Grid Group Theory
Mike Hulme introduces what we refer to as Cultural Theory in chapter six of his book, Why We Disagree About Climate Change. The model of Cultural Theory (or the four ‘ways of life’ as titled by Douglas and Wildavsky) groups all individuals into four different sections or “ways of life” (Hulme 2009, 186). “The classification draws upon two fundamental dimensions: the extent to which people are group-oriented or individual-oriented, and the extent to which people believe that many rules are needed to control behavior or that only few rules are necessary” (Hulme 2009, 186). This theory holds a great deal of merit when attempting to analyze the ideals of both institutions and individuals which make up cultures and communities. The number one advantage of using grid-group theory is that it simplifies every individual or group into one simple graph allowing every standpoint regarding societal positionality to be easily explained, examined, and understood through the lens of Cultural Theory (See Figure 1). After establishing the necessary background, Hulme introduces this model towards the middle of his argument in order to support the analysis that follows in relation to said model. Hulme’s application of the grid-group model is an important scholarly example of the interdisciplinarity of Environmental Studies because it effectively brings together notions of Climate and Cultural Theory thus creating this multifaceted field of academic endeavor.
Normative Statements
There are two types of statements that can be made within environmentalist discourse: empirical and normative. An empirical statement is one that simply states facts about the way things definitively exist. A normative claim, on the other hand, is a declaration of the way that things should be. Behind every claim made in activism there is a normative statement about the way things should be. An example of this is given in Paul Steinberg’s book Who Rules the Earth? when he writes that “behind the most dispassionate effort by researchers to discover how flu viruses infect human cells, we find the normative position that human health should indeed be protected” (Steinberg 2015, 17). These normative tendencies cause discrepancies between research and activism due to instances when researchers allow their inherently biased beliefs to influence their work. This issue is prevalent in environmental studies in the sense that most people research subjects that pertain to their existing opinions; they let the activism drive the research instead of the other way around.
Anti-Consumption Hierarchy
There seems to be an inevitable hierarchy surrounding many, if not all, aspects of anti-consumption ideals and politics. Referred to by Siddhartha Shome as the “green elites,” those in the upper class are consuming mass quantities while creating propaganda detailing the consumerist downfalls of those in the lower class who, in reality, are simply trying to survive (Shome 2011, loc. 1614). From this hierarchy arises a dichotomy between the green elites who frantically push for notions of socialist order while consuming mass quantities and shaming those of lower socioeconomic class for simply scraping by (See Figures 2 and 3). In a perfect world socialism means complete equality and plenty for all, but in reality, those who currently hold the power advocate for a false sense of socialism while simultaneously furthering class separation through hierarchical anti-consumption politics. The knowledge of such hierarchy has proved to be quite useful under the Environmental Studies heading because it has facilitated the scholarly critique of the disinformation produced by the the green elites’ notions of anti-consumption.
Works Cited
Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shome, Siddhartha. 2011. “The New India Versus the Global Green Brahmins: The Surprising History of Tree Hugging.” In Love your monsters: postenvironmentalism and the anthropocene by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus. 2011. United States: Breakthrough Institute. Kindle Edition. (Kindle Locations 1576-1577).
Steinberg, Paul F. 2015. Who rules the earth?: how social rules shape our planet and our lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.