There are many common themes that have revealed themselves throughout the span of our course. Of the many, I have chosen to focus on three that serve critical roles in environmentalism: institutionalism, spirituality, and the hybridity of the natural world and humans.
-Hybridity-
As we enter into the Anthropocene, or the modern age of humans highlighted by climate change, the classic environmentalist approach of the dichotomy between nature and humans is not easily seen fulfilling itself anytime soon. Humans have begun to affect climate on a global scale, creating an entirely new ecological age and leading to drastic changes of the Earth as we (chiefly the developed western world), continues to modernize. Within Richard White’s The Problem With Purity, he states that “we have been for centuries so inextricably tangled in the natural world that traces of nature are everywhere in us and traces of us have infiltrated more and more of nature” (White 2000, 216). Understanding the natural world as a separation from humans denies that there has already been a cross contamination between the two that has made it unrecognizable to tell them completely apart, as each has influenced the other. Another group believing in the hybridity of the natural world and humans, being those authors of the Ecomodernist Manifesto, see human prosperity as well as ecological health as inseparable (2015). Attempting to separate these two interweaving realms is not only impossible looking backwards as White describes, but also looking forward as the Ecomodernists argue.
-Spirituality-
An important facet of environmentalism is its ties to spirituality, ethics, and morals. Environmentalists at large involve themselves in this field due to a deep passion and love for the Earth. Within deep ecology, the ecologist is supposed to acquire a veneration for all ways and forms of life. As well, the happiness of humans is thought to be in direct relation to having close partnerships with other forms of life (Naess 1979). Climate change is in direct odds with religious traditions, namely being “a reverence for life-a sacredness- that is central to nearly all religious writings” (Hulme 2009, 148). Across religions, there are strong beliefs in the sacredness of life and the Earth, and these beliefs tie deeply into how we approach climate change and why we feel so deeply about it.
-Institutionalism-
The scale of action against climate change is a much discussed topic, becoming so due to our globalized world, and is highlighted by varying viewpoints of individual action versus that of the institutional kind. Within both Why We Disagree About Climate Change by Mike Hulme and Who Rules the World by Paul F. Steinberg, institutional action is stressed as important. Recently, the role and importance of institutional action to manage ever increasing humans impacts onto the natural world has been on the rise, as “the transformation to sustainability requires transforming the rules we live by” (Steinberg 2015, 15). Whether or not this is at a more localized level, as Steinberg describes taking place in Costa Rica which has created new rules to give local communities more power over their water sources (2015), to requiring “new global forms of governance” (Hulme 2009, 290), the need to alter the rules and foundations by which we live is highlighted by both of these authors.
Works Cited
Hulme, Mike. 2015. Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steinberg, Paul. 2015. Who Rules the Earth?: How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Naess, Arne. 1973. “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement.” Inquiry 16: 95–100.
White, R. 2000. “The Problem with Purity.” Tanner Lectures on Human Values 21: 211–228.
Nordhaus, T., and M. Shellenberger. “An Ecomodernist Manifesto.” 2015. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5515d9f9e4b04d5c3198b7bb/t/552d37bbe4b07a7dd69fcdbb/1429026747046/An Ecomodernist Manifesto.pdf.