Ecology and political theory

No description supplie

The Urban Political Ecology of Post-industrial Scottish Towns: Examining Greengairs and Ravenscraig

Urban ecological politics is shaped by both moments of concerted action and more silent perceptions and responses. Instead of only being evident in situations of organised protest, the politics of urban ecology is also manifested, in material and symbolic terms, in the daily life of the residents. The fragmentation of urban political ecology turns out to be an important element in the affirmation of post-political forms of urban governance. Those issues were the object of fieldwork research carried out in Greengairs and Ravenscraig, two towns in North Lanarkshire, near Glasgow, with the goal of unravelling the understanding and the coping mechanisms of environmentally deprived residents. The towns are permeated by a widespread, often dissimulated, political ecology that is nonetheless always present. Empirical results demonstrate that a more comprehensive handling of the political ecology of the urban is crucial in order to halt the sources of marginalisation and ecological degradation

Revisiting and revitalizing political ecology in the American West

Political ecology, initially conceived to better understand the power relations implicit in management and distribution of natural resources in the developing world, came “home” to the American West in the 1990s and 2000s. This groundswell of research did much to problematize socio-environmental conflicts in the region, long typified by tensions over land and resources, identity and belonging, autonomy and authority. Since first touching down in the West, however, the “big tent” of political ecology has only grown bigger, incorporating new perspectives, epistemologies, and ontologies. At the same time, the nexus of environment and society is perhaps even more salient today, amid a regional conjuncture of populist revolt, climate change, and rapid political economic transformation. Here we reflect on three longstanding regional concerns – energy development, wolf reintroduction, and participatory governance – leveraging the pluralism of contemporary political ecology to better understand their contemporary incarnations. In so doing, we highlight the need to bring together insights from both “traditional” approaches and newer directions to better understand and engage contemporary challenges, with their heightened stakes and complexity. Such an approach demonstrates what we might learn about global processes in this place, as well as what insights regional praxis (often woefully provincial) might gain from elsewhere – new ways of seeing and doing political ecology. Our goal is to generate discussion among and between political ecologists and regional critical scholars, initiating new collaborative engagements that might serve the next wave of political ecology in the 21st century American West

Political Ecology

Environmental legislation is commonly accepted as an altruistic approach to land management. A closer examination however, reveals that political incentives and flawed arguments consistently shape U.S. environmental policy at high public costs. As student fellows at the Institute of Political Economy at Utah State University, we have had the opportunity to research this subject under the direction of Professor Randy Simmons. Political Ecology is his upcoming book that explores a variety of environmental policies, the incentives that created them, and their effects on both public lands and taxpayers. Our research contributions to this overall project specifically explore three separate case studies: the Federal Land Management Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Altogether, it is our hope that the analysis and case studies presented will provide policy makers and the general public with needed information in regards to current and future U.S. environmental policy

Political ecology and the epistemology of social justice

Piers Blaikie’s writings on political ecology in the 1980s represented a turning point in the generation of environmental knowledge for social justice. His writings since the 1980s demonstrated a further transition in the identification of social justice by replacing a Marxist and eco-catastrophist epistemology with approaches influenced by critical realism, post-structuralism and participatory development. Together, these works demonstrated an important engagement with the politics of how environmental explanations are made, and the mutual dependency of social values and environmental knowledge. Yet, today, the lessons of Blaikie’s work are often missed by analysts who ask what is essentially political or ecological about political ecology, or by those who argue that a critical approach to environmental knowledge should mean deconstruction alone. This paper reviews Blaikie’s work since the 1980s and focuses especially on the meaning of ‘politics’ within his approach to political ecology. The paper argues that Blaikie’s key contribution is not just in linking environmental knowledge and politics, but also in showing ways that environmental analysis and policy can be reframed towards addressing the problems of socially vulnerable people. This pragmatic co-production of environmental knowledge and social values offers a more constructive means of building socially just environmental policy than insisting politics or ecology exist independently of each other, or believing environmental interventions are futile in a post-Latourian world

When “conservation” leads to land degradation: lessons from Ban Lak Sip, Laos

Land degradation / Soil erosion / Farming systems / Environmental policy / Political ecology / Households / Population growth / Laos / Ban Lak Sip

The global political ecology of the Clean Development Mechanism

This article explores the ways in which the "global" governance of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) intersects with the "local" politics of resource regimes that are enrolled in carbon markets through the production and trade in Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs). It shows how political structures and decision-making procedures set up at the international level to govern the acquisition of CERs through the Kyoto Protocol's CDM interact with and transform national and local level political ecologies in host countries where very different governance structures, political networks, and state-market relations operate. It draws on literature within political ecology and field work in Argentina and Honduras to illustrate and understand the politics of translation that occur when the social and environmental consequences of decisions made within global governance mechanisms, such as the CDM, are followed through to particular sites in the global political economy. It also shows how the outcomes in those sites in turn influence the global politics of the CDM

Power, discourse and city trajectories

Examines social theory and contemporary human geography in the context of urban development. Covers theoretical debates in political ecology, the cultural turn in the economy, social relations and scale, space and place, and colonialism and post-colonialism

Feminist Ecological Economics

Feminist ecological economics links gender and ecological perspectives both theoretically and practically, providing justification and impetus for considering gender, intersectionality, and ecology together in relation to economic activity. Such analysis reveals the material links between biophysical reproduction and social reproduction, and their importance for economies, despite their generally being undercounted and/or externalized. Feminist ecological economics analysis also generates important and timely insights about how economies might be structured differently to prioritize equity, ecological and political sustainability, and interspecies or ecosystemic well-being (Salleh 1997, 2009; Gibson-Graham and Miller 2015).Feminist ecological economics is closely related to ecofeminist economics, which is somewhat more critical since it is built on extensive ecofeminist analysis of the links between feminism and ecology. Both fields problematize and critique economies and economics from intersectional feminist standpoints. These fields are also intertwined with feminist political ecology, postcolonial feminisms, the subsistence approach theory, materialist ecofeminism, Indigenous feminisms, gender and development, feminist commons theory, and feminist degrowth theory (see Mellor 2002; Nixon 2015; Dengler; Akram-Lodhi and Rao; Tsikata and Torvikey; and Agarwal, this volume).This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canad