Environmental

Political Schools
of Thought
Dr Edsel E. Sajor
Political Values and
Environmental-Ecological
Issues
 In environmental-ecological debate often invokes the issue
of political-economic organization and alternative social
forms argued explicitly or implicitly, deemed “necessary” to
solve the issues at hand, along with an extraordinary
display of disparate culprits and villains needing to be
overthrown if present ecodrama is to have a happy rather
than tragic ending.
 Environmentalists not only occupy every position on the
traditional right-to-left ideological spectrum but also can
adapt to diverse political positions while simultaneously
claiming they are beyond politics in the normal sense.
 What is often at stake in ecological and environmentalist
arguments is the idea of different kinds of societies.
A classification of selected types
of environmental-ecological
political positions
 Authoritarianism
 Corporate and State Managerialism
 Pluralistic Liberalism
 Conservatism
 Moral Community
 Ecosocialism
 Decentralized communitarianism
 Ecofeminism
Authoritarianism in Ecopolitics
 There is a belief that the politics of sustainable
development seem likely to move as along the spectrum of
libertarianism towards authoritarianism, and that the
golden age of individualism, liberty, democracy is all but
over in the face of present-day level of worsening
ecological crisis and growing scarcity.
 Authoritarianism concedes the necessity of some kind of
centralized authoritarian or iron-hand response as a
‘realistic’ approach to natural resource limits and the
painful adaptations that such limits will inevitably force
upon us.
 Authoritarian ecopolitics typically presumes that resource
scarcities (and consequent limits to growth) and population
pressure lie at the heart of environmental-ecological issue.
Corporate and State
Managerialism
 The centerpiece of this political argument is that our
definition of many ecological problems (e.g., acid
rain, the ozone hole, global warming, pesticides in
the food chain, etc.) is necessarily science-led and
that solutions equally depend upon the mobilization
of scientific expertise and corporate technological
skills embedded with a rational (state-led process of
political economic decision making.
 Corporate and state managerialism has a weak
version of the authoritarian solution, resting upon the
application of techniques of scientific-technical
rationality within an administrative state armed with
strong regulatory and bureaucratic powers in liason
with “big” science and big corporate capital.
Pluralistic Liberalism
 Its core assumption is that because of the difficulty in defining in any
omniscient or omnipotent way what a proper environmental-ecological
policy might be and what particular values should be brought to bear in
discussing environmental issues, democratic rights and freedoms (particularly
of speech and opinion) are sometimes regarded as essential to ecological
politics.

 Open and perpetual negotiation over environmental-ecological issues in a

society where diverse pressure groups are allowed to flourish is seen as the
only way to assure that the environmental issue is always kept on the agenda.

 Consensus about environmental issues -- and therefore the best bet for
environmental protection – can best be reached only after complex
negotiation and power plays between a variety of interest groups. Consensus,
however, is admittedly only a temporary moment in a deeply contested and
pluralistic politics concerning the values to be attributed to nature and how to
view ecological change.
Conservatism
 This is a belief that human adaptations to and of natural
environments have been arrived at over centuries and should not
be unnecessarily disturbed. Tradition ought presumably to be
respected everywhere, so that all-out modernization is always
regarded as problematic.
 The issue is not nonintervention in the environment, but preservation
of traditional modes of social and environmental interaction
precisely because these have been found to work, at least for
some (usually but not always elite) groups.
 Corollarily, preservation of the political power and values of such
groups is just an import issue here, as environmental considerations.
 Conservatism can have a radical edge. They can be strongly anti-
capitalistic (against development) and when placed in an
international setting, they can also be strongly anti-imperialistic.
Moral Community
 It is the definition of many “communities” of a consensus as to what
their moral obligations are with respect to modes of social relating
as well as to ways of behaving with respect to the “rights of
nature”.
 While often contested, by virtue of the internal heterogeneity of the
community or because of pressures towards social change, these
moral precepts concerning, for example, the relation to nature
(expressed increasingly in the field of “environmental ethics”) can
become an important ideological tool in the attempt to forge
community solidarities (e.g. nationalist sentiments) and to gain
empowerment.
 This space of moral debate on environmental issue articulates with
communitarian politics and values that center on the ideals of civic
virtues. That is, a virtuous relation to nature is closely tied to
communitarian ideals of civic virtues.
 Ecosocialism
 This is a distinct current with most mainstream socialist
movements that regard environmental problems and issues
(e.g., occupational health and safety) can be traced back
to the capitalist precept that the choice of production
technology is to be governed solely by private interest in
profit maximization of market share.

 Moreover, it argues that social control of production

technology and the means of production, and control over
capitalistic “accumulation for accumulation’s sake,
production for production’s sake, which lies at the root of
many environmental issues has to happen. There is a
recognition too that “the future of humanity simply cannot
build on pleasant life for a few and suffering for the
majority”.

 It argues that in the context of current ecological crisis, a

second route to socialism is available – one that highlights
the contradiction between the social organization of
production and the (ecological) conditions of production,
rather than class contradictions.
Decentralized communitarianism
 This derives inspiration from the “self-reliant
community modelled on anarchist lines”, which
articulates that the form of social relations which
should prevail within such self-reliant communities
could become, by virtue of their scale “closer” to
nature.

 Egalitarianism, nonhierarchical forms of organization,

and widespread local empowerment and
participation in decision-making are usually depicted
as the political norm.

 Decentralization and community empowerment,

coupled with a certain degree of bioregionalism, is
then seen as the only effective solution to an
alienated relation to nature and alienation in social
relationships.
 Ecofeminism: Core Ethical Premises
 Ecofeminism is the position that that there are important connections
– historical, experiential, symbolic, theoretical – between the
domination of women and the domination of nature, an
understanding of which is crucial to both feminism and environmental
ethics.
 Ecofeminists argue that, at least in Western societies, the oppressive
conceptual framework which sanctions the twin dominations of
women and nature is a patriarchal one, characterized by an
oppressive conceptual framework. It has the following argument:
1. Women are identified with nature and the realm of the physical;
men are identified with the “human” and the realm of the mental.
2. Whatever is identified with nature and the realm of the physical is
inferior to (“below”) whatever identified with the “human” and the
realm of the mental; or conversely, the latter is superior to (“above)
the former.
3. Thus, women are inferior (“below”) men; or, conversely, men are
superior to (“above”) women.
4. For any X and Y, if X is superior to Y, then X is justified in subordinating
Y.
5. Thus, men are justified in subordinating women.
Ecofeminist Politics in Environment and Development
 Ecofemism in development can be broadly named as the WED
approach (Women, Environment and Development), which
developed in the 1970s. It challenged the dominant model of
development, and in particular what they saw as the gendered
(masculine)knowledge that underpins it
.
 WED approach equated men’s domination of women with their
control over nature (which is, the core of ecofeminist ethical
position). From this perspective, industrialization and science have
been shaped by masculine values since the Enlightenment and
have been guilty of excluding spiritual and holistic thinking. It has
led to the pursuit of economic development that has effectively
constituted a war against the earth’s ecosystems, which are usually
portrayed as female by eco-feminists.

 One radical strand of ecofeminist politics (Vandan Shiva’s) seeks to

connect women and the environment by focusing upon their
characteristics or traits, their nuturing and caring capacities, and
their ability to manage limited food supplies. This position discounts
gender formation, and identify an organic link between women
and nature. It follows, according to the argument, that is such
linkage exists, it makes sense for environmental programmes to be
geared toward women – or the prioritization of women within
development projects that are related to environment
conservation.
 Counterpoints to WED
 Critics have questioned the link between women
and the environment, viewing it as an essentialist
reading of women’s biological make-up and their
relationship with nature.

 Uneasiness with this biological claims made in

relation to women stems from the fact that potential
this can be used to limit their roles and influence
within society.

 WED approach which emphasizes rural

connectedness is claimed to be an outdated almost
romanticized conception of their lives especially
since they increasingly live in urban areas.

 WED approach is also charged with ignoring and

excluding environmentally sensitive men who may
have much to bring to this debate.
Thank you.