In ENVS 160, we like to have sets of concrete terms that we can compare and contrast that aid us in understanding and analyzing what environmental studies are meant to actually “study”. There are many comparisons that have come up in class multiple times and are addressed in various readings throughout the course.
In environmental studies, there are two important theories: empirical theories and conceptual theories, or “isms”. Empirical theories are claims on reality that require empirical evidence to disprove while conceptual theories are preferred ideas (isms) that require conceptual reasoning to disprove. Throughout the class, we have looked at various isms in order to create a base for conceptualizing how one can interpret phenomena that occur within the realm of environmental studies, such as the comparison between pure nature and hybrid nature. Both pure and hybrid nature delve into contrasting themselves to essentialism which is things having a fixed essence and is a term that is used to critique people putting other people or things in only one category as well as being used to dispute pure versus hybrid nature.
Another reoccurring theme is the idea of dematerialization and what that would look like in different societies as we aim to use less material commodities. With that comes two different notions of dematerialization: absolute and relative. Absolute dematerialization is reduction of materials globally or nationally or thinking in an overall sense. It calls for simply producing and using less stuff. For example, it may seem that we are using less metal for engines and would be absolutely dematerializing when we are actually using more metal to create the cars themselves. Relative dematerialization is the reduction of materials used to create the products and a new approach to creating products. The substitution of one product for another is an example which creates more efficient production and can be accomplished by material substitution or efficiency. For example, there is more metal being consumed to make cars even though our engines are more efficient since cars have gotten bigger.
Another topic that is frequently discussed is classic versus contemporary thought on environmental issues. Classic environmental thought has informed most North American environmentalism from the 1960’s on which has introduced things like the tragedy of the commons and limits to growth. Classic thought is still the mainstream form of environmental thought today among environmentalists and environmental organizations. Contemporary environmental thought is primarily based on a critique of classic thought from the 1990’s on. There are some contemporary movements such as political ecology (conflict society), ecomodernism (progressive time), and post naturalism (hybrid nature) that have occurred over time. There are also movements that were classic that contemporary has pushed such as environmental justice without purity and ecofeminism without essentialism so contemporary thought is more diverse than classic thought.