From Deep Ecology to

Wednesday, Sept. 14
ENVL 1011
Political Ecology:
philosophical and
empirical currents
Group Quiz
1. What does “the land” represent to Leopold?

2. How does Leopold define the health of the land?

3. What is at the root of environmental destruction, according to Bookchin?

4. What do “first nature” and “second nature” mean to Bookchin?

5. What is the “hatchet” of political ecology?

Answers
1. What does “the land” represent to Leopold? Soils, waters, plants, animals, and people

2. How does Leopold define the health of the land? The capacity for self-renewal

3. What is at the root of environmental destruction, according to Bookchin? Human social

domination, oppression, and conflict

4. What do “first nature” and “second nature” mean to Bookchin? First nature = biotic nature.
Second nature = humanized nature / the human-created environment

5. What is the “hatchet” of political ecology? The critical perspective that exposes power
inequities and agendas behind environmental problems
Overview
1. Continued from last time: Ethics, values, advocacy
2. Philosophical movements
1. Deep Ecology
2. Ecofeminism
3. (Radical) Social Ecology
3. Empirical approaches
1. Cultural Ecology
2. Political Ecology
4. Discussion
Pope Francis’
Laudato Si’
Sample Chapters:
• “What is Happening to Our
Common Home?”
• “The Human Roots of the
Ecological Crisis”
• “Integral Ecology”
• “Ecological Education and
Spirituality”
• Scientists as advocates?
Deep Ecology
• Strong ecocentric worldview
• Ethical, spiritual, psychological paradigm
• Arne Naess (1912-2009), Norwegian philosopher
• Beyond “shallow” legal fixes of 1970s environmentalism
• Popularized in the 1980s
• Heavily critiqued
Ecofeminism
• Connects human domination of nature to domination
of women by men
• Nature as property; women as property under patriarchy
• Highlights important environmental knowledge and
care-work of women
• Focused on ending oppression in all forms, building
egalitarian society
(Radical) Social Ecology
• Murray Bookchin (1921-2006)
• Anarchist Social Ecology
• Advocated a decentralized, communalistic society
• Critical of individual, recreational,
“cosmetic” measures
• Ecological problems arise from political and economic
contexts, social inequality and oppression
• Pre-political ecology!
• Radical social change necessary to save the environment
• Critical of Deep Ecologists’ naivete, ignorance of political
issues, pessimism about humans
Cultural Ecology
• 1930s – 1970s
• Focused on human adaptations to natural environment (cultural,
technological)
• Adaptations to the environment shape social organization and technological
development (esp. small scale/subsistence societies)
Political Ecology (PE)
• Contrasted with typical, “apolitical” ecology
• Cultural ecology + political economy
• Closely associate with geography, anthropology, development studies
• Focus on inequality in access to natural resources, uneven
environmental impacts
• Looks for higher levels of causation, rather than just blaming “local
people”
• The “Hatchet and the Seed”
Discussion
1) What did you think of the Bookchin piece? Your biggest takeaways?

2) Do you have any lingering questions, disagreements, or issues of

confusion about it?

3) Do you think sustainability is a meaningless concept or a useful one?

Why?

4) If we agree that a new worldview is needed that integrates humans

and nature, how can we get there as a society?