, to understand the position of women and their role as
conservers of culture and nature,Shivaexamines the relationship between the
world of women, environment and the cosmological world. She argues that
the connection between women and nature is an ideological one and deeply
rooted in belief systems, ideas, values and their cultural representation.
The scriptures and other cultural works recognise the interplay between the
ideas of creation and destruction and dynamic energy or Shakti. The
manifestation of this energy is called Prakriti, the feminine and creative
principle which is both animate and inanimate. This exists in conjunction
with the masculine principle or Purusha. Together, they create the world
(Shiva, 2007:37).

This dialectical unity and harmony between the masculine and feminine
principles are the basis of ecological thought and action in India.Thus we see
how in Indian culture, the feminine principle is worshipped in many ways
and forms, all of which highlight the close and dynamic connection between
women and nature.

Shivadefines natureas the ―creative expression of the feminine

principle‖.This embodiment and manifestation of the feminine principle is
characterised by (a) creativity, productivity (b) diversity in form and aspect
(c) connectedness and inter- relationship of all beings, including man (d)
continuity between the human and natural and (e) sanctity of life in nature.

Shiva argues that nature has been treated as integral and inviolable and there
is no dualism between man and nature for it is Prakriti that sustains life.

8.3.2 Gender and Environment

The eco-feminist approach establishes the fact that

 women are embedded in nature

 the exploitation of nature could be seen as an exploitation of women
 development and other patriarchal forces dominate and exploit women
and nature

Shiva says that cultures recognise that women and nature are powerful, they
thus need to be controlled and oppressed. In doing so the patriarchal world
underestimates that though they may be victims of patriarchy and
exploitation, women can also be agents of change. Because of their close
association with nature, women are the more affected by ecological disasters
than men, and that is why we find they are everywhere on the forefront of
protests against the destruction of nature. 101
Envisioning Shiva also makes a distinction between an Indian and Western understanding
Environmental
Sociology of the above. In simple words, in the western understanding, the relation
between women and environment is viewed as primarily material; in the non-
western countries, this relationship is considered as ideological and real and
women and nature are seen to represent the feminine principle.

BOX 2 .Women and Nature

Prakriti creates diversity with multiple forms of life and lives in every stone
or tree, pool, fruit or animal and is identified with them and by names such as
Aditiand Adi Shakti.

In their daily watering and worship women renew the relationship of the
home with the cosmos and with the world process. When Hindu women
cover the tulsi or holy basil plant with a red cloth, they express feminisation
of the delicate plant and the closeness of women and nature. This is also seen
in how the ficus tree or peepalor the banyan tree are worshipped by women
across India. Every culture has multiple such examples of the worshipping of
nature by women.

8.3.3 Maldevelopment
As an ecofeminist.for Shiva the problem arises from the modern consumerist
worldview best illustrated by the patriarchal-capitalist power structure that is
central to development. She calls this the western model of
―maldevelopment‖.

In this model, patriarchal ideology and understandingcreates a hierarchical

social order across cultures and societies. This inequality is strengthened by
the role of capitalism, consumerism and technological development which is
aimed solely at the creation and accumulation of wealth at the lowest possible
cost and serves the purposes of the owner‘s of the capitalist ventures.

This association between patriarchy and capitalism is also built on the

hierarchical structure that promotes and justifies the superiority of the
masculine and the oppression of the feminine and thusof nature.It is such an
understanding of nature as a resource which also lies at the foundation of the
paradigm of maldevelopment wherein the world of women, nature and the
third world are all exploited by a dominating male colonising world.

Shiva argues that maldevelopment represents how capitalism, patriarchy and

exploitation are not only interrelated but also shape the living environments
in many places of the world in problematic and devastating ways.

8.3.4 Nature as a Resource and the Devaluation of Women’s

Work
The western understanding of the relationship between man and nature as we
have seenis built on a dualism that has conveniently allowed the subjugation
102 of nature and the environment by patriarchy and development. Thishas given
rise to a new worldview in which nature is (a) inert and passive(b) uniform Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and mechanistic (c)separable and fragmented within itself (d)separate from and Scope
man and inferior (e)to be dominated and exploited by man. You can see how
this is different from how nature was defined in section 8.3.1 by Shiva.

This dominant patriarchal perspective of development is rooted in the idea of

capital accumulationand it renders both nature‘s work and women‘s work as
invisible and insignificant. This leads to the devaluation and the de-
recognition of natureas well as women which has led to the parallel
exploitation of both.

This attitude of blindness towards the work done and invisible wealth created
by nature and women, by those who have power and dominate, threatens the
survival of the species and the ecological balance so necessary for a
sustainable life.Shiva argues that this work and wealth in accordance with the
feminine principle are significant because they are rooted in stability and
sustainability.Sadly, this goes unrecognised and is destroyed and dispensed
with through homogenisation and privatisation that reduces nature to raw
materials and commodities and women to mere reproducers of life.

It is important for us to understand that when we thus look at nature as a

―resource‖ to be exploited, we are creating a relationship between
development and environment which is built on the idea of a ―mastering of
nature‖ by thepatriarchal/ masculine. Shiva says that this not only enables the
exploitation of nature but also allows the ―death of Prakriti‖ and the
marginalisation, devaluation, displacement and dispensability‖ of women
(Shiva,2007, pg.41). What Ecofeminism is essentially arguing is that when
we destroy nature we destroy women, when we violate nature, we violate
women. The role of women in creating and conserving life is lost in an
ecologically alienated world which is blind to the role of women and their
harmony with the ecosystems. We need to recognise that the partnership
between women and nature ensures sustainability and it is this critical
partnership that is destroyed when the project of development becomes a
patriarchal project.

Remember, maldevelopment is thus a paradigm that sees nature only as a

resource and women only as reproducers of life and promotes a culture of
destruction.As Shiva says, maldevelopment is not only exploitativebut also
―crippling‖ to both women and natureand eventually makes the colonising
male the agent and model of development.

Women, the third world and nature become underdeveloped and change will
only come when this is interrogated and an ecological way of understanding
nature emerges.

8.3.5 Significance of Ecofeminism

The ecofeminists argue that marginalised communities: women, third world,
peasantry, tribalsetc are all victims of maldevelopment. But at the same time, 103
Envisioning we cannot deny that they are the repository agents of traditional knowledge.
Environmental
Sociology They cannot be reduced to mere victims of development by the male world.
The marginalised communities are capable of action and questioning
exploitation and can pose a challenge to the inequalities created by
maldevelopment. What is needed is for us to change the way we think so that
a new intellectual ecological paradigm arises.

The significance of ecofeminism can be captured this way: Women havefirst-

hand knowledge of what it means to be victims of violence and
exploitationand what motivates them is their direct engagement with the
environment. They have traditional knowledge about nature, forests and
ecosystems and are deeply rooted in environmental protection and
preservation. As they are embedded in nature that they become forerunners in
solving the problems related to nature.

It is no wonder, that a perspective like Ecofeminism and women‘s ecological

movements pose a challenge to the paradigms of patriarchy and
maldevelopment.

Check Your Progress 2

1) What are the masculine and feminine principles called in the Indian
scriptures?

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

2) Define maldevelopment in a few lines.

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

3) Describe the critical partnership that is destroyed when development

becomes patriarchal.

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….
104
 ……………………………………………………………………………. Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
…………………………………………………………………………….

4) State whether true or false

a) Women are embedded in nature

b) Shiva‘s book is titled StayingAlive

c) Development celebrates women‘s work

BOX 3. Maria Mies

The role of women in the creating and conservingof lifehas been called a
partnership and a cooperation with nature by the ecofeminist Maria Mies who
has worked closely with Vandana Shiva. She argues that women use the
environment sustainably rather than for capital accumulation or for profit. It
is when we devalue this balanced productivity that we have ecological
disruptionand crisis.This also reflects the patriarchal beliefs that devalue
women and thereforewomen are seen as incapable of producing wealth.Thus,
patriarchy reduces both women and nature to a commodity.

Mieswritesthat women not only collected and consumed what grew in nature
but they made things grow. This organic process of growth in which women
and nature work in partnership with each other has created a special
relationship of women with nature which is seminal to the work of―Staying
Alive‖

PC: gendercampus.ch/en/blog/post/what-can-we-learn-from-ecofeminist

105
Envisioning
Environmental 8.4 WHAT IS FEMINIST
Sociology ENVIRONMENTALISM
Ecofeminist scholars often contend that the great plurality of beliefs within
Ecofeminism is one of the movement‘s greatest strengths. Although a
significant theoretical development in the 1970s and 80s,many remained
unsatisfied with what they felt were the limits of the Ecofeminist movement.
Of particular concern was the failure of women in developed countries to
acknowledge the ways in which their own lifestyles maybe leading to
degradation of the environment.

An important critique and alternative perspective came in the form of

Feminist Environmentalism. Important here is the work of the economist,
Bina Agarwal who presents a critique and remodification of Ecofeminism
and of the developmentparadigm.

BOX 4: Questioning Ecofeminism

Many ecofeminists were also concerned with what they saw as a heterosexual
bias in the movement insofar as ecofeminism appeared to privilege the
experience of heterosexual women. Overtime arguments emerged that
emphasised the need to incorporate the tenets of other communities into the
precepts of Ecofeminism. It was said that if Ecofeminism is committed to
fighting against systems of oppression and domination, then the movement
must also acknowledge the ways in which sexuality—and, more specifically,
responses to that sexuality—also figure as oppressive mechanisms. In other
words, understanding of women‘s roles and opportunities must also include a
valuing of sexual differences as well as differences in race, class, and gender.

For instance, GretaGaard an ecofeminist, pointed to how sexuality and

gender identity were used as tools of domination and oppression in societies.
The procreative and male-controlled heterosexuality appears as the one and
only natural sexuality, pushing women into economic dependency and
compulsory motherhood and indirectly denying them their role as producers
in balance and harmony with nature.

8.4.1 The Work of Bina Agarwal

As representing Feminist Environmentalism, Agarwal reiterates many of the
arguments made by ecofeminists such as Shiva, particularly

 that violence against women and against nature are linkedideologically,

symbolicallyand materially.
 that the destruction of nature meant a destruction of women‘s sources for
―staying alive‖.
 that the western maldevelopment model and the modern science which
are patriarchal projects ignore the traditional knowledge of women on
106 nature which is particularly prevalent in the 3rdworld.
 that an answer lies in a continuity between a women‘s movement and an Environmental
Sociology: Nature
environmental movement for the need for an egalitarian society and Scope

Agarwal in support of Shiva says that she takes us beyond western

ecofeminists by

 exploring the links between ways of thinking about development

 examining change and the impact of these on the environment
 pointing out that development is a patriarchal project that marginalises
and undervalues women and nature

Agarwal says these are critical arguments about the important connection
between the domination and exploitation of nature and women by how
patriarchy. This dominationcan be seen as ideological and rooted in a system
of beliefs, ideas, values that places women and non-human world
hierarchically below men and the world of culture.

8.4.2 A critique of Ecofeminism

Nevertheless for Agarwal the Ecofeminists arguments are problematic on
several counts:

 Ecofemnists looks at ‗woman‘ as a unitary category and fails to

differentiate among women by class, race, ethnicity etc.Agarwal argues
that the idea that there is a different kind of relationship between women
and environment that must be viewed in terms of how the third world
women are the victims of environmental degradation is ignored
 Shiva‘s examples on rural women are primarily drawn from north-west
India but she generalises all third-world women into one category
 Ecofeminism largely talks about the domination of women in terms of
genderand patriarchal ideologies and neglects otherwise material sources
of domination which includethe economic and political
 Ecofeministsoveremphasise the ideological aspects of domination of
nature and women and ignores women‘s material relationship with
nature

8.4.3 Feminist Environmentalism

According to Agarwal, what we need is an explicit analysis of the structural
causes of environmental degradation, its effects and responses to it. She thus
suggests an alternative framework which has been termed as Feminist
Environmentalism.

This alternative approach incorporates many elements of Ecofeminism and

highlights certain issues which are missing from the Ecofeminist approach.
Agarwal argues that we need to go beyond this ideological construction of
gender, environment and inequality highlighted by Ecofeminism and examine
the relation of women with nature more closely.We need to take into account 107
Envisioning the material realities in which women of different classes, race respond
Environmental
Sociology differently to the environment and its related issues.

The central arguments of Feminist Environmentalism are as follows:

 recognise that gender relations are rooted in material reality and

influence access to resources
 recognise that women are victims of domination but also repositories of
traditional knowledge systems that enable them to resist degradation and
exploitation
 recognise and re-examine the appropriation of resources and their
unequal distribution and access in local regions
 recognise that increased degradation of resources and the environment
are the result of privatisation and state encroachment or statisation
 recognise that environmental destruction is also the result of an erosion
of traditional arrangements and community cooperation
 recognise that population growth impacts lives and the work of
womenand also impacts their health,education,and life span
 recognise that erosion of local knowledge systems by invisiblising
women leads to a devaluation of indigenous knowledge systems
 recognise that gender and class impact on resource access and
distribution

Feminist Environmentalism thus raises critical questions about the role of the
state in environmental destructionand its failure to address gender issues as it
has a reductionist attitude and commercial approach to the environment. Most
development policies are extractive and destructive rather than conserving
and regenerating.

It also provides a framework for bringing together people, theenvironment,

gender, class power and economy leading to grassroot transformation.

Feminist Environmentalism thus reiterates the need to recognise the critical

role of local communities as agents of change and grassroots movements like
Chipko which highlight the role of women in resisting deforestation and
destructive development processes and emphasise the close link between the
material aspects of nature, human sustenance, and sustainable environmental
protection.

ACTIVITY 1

You can look at examples of environmental movements led by women from

across the world. Besides Chipko with which you would be familiar, you can
also look at for instance the role of Brazilian women in conserving their
forests.

108
https://news.mongabay.com/2020/08/amazon-women-warriors-show-gender-equality-forest- Environmental
Sociology: Nature
conservation-go-hand-in-hand/ and Scope

8.4.4 Significance of FeministEnvironmentalism

In conclusion,for Bina Agarwal, the Feminist Environmentalism perspective
is rooted in material reality and in the relation shared by women and nature as
structured by gender and class organisation.It helps recognise that
environmental degradation has specific class-genderimplicationsfor
livelihood and knowledge systems and helps question the development
paradigm. Longstanding issues such as development, redistribution and
institutional change are re- examinedjust as the role of the marginalised as
agents is recognised. Thus, Feminist Environmentalism becomes;

 an alternative way of thinking and acting about gender and environment,

 an alternative approachthat providesa new way of understanding
ecological questions.

Bina Agarwal is of the view that the ones affected by environmental

degradation mainly the state and the people, respond to it in a different way.
The state responds to it through a piecemeal approach and is often criticised
for the same as most of its policies do not benefit the people and have been a
cause of resistance. They adopt a reductionist perspective, looking at the
environment only in terms of development and exploitation and does not take
into consideration the agency of women who have led many ecological
movements other than the famous Chipko movement.

She argues that we need to recognise the role of women's participation in

solving environmental problems as this would then give a new understanding
to the issue of development and degradation.

If Ecofeminismraises critical questions and provides us with a panoramic

view that helps us understand the relation of gender environment and
development culturally, Feminist Environmentalism engages with
differentiations across class, caste, ethnicity etc, to have a holistic
understanding of the environmental problems and to create environmental
consciousness and an ecological balance, ideas that we discussed in section
8.2 and 8.3.

Check Your Progress 3

1) Does Bina Agarwal support the ideas presented by Ecofeminism? Write

your answer in 3 points

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….
109
Envisioning …………………………………………………………………………….
Environmental
Sociology
…………………………………………………………………………….

2) Stateany four central arguments of the Feminist Environmentalism

perspective.

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

8.5 LET US SUM UP

In this Unit we have looked at some of the critical debates on the relationship
between gender, environment, development and patriarchy. We looked
specifically at the role of maldevelopment and the exploitation of women and
nature with the help of the work of Vandana Shiva and Ecofeminism.

We then examined the critical perspective of Feminist Environmentalism and

the work of Bina Agarwal that emphasised the need to broaden our
understanding of the material realities and exploitative and destructive role of
development on the lives of women.

The unit has also highlighted how the work of the Ecofeminist raises thought
provoking questions about environmental issues and the ecological crisis. It
has also addressed the issue of how the work of women and the environment
are highly devalued and renderedas only a resource or entirely invisible.

You will also have learnt with the help of Feminist Environmentalism that it
is not only important to take into consideration the world view of women for
our understanding of nature butto alsocritically examine the role of
inequalities and intersectionaldifferentiation so as to gain a holistic
understanding of the relationship between gender, environment and
patriarchy.

8.6 REFERENCES
Carson, Rachel(1962)Silent Spring.US: Houghton Mifflin.

Shiva, Vandana(1988) ―Women in Nature‖inStaying Alive:Women Ecology

and Development. Zed Books. Chp.3 (pp.38-54). Agarwal, Bina (2007)‖The
Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India‖ in Mahesh
Rangarajan(ed) The Environmental Issues in India:AReader. New Delhi:
PearsonLongman. Chp 19 (pp 316-324;342-352).

110
 Environmental
8.7 SPECIMEN ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR Sociology: Nature
PROGRESS and Scope

Check Your Progress 1

1) domination of women by patriarchy and the exploitation of the

environment by development

2) radical ecofeminism and cultural ecofeminism.

3) Using a feminist lens, Ecofeminism highlights:

 the many ways in which both nature and women are treated by
a patriarchal society
 how social norms exert unjust dominance over women and nature
 the role of development and destruction of nature and the patriarchal
exploitation of women as parallel processes.

Check Your Progress 2

1) Prakriti and Purusha

2) Whenpatriarchal ideology creates a hierarchical social order and this

inequality is strengthened by the role of capitalism,consumerism and
technological development that promotes and justifies the superiority of
the masculine and the oppression of the feminine and thus of nature, we
have maldevelopment.

In other words, maldevelopment represents how capitalism, patriarchy

and exploitation are not only interrelated but also shape the living
environments and impact on women in many parts of the world in
problematic and devastating ways.

3) In an ecologically alienated world which is blind to the role of women

and their harmony with the ecosystems we need to recognise that the
partnership between women and nature ensures sustainability. It is this
critical partnership that is destroyed when the project of development
becomes a patriarchal project aimed at exploitation and destruction of the
environment and women.

4) State whether true or false

a) True
b) True
c) False

Check Your Progress 3

1) Yes,Agarwal supports many Ecofeministarguments such as violence

against women and against nature are linked ideologically, symbolically
and materially;that the destruction of nature meant a destruction of 111
Envisioning women;that the western maldevelopment model and the modern science
Environmental
Sociology which are patriarchal projects ignore the traditional knowledge of women
on nature which is particularly prevalent in the 3rd world .

2) Four central arguments of Feminist Environmentalism are:

 Recognise that increased degradation of resources and the

environment are the result of privatisation and state encroachment or
statisation

 Recognise that environmental destruction is also the result of an

erosion of traditional arrangements and community cooperation

 Recognise that population growth impacts lives and the work of

womenand also impacts their health,education,and life span

 Recognise that erosion of local knowledge systems by invisiblising

women leads to a devaluation of indigenous knowledge systems

112
 Environmental
UNIT 9 POLITICAL ECOLOGY Sociology: Nature
and Scope
Structure
9.0 Objectives
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Political Ecology: Understanding the Term
9.2.1 Is Ecology Apolitical?
9.2.2 Assumptions of Political Ecology

9.2.3 Main Concerns of Political Ecology

9.3 Culture, Nature and Power
9.3.1 Modernity and Control of Nature

9.3.2 Colonial Outlook on Land and Forest in India

9.3.3 Protests and Environmental Movements

9.4 Environmental Justice
9.5 Let Us Sum Up
9.6 References
9.7 Answers to Check Your Progress

9.0 OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit you should be able to:

 Explain what political ecology is

 Discuss the relationship between culture and nature
 Narrate some aspects of colonial policies on land forest in India
 Grasp the necessity of environmental justice

9.1 INTRODUCTION
In the past several decades various disciplines like sociology, anthropology,
political science, biology, geography and history have embraced the political
ecological approach to gain a deeper understanding of environment and
human interactions. Political Ecology is distinguished domain of social
research which aims to understand the complex relations between
environment and social institutional lives by a critical analysis of the different
means of access and control over environmental resources. It emerged in the
backdrop of various environmental movements which generated public
debate on environmental issues, emerging problems, conflicts over its
abundance and scarcity.Political ecology aims to understand the political
contestations over the nature-society relationships, their directions,


written by Kiranmayi Bhushi, IGNOU, New Delhi 113
Envisioning implications of environmental health and sustainable livelihoods. Political
Environmental
Sociology ecological research proceeds from central questions, such as – what are the
causes of regional environmental degradation, who benefits from wildlife
conservation efforts and who loses, what kind of social, cultural and political
movements and agitations have emerged to address the social inequalities
related to environment and its accessibility.

9.2 WHAT IS POLITICAL ECOLOGY?

When we think of nature, we tend to imagine it in its most natural form-
pristine. We assume that the mountains and seas popularly depicted on
calendar images and posters exist at a distance from human communities. We
do however know that this is rarely the case, as any visit to even a remote
mountainous or coastal region will show us- humans are embedded in nature.

This integral aspect produces a series of interactions between humans and the
natural environment they inhabit, which has shaped all aspects of human life.
Whether one lives in cities or at the foothills of the mountains, all human
communities ultimately are interacting with nature and its resources to build
their lives. The concern of an approach of political ecology is to ask the
question of whether this interaction is devoid of politics or not.

Political ecology, generally defined, examines the politics, in the broadest

sense of the word, of the environment. Political Ecology rejects the view that
environmental degradation can be understood as a simple objective problem
amenable to scientific and technical fixes—e.g., ―there are just too many
people,‖ or ―we just need cleaner and more efficient production or disposal
technologies.‖ Instead, Political Ecologists emphasise that there is ecology of
politics and a politics of ecology. The former refers to central role that natural
resources—their distribution, allocation, and extraction—play in shaping the
nature of political and social institutions within a society. Ecological
conditions influence, the development of social structures and institutions, by
imposing challenges and opportunities for meeting basic needs. Moreover,
ecology is political. When there is scarcity, there are decisions which have to
be made over how things are doing to be allocated, who will receive and who
will not. Besides the distribution of resources and benefit streams, decisions
are made over which groups in society bear the burden of environmental
degradation. Hierarchies, privilege, and power all come into play, as social
dynamics shape use patterns of natural resources, as well as fundamental
definitions of what constitutes environmental problems, which causes them,
and what the solutions should be.

Political ecology refers to the study of the relationships between

environmental concerns, interests and movements and the unequal access of
environment as a whole to different social groups. Its intellectual origin dates
back to 1970s when anthropologists started looking at the relationships
between ecology and political economy to understand the bourgeois
114
environmental agitations. Different scholars like Dianne Rocheleau, Arturo Environmental
Sociology: Nature
Escobar, Richard Peet, Piers Blaikie, Bunyan Bryant, Eric Wolf, Johnston and Scope
Barbara etc. have contributed to its intellectual foundations and established
the tradition of political ecology examining the relationships social power
and functioning of ecologies. Theoretical insights from social sciences have
been used to analyse questions of access and control over environmental
resources, production and consumption of environmental debates, understand
forms of environmental disturbance, degradation, and rehabilitation.
Proliferation of peasant studies and critiques of colonialism during 1960s &
1970s also spurred the interest in the changing environmental landscape and
community relations in the backdrop of the formation of developmental state.
Scholars influenced by Marxian political economy began raising questions of
class differentiation among rural societies, peasant mobilisation against the
colonial rule, and increasing impact of international market on rural poor in
developing countries.

Scholars working in this field have paid attention to the construction of

environmental knowledge, environmental practices of different ethnic groups,
classes, races and genders. They insist in drawing attention to the empirical
engagement with different social groups, their stakes and solutions to social-
environmental problems. Political Ecology highlights the significance of
wider economic, political structures as well as cultural discourses in shaping
the way people are related to environmental conditions.

9.2.1 Is Ecology Apolitical

When we are discussing whether something or someone is political we are
usually referring to a question of power. Do power dynamics between various
communities (countries; city residents versus rural inhabitants; caste groups),
within communities (between men and women, members of different classes)
affect the way in which resources are used and the environment is shaped?
Political ecology answers that question with a resounding yes, but that has
not always been a dominant approach.

One of the significant ways in which our conception of the environment

around us was shaped was through what we term as apolitical approaches.
Such approaches are grounded in the notion that the environment and its‘
state is shaped by objective factors such as the kind of resource and most
importantly the population dependent on it. The approach was characterised
by Malthus‘ arguments on the ecology which was premised on a concern of a
growing human population. He claimed that a rising population would put an
unbearable strain on natural resources leading to poorer living conditions for
everyone. The approach was to become extremely popular and is frequently
invoked when we think of how we frame the environmental question. The
burden of making sustainable living a continued possibility is placed on
countries which have large populations, these invariably tend to be
developing or poorer countries of the world. It is argued that the population
115
Envisioning bomb is ticking and not defusing it will cause worldwide damage. However
Environmental
Sociology when we think about our current environmental state, a significant fact that
emerges is that resource use has very little to do with population sizes. In fact
the richer countries of the world are consuming more resources than the
poorer nations. If we think of how to address the problem of our environment
today, we need for the most developed parts of the world to actually rethink
the ways in which they consume. But who will compel these countries that
are economically and politically dominant to do so. In other words, is it
possible to discuss ecology and environmental conflict without looking at the
question of power?

Another popular apolitical approach has been that of modernisation imagined

through technological use promoting efficiency or through a market based
approaches which prices ‗environmental goods‘ in a way to promote better
and efficient use. The assumption once again is that matters of technology
and markets are removed from questions of power. However historical
evidence tells us otherwise. The transfer of technology from one country to
another can often cause more harm than good. Technology to use or
appropriate resources can work differently across contexts because human
interaction with nature (mediated through technology) is also shaped by
power relations. In the Indian context for instance, the Green Revolution
strengthened the claims around land for a section of OBC castes in India,
leading to a new set of caste conflicts emerging in the agrarian setting.
Furthermore, the transfer of technology or pricing mechanisms often move in
the direction of being transferred from countries of the Global North
(developed countries) to those of the Global South (developing countries). It
is premised on the idea that the former are more knowledgeable and can aid
the Global South- indicative of power relation that exists between the two.

Political ecology rests on the foundation that questions of power cannot be

separated from the environment. Definitions vary, however if we are to pull
together the various ways in which the term has been interpreted then the
common elements point to a study that seeks to draw in concerns about
distribution of power alongside production regimes and an ecological
analysis ( Greenberg and Park, 1994). Another way to look at it has been to
define it as a study that lies at the intersection of an ecologically rooted social
science and principles of political economy (Pete and Watts, 1996).

9.2.2 Assumptions of Political Ecology

More recently, political ecology has realised links with gender studies and
social movement analyses. The broad scope and interdisciplinary nature of
the field lends itself to several definitions and understandings. However,
common assumptions across the field give it relevance. Raymond L. Bryant
and Sinéad Bailey (1997) have developed three fundamental assumptions in
practicing political ecology:

116
 Costs and benefits accompanyingenvironmental change are distributed Environmental
Sociology: Nature
unequally. Changes in the environment do not affect society in a uniform and Scope
way: societal differences of hierarchy whether based on ethnicity or class
or political access to power all have bearing on who benefits and who
loses from environmental changes Political power plays an important
role in such inequalities.

 This unequal environmental distribution inevitably strengthens or

reduces existing social and economic inequalities. In this assumption,
political ecology runs into political economies as any change in
environmental conditions must affect the political and economic status
quo.

 the unequal distribution of costs and benefits and the reinforcing or

reducing of pre-existing inequalities hold political implications in terms
of the altered power relationships that are produced.

What emerges through these definitions is a concern about how social

relations between individuals shapes their interaction with nature while
addressing questions of environmental change and damage, community, state
and international level action on environmental issues and movements around
environmental questions.

9.2.3 Main Concernsof Political Ecology

In this regard it would instructive for us to look at some of the main issues
around which work and research in the field of political ecology has centred.
Robbins (2012) identifies five central themes in recent work.

a) The Degradation and Margenilisation Thesis: is concerned with

changes that have taken place in the use and management of resources.
The changes could have occurred as a result of community or state (both
local and external) intervention owing to the link of these economies
with global/local markets. The changes are seen as leading to
unsustainable use and practices, leading to poverty of populations
dependent on resources and in turn leading to further exploitation of
resources.

b) Conservation and Control Thesis looks at how aims of conserving the

environment can work in contradictory ways. This occurs when state or
other institutions (national or international environmental groups) take
away control of resource management and use from communities and
transfer it to other hands. Such efforts might displace livelihood practices
and management styles that were in fact more environmentally
sustainable.

c) The environmental conflict and exclusion thesis explores how at a time

when we are facing resource exploitation, access to resources can
become a charged political issue. This can occur either when resources
117
Envisioning are enclosed and managed by state or private interests or could also be a
Environmental
Sociology time when resource use remains unequal between or within communities.
For instance if land ownership is restricted only to men from upper and
dominant castes then access is unequal and can stand to challenge.

d) Environmental subjects and identity looks at how at a time of

contestations around the environment new identities are forged by groups
looking to secure rights over the environment. The identity that lies at the
foundations of such groups are built around the ecology and in doing so
can bring together varied groups (of class, caste, gender) to protect the
environment. The ecological concerns of such groups tend to revolve
around basic questions of livelihood.

e) Political Objects and Actors seeks to look at the interaction between

humans and non-human objects from a political perspective. It is
premised on the notion that political and economic systems are affected
by the networks or the patterns of interaction that exist between humans
and nature. Influential states or organisations can exert changes in these
networks often causing harm, which has in turn resulted in movements
arising from local communities.

Thus the field of political ecology rests on the belief that power relations and
the social relations they are embodied in play a critical role in not just
shaping our environment but also in how we respond to the changing
environment.

Check Your Progress 1

1) Political ecology rests on the foundation that questions of

……………cannot be separated from the environment.

2) Explain conservation and control thesis given by Robbins with suitable

examples.

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………….

9.3 CULTURE, NATURE AND POWER

There is a general opinion in much of the scholarship in sociology and among
scholar studying environment that the present crisis in environment is a result
of human intervention and domination of nature.This human intervention is
so drastic that the present age is termed as the Anthropocene Epoch. This
anthropogenic (originating in human activity) have their roots in the way
118
nature was conceptualised in the rational traditions of Europe. We take an Environmental
Sociology: Nature
over view of this view and then discuss the specific case of Colonial policies and Scope
related to land and forest as an outcome of this idea of nature. The state
policies whether in colonial society or in contemporary contexts do not
always address the interest of all its citizenry, if anything pre-existing
structural inequalities further worsened in the wake of environmental
disasters. As can be seen in the environmental policies of British India and
subsequent environmental policies in Independent India.Many of the
environmental movements and protests in India involved the women, the
tribals, the poor and the peasants who are victims of environmental
degradation, unjust use of resources through state policies etc. It is
thesestruggles by people that has given rise to environmental justice which
we will discuss in our next section

Box 1: The Anthrpocene Epoch

The Anthropocene Epoch is an unofficial unit of geologic time, used to

describe the most recent period in Earth‘s history when human activity
started to have a significant impact on the planet‘s climate and ecosystems.
The word Anthropocene is derived from the Greek words anthropo, for
―man,‖ and cene for ―new,‖ coined and made popular by biologist Eugene
Stormer and chemist Paul Crutzen in 2000.

To those scientists who do think the Anthropocene describes a new

geological time period, the question is,
when did it begin, which also has been
widely debated. A popular theory is that
it began at the start of the Industrial
Revolution of the 1800s, when human
activity had a great impact on carbon and
methane in Earth‘s atmosphere. Others
think that the beginning of the
Anthropocene should be 1945. This is
when humans tested the first atomic
bomb, and then dropped atomic bombs
on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. The
resulting radioactive particles were
detected in soil samples globally‖.‗The
testing of the bomb and resultant mushroom cloud created a powerful new
symbol of the destructive power of the human species‘
(https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/anthropocene/). And pic credit: https://
commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nagasakibomb.jpg)

9.3.1 Modernity and Control of Nature

Conceptions about nature and what it is to be human has a long history and
genealogy, however The Enlightenment project, an intellectual tradition of 17
and 18th century Europe, which centred human beings as masters of their 119
Envisioning destiny has a central role in the way nature was conceptualised. The
Environmental
Sociology enlightenment emerged out of the preceding Scientific Revolution and its
achievements which made reason, rationality and observational knowledge
the basis of human endeavour. Human abilities were also the focus of
renaissance period that took to the Protagoras‘ - A Greek philosopher -
dictum: "man is the measure of all things‖.Broadly speaking, Enlightenment
greatly valued empiricism and rational thought and championed the ideal of
advancement and progress. Modernity is an outcome of all these historical
events and accompanying thinking in Europe.

There may be nuanced versions how modernity conceptualised nature but the
predominant idea was /is to conquer nature for the purpose of humanity. An
anthropocentric view which places human beings interests above all other
sentient beings of nature was part of modernity.The science promoted by
many intellectualsof that period, including Rene Descartes, Isaac Newton and
Francis Bacon separated nature from society as a mechanistic, divisible and
exterior. The increasingly control of nature was viewed as progression
towards a civilised society. Thus, ‗primitive cultures‘ such as the hunter-
gathers who lived in close proximity to nature were seen as backward and
without the wherewithal to conquer nature.

While nature was to be exploited there were also the critiques of

modernisation who romanticised all that is wild and pristine.Accounts of the
relationship between humans and nature, as they appear in the history of
ideas, convey ambiguous messages that identify humankind as both destroyer
and rescuer, and wilderness or "natural nature" as both threat and refuge.
Nature is also a resource which needs to be conserved and managed. The
many conceptions of nature only helped serve various politico-economic
ends. In the next sub section we will discuss colonial conceptions of land
and nature to see how these conceptions find their place in the colonial
exploitation and protection of resources. It is worthwhile to take a general
overview of colonial outlook on land and forest as they have a bearingon
contemporary environmental movements as well.

9.3.2 Colonial Outlook on Land and Forest

Many of the popular protests by tribal communities and other marginalised
people in independent India, especially in 1970s onwards were against state
policies which made survival difficult for these communities. During the
1970s and the ‗80s, India witnessed a range of popular protests. The protests
were against the forest policies of the Indian state. On the one hand, the
policies restricted the forest dwellers‘ and peasants‘ access to forest resources
and, on the other, led to rapid environmental degradation. The Indian state
involvement in building big dams also displaced of indigenous people from
their native lands and resulted in organised protests and movements.

120
These protests have their antecedents in colonial history of India. Forest Environmental
Sociology: Nature
policies, laws on commons etc. were directly drawn from colonial and Scope
legislations.

Some of the studies which examine colonial environmental history ‗primarily

argue that the ecological and environmental ills of different regions of India
are a direct outcome of the exploitative colonial policies. The policies were
motivated by concerns such as revenue augmentation, expansion of
agriculture lands, and attaining of sleepers for railways, etc.Among the works
who examined the ills of colonial rule on environment are: Elizabeth
Whitcombe‘s well-known study (1995) on irrigation. It examines how the
irrigation investments and damconstruction activities of the British Raj led to
ecological degradation, salinity and malaria in the regions of Sind and
Ganges basins in north India; Likewise, Micheal Mann‘s detailed study
(1999) on the agricultural transformation in the region of Ganga-Jamuna
Doab during the early nineteenth century focuses on the salinity and mass
destruction of woodlands because of colonial policies (Arivalagan, 2003:5)

As much as there was large scale deforestation and environmental damages

throughout India, which were far reaching compared to previous empires and
political regimes, the British government also realised the valuable resource
forest were and took to conservation. The Romantic Movement in early 19 th
century England that questioned industrialisation and modernity as
destroying the lands and nature may have some influence on various
conservation societies and programmes that were started in England. These
conservation societies had considerably following among the middle class
who pushed for laws and state interventions in protecting the ecology. While
the middle class of England could enjoy such privileges, back in the Indian
colony the peasants and tribals were severely affected by the restricted access
to forests on which their survival depended.

Box 2: Forestsand Conservation in British India

TheBritish government under Lord Dalhousie introduced large scale

conservation programme, this effort was first of its kind in the world and
which was later introduced to other colonies of the British Empire. Hugh
Cleghorn's 1861 manual, The Forests and Gardens of South India, became
the definitive work on the subject and was used by forest assistants.

Dietrich Brandis who joined the British Imperial Forest Service in 1856
worked in Burma and India, formulated new forest legislation and helped
establish research and training institutions. The Imperial Forestry School
at Dehradun was founded by him.Brandis is considered the father of Indian
forestry and is known for his conservation effort termed scientific forestry.
His seminal work on Indian Trees (1906) is an expansive compendium.

MadhavGadgil and Ramachandra Guha (1994), among others, highlight

howBritish restricted the access of tribals and peasants to different kinds of
121
Envisioning natural resources on which their survival depended.Collective resistances and
Environmental
Sociology protests were witnessed against this colonial to restrict access to forest and its
produce. These resistances are captured by Saldanha (2000) and Guha (1985;
1989) in north India.Sivaramakrishnan (1999)writes about the contestations
between the forest dwellers and the colonial authority in the eastern India
over a period of one-and-a-half centuries. He shows that the colonial forest
principles evolved over time; Sivaramakrishnan says, ‗…through conflict and
co-operation between a differentiated society and a heterogeneous colonial
state in the making, rural social relations and colonial power were mutually
transformed‘ (1999: 4-5).

9.3.2 Protest and Ecological Movements

´The Indian Forest Act of 1878 was a comprehensive piece of legislation that
came to serve as a model for other British colonies.'―The new legislation was
based on the assumption that all land not actually under cultivation belonged
to the state...Within India, it allowed the state to expand the commercial
exploitation of the forest while putting curbs on local use for subsistence.
This denial of village forest rights provoked countrywide protest. The history
of colonial rule is punctuated by major rebellions against colonial forestry-in
Chotanagpur in 1893, in Bastar in 1910, in Gudem-Rampa in 1879-80 and
again in 1922-23, in Midnapur in 1920, and in Adilabad in 1940‖ (Guha,
2001: 216) and By 1907, the forest department sought to protect land from
fire, as well as to restrict fodder harvests, cattle grazing, and lopping.

Box 3 : Kumaon Forests Laws and Resistance

Between 1911 and 1916, the forest, nearly 3000 square miles, in Kumaon
hills of now Uttarakhand state were under restricted use. Kumaoni villagers
had no legal access to forest resources for grazing and collecting fodder. The
imposition of forest management severely dislocated traditional agrarian
practices.Peoples‘ resistance and continuous struggles brought it to the
attention of British Government. People‘s main demand in these protests was
that the benefits of the forest, especially the right to fodder, should go to local
people. These struggles have continued in the post-independent era (seen in
Chipko Moveemnt) as the forest policies of independent India are no
different from that of colonial ones. Eventually, the forest campaign led the
state to appointed the Kumaon Forest Grievances Committee. Composed of
government officials and local political leaders, the committee examined
more than 5,000 witnesses in Kumaon. The committee composed a set of
nearly 30 recommendations from the resulting evidence. The committee
recommended a reduction in the area of forest under control of the forest
department, and a repeal of all regulations on grazing and collecting of fodder
from the forest. The provincial government accepted the recommendations of
the Kumaon Forest Grievances Committee. The committee also
recommended the setting up of village councils who would manage forest
lands lying within the village boundaries. This led to the creation of the
122
Forest Council Rules of 1931. The Rules led to the establishment of 3,000 Environmental
Sociology: Nature
elected forest councils to manage Kumaon forests. Villagers successfully and Scope
reclaimed their use of natural resources for subsistence and brought an end to
forest exploitation on the grounds of commercial profitability under colonial
rule.

(Source, R. Guha, 2000, 2001 and A. Agrawal, 2005)

Activity

Make a list of recent environmental movements that have taken place in

India. What are the main demands of these movements and who are they
addressing these demands to? You can make a simple map of the power
relations that exist in each scenario

9.4 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

The concept of environmental justice began as a movement in the 1980s due
to the realisation that a disproportionate number of polluting industries,
power plants, and waste disposal areas were located near low-income or
minority communities. The movement was set in place to ensure fair
distribution of environmental burdens among all people regardless of their
background.Examples of environmental burdens that may be considered
under the umbrella of environmental justice cover many aspects of
community life. These burdens can include any environmental pollutant,
hazard or disadvantage that compromises the health of a community or its
residents.

Environmental racism or environmental justice came into the American

nation‘s political and academic notice in 1982 when people of Afton in
Warren County, a poor overwhelmingly black rural county in North Carolina,
protested and struggled to stop the state of North Carolina from dumping
120 million pounds of soil contaminated with toxic polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) the Warren County Protest brought to attention that people
of color and poor communities were facing ecological risks far greater than
the richer white folks. This incident brought together a coalition of civil
rights activists, environmental activists, labour, and urban reform moments
and activists, indigenous rights movements, campaigns of occupation health
etc. Together they all took note of the inter-sectionalities. ―In 1991, a diverse
group of African-American, Asian-American, Latino, and Indigenous
community activists and leaders from across the United States gathered in
Washington DC for the First National People of Color Environmental
Leadership Summit. Given its broad background, and with central concerns
around health, human and civil rights, and the environmental conditions of
everyday life, the eventual evolution of the movement‘s concerns toward
community vulnerability to climate change make sense‖(Schlosberg &
Collins,2014:360).
123
Envisioning Today, hundreds of studies conclude that, in general, ethnic minorities,
Environmental
Sociology indigenous persons, people of color, and low-income communities confront a
higher burden of environmental exposure from air, water, and soil pollution
from industrialization, militarization, and consumer practices. Robert Bullard
defined environmental justice as the principle that ―all people and
communities are entitled to equal protection of environmental and public
health laws and regulations.‖ (Bullard quoted in Mohai et al, 2009) In a 1999
interview, Bullard described how ―The environmental justice movement has
basically redefined what environmentalism is all about. It basically says that
the environment is everything: where we live, work, play, go to school, as
well as the physical and natural world. And so we can't separate the physical
environment from the cultural environment. We have to talk about making
sure that justice is integrated throughout all of the stuff that we do‖ (ibid)

Another term that is an outcome of environmental justice is climate justice.

Climate Justice looks at environmental upheavals not only in physical terms

but views climate change as a political and ethical issue. Climate justice takes
into account issues of human rights, collective rights, social justice, equality
and historical responsibilities for climate change.The use of the term climate
justice is somewhat encompassing and has been widely used in the recent
past. While climate justice may be understood in different ways, its essence
can be captured through its stress on inclusive decision making regarding
climate related decisions and practices, which places the emphasis on who
bears the costs of both climate change and the actions taken to address
it.Indeed, there is growing set of legal action that address climate justice In
2017, a report of the United Nations Environment Programme identified 894
ongoing legal actions worldwide.

It has been seen that marginalised communities: tribals, women, peasants,

and the poor face the worst consequences of climate change: in effect the
least responsible for climate change suffer its gravest consequences. They
might also be further disadvantaged by responses to climate change which
might further strengthen the existing inequalities, which has been labeled the
'triple injustices' of climate change. And these people and areas have been the
focus of rising number of grass roots movements who are fighting for climate
justice such as Fridays for Future, EndeGelände and Extinction Rebellion .

Much of the discussion on climate justice also focuses on the structural

inequalities. They believe that climate action must explicitly address
marginalization of vulnerable groups from decision-making that directly or
indirectly affects their livelihoods. They strongly advocate the nurturing of
civil society and democratic governance at all scales and levels.

124
Check Your Progress 2 Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope
1) Enlightenment greatly valued ……………….. and …………………..
thought.

2) The Indian forest Act came into force in ………………………….

3) What did Warren County Protest highlight/

……………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………

9.5 LET US SUM UP

In this unit we have tried to capturing the meaning and focus of political
ecology. We have outlined some of the concerns and assumptions of political
ecology. The political ecology can be best understood if we situate some of
the practices where politico-economic institutions created further
marginalised among people. We tried to look at forest laws in British India to
understand how sections of the country were affected by these policies, and
how these colonial policies were geared towards serving the interests of the
empires. Before that we tried to understand the ideas and conceptualisation of
nature which spearheaded a range of human activity that tried to dominate
nature, and how colonialism is an aspect of that thinking.
Peoples resistance to British policies were captured to highlight how such
resistances and protests have continuing relevance in the contemporary
contexts as state policies directly or indirectly affect many vulnerable
communities.

9.6 REFERENCES
Arivalagan, M. (2008). Beyond Colonialism Towards a New Environmental
History of India. Madras Institute of Development Studies.
Guha, R, (1985). Forestry and Social Protest in British Kumaon, 1893-1921,
in RanajitGuha, ed, Subaltern Studies IV. New Delhi: Oxford University
Press, pp.54-101.
Guha, R.(1989).The Unquiet Woods: Ecological Change and Peasant
Resistance. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Guha, R. (2001). The Prehistory of Community Forestry in India.
Environmental History, 6(2), 213-238.

125
Envisioning Bullard RD. (1996). Symposium: the Legacy of American Apartheid and
Environmental
Sociology Environmental Racism. St. John's J. Leg. Comment. 9:445–74
Mohai, P., Pellow, D., & Roberts, J. T. (2009). Environmental justice. Annual
review of environment and resources, 34, 405-430.
Schlosberg, D., & Collins, L. B. (2014). From environmental to climate
justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), 359-374.
Saldanha, IndraMunshi, 1998, ―Colonial Forest Regulations and Collective
Resistance: Nineteenth Century Thana District,‖ in Richard H. Grove, Vinita
Damodaran and SatpalSangwan, eds, Nature and the Orient: Essays on the
Environmental History of South and South East Asia. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, pp. 708-733. (Paperback Edition 2000)
Gadgil, M., &Guha, R. (1994). Ecological conflicts and the environmental
movement in India. Development and change, 25(1), 101-136.
Sivaramakrishnan, Kalyanakrishnan. Modern forests: Statemaking and
environmental change in colonial eastern India. Stanford University Press,
1999.
Robbins, P. (2011). Political ecology: A critical introduction (Vol. 16). John
Wiley & Sons.

9.7 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

Check Your Progress 1

1) Power

2) This occurs when state or other institutions (national or international

environmental groups) take away control of resource management and
use from communities and transfer it to other hands. Such efforts might
displace livelihood practices and management styles that were in fact
more environmentally sustainable. A good example of this is colonial
policies in India and subsequent protest against it.

Check Your Progress 2

1) Empiricism and rational

2) 1878

3) 1982 when people of Afton in Warren County, a poor overwhelmingly

black rural county in North Carolina, protested and struggled to stop the
state of North Carolina from dumping 120 million pounds of soil
contaminated with toxic polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) the Warren
County Protest brought to attention that people of color and poor
communities were facing ecological risks far greater than the richer
white folks.

126
 Environmental
Sociology: Nature
and Scope

127