society and environment 1

8/13/2019 Society and Environment 1

1/32

Soc io logy and the Env i ronment


2/32

Sociology and the Environment

1

Environm ental Histo ry (February 25th):

Changing ideas and perceptions of nature and the environment

2 - Soc iolo gy and Nature (February 26th):

Thinking sociologically about nature and the environment

Key Questions:

How have understandings of nature and the environment

changed over time and what social transformations have led tothese shifts in perception?

What can sociological concepts and theories contribute to our

understandings of nature and environmental issues?


3/32

Outline of Lectures

- Introduction: Sociology and the Environment

1. Environmental History: Changing Ideas and Perceptions of

Nature and the Environment

- Industrialisation: Modernism and Romanticism

- Late Modernity, Risk and the Globalisation of Nature

2. Thinking Sociologically about Nature and the Environment:

- Nature in Classical Sociology

- Critical Realism vs. Social Constructionism

- Ways Beyond the Realism/Constructionism Divide?


4/32


The environment has only recentlystarted to become a major issue forsociology.

It is still not seen as one of the coresociological topics, like power, social

class, inequality, and gender.

Until recently nature and environmentwere seen as the preserve of naturalscientists and of scientific knowledge.

Why?

Because sociologists (and scientists) have traditionally assumedthat nature and society are separate entities they havemaintained a strict division between societyand nature.


5/32


They have therefore tended to believe that sociologists shouldstudy society and natural scientists should study nature.

Sociologists have also felt the need to defend themselves against

biological reductionism.

Biological reductionism= explaining social phenomena in termsof biological factors.

E.g. Attempts to explain social

inequalities between the sexes

in terms of biological differences(e.g. men are naturally more

competitive, women are

naturally more caring).


6/32

Biological reductionism was central to the socio-biology of

the 1970s and can still be found in crude forms ofevolutionary psychology.

It has been seen as a key task ofsociology to challenge biologicalreductionism, which is accused of

legitimising social inequality.

This has led to an institutionalisedsuspicion of the non-social in --------------------------sociology(Philip Sutton, 2004, 2).

insistence that what is socialand what is naturalmust bekept strictly separate.


7/32

As a result of this Nature/Society separation:

Environmental degradation and pollution seen as outside the

domain of sociological knowledge.

It has been difficult to connect core sociological issues (power,class and inequality) to environmental issues.

There has been a suspicionthat environmental issues wouldprove a passing trend.

Also:

It is difficult to find the basis fora sociological understanding ofnature and the environment inclassical sociology (Durkheim,Marx, Weber).


8/32

These thinkers seem to present an

anthropocentric(human-centred)

view which leaves little room for nature.

Although some have argued it is

possible to use classical sociology

to theorise the relationship between

society and nature (more on this

tomorrow).

Another problem has been a tension

between:

A sociology of the environment wants to introduce theenvironment as a topic into sociology.

And an environmental sociology wants to re-constructsociology by introducing theories and concepts from biologicaland environmental sciences.


9/32

So why are nature and the environment sociological issues?

Our perceptions of nature are shapedby society and culture (meanings

and beliefs).

Our social organisation is shaped

by our material interventions intonature (labour and technology).

Our responses to environmental

problems depend upon social

structures and relationships

(power and institutions).

Human societies are ultimately dependent upon natural

life-support systems (the global eco-system or bio-sphere).


10/32

Environmental History: Changing

Perceptions of Nature and Environment

We often think of nature as

completely objective

(i.e. solid and definite).

Laws of nature = timeless truths

But the meaning of nature is notfixedour understanding of

nature is shaped by the societywe live in.

That is why our perceptions and definitions of naturehave changed over time.


11/32

E.g. Environmentalists today often see

nature as sacred:

Nature viewed as a finelybalanced natural order which

should be valued and protected.

But this perception is relativelyrecent:

before the 19thC (1800s) naturewas seen as wild, disordered,savage and cruel.


12/32

E.g. The savage lives of animals were believed to show that nature

was a war of all against all.

The 17thcentury philosopher Thomas

Hobbes based his defence of the

authoritarian state on the argument

that

Without a sovereign power to enforce

order human society would descend

into an animal state of nature.

In this view nature was uncivilised:

it had to be subdued and

dominated in the interests of

human progress.


13/32

This meant that:

wilderness had to be tamed land had to be cultivated

swamps had to be drained nature had to be cultured

So the dominant view was that culture and civilisation were superior tonature.

This idea strongly supported

capitalist industrialisation:

the extraction of raw

materials/

the use of scientific

knowledge to mine sources

of energy.

the forcible transformation

of uncivilised people into a

disciplined workforce.


14/32

This view of nature as something to be

dominated is explicitly opposed

by environmentalists today.

Rather than celebrating modernitys

triumph over nature, they accuse

it of destroying the natural ecosystems

we depend upon.So the historical shift in perceptions of

nature has been dramatic.

And this is important for understanding

contemporary environmentalism andgreen politics.

But how has this shift in attitudes come

about?


15/32

Environmental awareness is often presented as a very recent

development

But it can be traced back to 19thcentury conservationist and

preservationist movements, and to Romanticism.

The 19th century saw dramatic changes in both social

organisation and in the material relationship between human

society and nature:

capitalist industrialisation

urbanisation

population expansion

decline of rural way of life


16/32

Critics saw these transformations as leading to:

dramatically increased poverty and inequality

pollution and degradation of the natural environment

moral and spiritual decline and social breakdown

These critics used nature as abasis for their attacks on Victoriancivilisation.

They argued that people hadlost touch with nature, and

needed to get back to natureand back to the land.

i.e. People needed to reconnectwith their natural selves.


17/32

The English Romantic Poets (Wordsworth, Blake, Coleridge,

Byron, Shelley, Keats) were prominent advocates of this view:

The Romantic viewof nature:

Getting and spending,

we lay waste our powers:

Little we see in Nature thatis ours. (Wordsworth)

Come forth into the light

of things, let Nature be your

teacher. (Wordsworth)

The Romantics were fierce critics of modernity who saw nature

as the ultimate source of human spiritual well-being.


18/32

They emphasised the importance of sensory and emotional

experience and intuitive wisdom against the Enlightenment

philosophy of rationality and science.

Romantic thinking was a

response to modernity made

possible by industrialisation

and urbanisation.

But it was fiercely opposed to

modern culture and urban

life, instead promoting a

pastoral existence.

This helped to create a country/city polaritywith a powerful set

of cultural associations which persist today:


19/32

Country (rural) City (urban)

peace

+ innocence

simple virtue

learning

+ communication

enlightenment

backwardness- ignorance

limitation

noise- pollution

ambition/greed

Like the Romantics, the 19th century conservationists

emphasised the positive virtues of country life and the

negative aspects of urban life.


20/32

They also argued that industrialisation disfigured both the

natural landscape and human moral values.

And this led to the

development of an

environmental

consciousness from

the mid-19thcentury,

and the growth of

various conservation

societies (e.g. RSPCA).

So the origins of social organisations dedicated to the idea

of protecting and defending nature can be traced back to the

1800s.


21/32

Some historians have suggested that a concern for the natural

world goes back even further (to the 1500s).

Man and the Natural World Keith Thomas (1984)

Changes in cultural values over

a long period (1500-1800)

provided the right conditions

for environmental concerns toemerge.

Gradual shift away from an

instrumentalattitude to nature

and towards a non-utilitarianattitude.

The utilitarian view= the idea that nature is there to be used

and exploited to serve human ends


22/32

This instrumental view is rooted in Judaeo-Christian theology:

= Nature was created by God for humans,who can therefore use it at will.

This has often been seen as sanctioning

the exploitation of the natural world

But, Christian theology always contained

the possibility for an alternative view:

= Nature was sacred (as Gods creation)

and humans were entrusted with its

stewardship.

E.gSaint Francis of Assisi.


23/32

Keith Thomas shows how the instrumental view was graduallychallenged by a concern for nonhuman animals and nature.

Why?

Because in an increasingly urban industrial society, peoplesdistancefrom naturein the raw and its threats actuallyfostered a longing for the countryside, for wilderness, and

for the well-being of animals.

Therefore:

There was a growing contradictionbetween:

an increasingly emotional caring attitude towards natureand animals.

and the real exploitation of nature and animals on which

modern society was based.


24/32

It is clear that these contradictions persist today:

E.g. between peoples attitudestowards their pets, and towards

agricultural food animals.

Thomas suggests

that the growth of a

non-utilitarian attitude

to nature resulted from:

changes in social organisation

(urbanisation, industrialisation).

the growth of a scientific world-view.


25/32

A similar account of historical changes in perceptions

of nature is provided by the sociologist Norbert Elias:

The Civilizing Process Norbert Elias

Argues that an increase in human

control over nature has reduced our

fear of nature and natural events.

This has led to more sympathetic

attitudes towards nature and animals,

and to an aesthetic appreciation of thenatural environment.

Elias calls this the civilizing process.


26/32

Contemporary Views of Nature and the Environment

Todays environmental consciousness is the product of a long

and gradual history.

It is not just a response to the contemporary ecological crisis

(i.e. climate change).

But how are social understandings of

nature and the environment changingtoday?

Ulrich BeckThe Risk Society

Beck says that we live in an age of risk,in which the main threats to late modern

societies stem from their relationship to

the natural world.


27/32

If our increasingly non-utilitarian attitudes to nature were rootedin an increasing distance from nature, and a diminishing threatfrom nature

Then how is the return of nature (i.e. environmental risk)transforming our attitudes?

Arewe seeing a strengthening of instrumental attitudesas

the distance between society and nature is reduced?

Orare we witnessing an ecological revolution - the birth of a

new ecological awareness?

Perhaps there will be no majorshift in consciousness until

the effects of climate change

are felt in the everyday lives

of people in the West


28/32

History suggests that any change is likely to be dialectical:

(i.e. it will involve deeply contradictory elements).

E.g. Efforts to secure new carbon reduction targets.

Andat the same time a rush tosecure Arctic territories with oilpotential.

Because new sites of drilling

are made possible as the ice melts!

Other obstacles to an ecologicalrevolution include the divisionsbetween nations, regions,hemispheres:

Rapidly industrialising and urbanising nations in the third world

(the global south) reluctant to curb emissions.

The US as the biggest consumer-polluter is unwilling to give up

its carbon advantage (Kyoto).


29/32


30/32

Summary 2:

These organisations were early pre-cursorsto contemporary environmental groups.

There has been a dramatic transformation of

attitudes to nature since the early modern period.

Rather than an uncivilized wilderness in need of

cultivation, nature has come to be seen as a

precious resource that must be protected:

Developments today may be leading to a newecological revolution in which an environmental

consciousness is becoming increasingly

globalised.


31/32

Summary 3:

This is a part of the globalisation process, as well

as a product of globalisation:

the increasing social and economic interconnectedness

of people around the world

the globalisation of industrial capitalism (especially therapid industrialisation of China and India)

the globalisation of environmental crisis

This contemporary age of risk could lead to a new view of

nature, a new global ecological awareness.

But there are many obstacles to this, and any global

environmental consciousness is likely to generate its own

contradictions and opposing views.


32/32

society and environment 1

Documents