The further scholarship investigates life forms (ecology, evolutionary biology and microbiology) the less those forms can be said to have a single, independent and lasting identity. The further scholarship delves into texts (deconstruction) the less they too can be said to have a single, independent and lasting identity. This similarity is not simply an analogy. Life forms cannot be said to differ in a rigorous way from texts. On many levels and for many reasons, deconstruction and ecology should talk to one another. It is interesting to contemplate an entangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent on each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, 395–396)
Political ecology has often defined itself against Eurocentric conceptions of the world. Nevertheless, recent contributions have questioned the ongoing reproduction of an Anglo-American mainstream against 'other political ecologies'. Decentering Anglo-American political ecology has therefore forced a greater recognition of traditions that have developed under the same banner, albeit in different linguistic or national contexts. In addition, thinking more about the situatedness of knowledge claims has forced a deeper questioning of the Eurocentric and colonial production of political ecological research. In this report I begin by reviewing a range of political ecological traditions before going on to look at decolonial moves within the field. I conclude by considering how political ecologists might reframe their practice as one of relational comparison.
Long ago when people still lived in caves-perhaps at the same time when they developed habits that were different from those of other animals- humans began to practice ecology. They became keen observers of nature through such basic and instinctive actions as tracking both large wild animals and small prey, discerning edible plants from poisonous ones, and noting the time of year when different plants could be gathered. From necessity and inherent curiosity, humans began to learn about the relationships between living things and the environment. As the field of ecology grew, its focus went beyond the simple cataloging of living things in the world. Ecologists also became interested in understanding how living things function and how they interrelate with one another and with the environment-to explain that peculiar element that makes the Earth unique: life. We will begin by learning what ecology is and what it is not. (At times the word has been used incorrectly as a synonym for environmental protection.) Later, we will look at how living things are classified, before moving into the study of the environments in which they live: the land, water, and air.
What is ecology? -- Energy flow and nutrient cycles -- Analysis of the environment -- Terrestrial biomes -- Aquatic biomes -- Populations and their regulation -- Communities -- Plants, phytophagous invertebrates and vertebrate herbivores -- Predators and prey -- Pathogens, symbionts and parasites -- Biomass, biodiversity and human influences on the environment -- Appendixes
Offers a neoliberal critique of Murray Bookchin's writings on social ecology (SE), focusing on how his attempt to unite a leftist critique of liberalism with contemporary environmental concerns is undermined by the comparisons he draws between market systems & ecosystems. Bookchin's project is assailed for failing to acknowledge that these systems function in accord with impersonal principles of self-organization. Conclusions suggest that Left-oriented environmental analysis lacks the intellectual resources to develop a viable approach to SE, & that evolutionary liberalism, imbued with insights from deep ecology, provides a sound basis for SE theory. Adapted from the source document.
Updated for 2013, Ecology is one title in the Britannica Illustrated Science Library Series. Long ago when people still lived in caves-perhaps at the same time when they developed habits that were different from those of other animals- humans began to practice ecology. They became keen observers of nature through such basic and instinctive actions as tracking both large wild animals and small prey, discerning edible plants from poisonous ones, and noting the time of year when different plants could be gathered. From necessity and inherent curiosity, humans began to learn about the relationships between living things and the environment. As the field of ecology grew, its focus went beyond the simple cataloging of living things in the world. Ecologists also became interested in understanding how living things function and how they interrelate with one another and with the environment-to explain that peculiar element that makes the Earth unique: life. We will begin by learning what ecology is and what it is not. (At times the word has been used incorrectly as a synonym for environmental protection.) Later, we will look at how living things are classified, before moving into the study of the environments in which they live: the land, water, and air.
MURRAY BOOKCHIN'S INFLUENTIAL WRITINGS ON SOCIAL ECOLOGY ATTEMPT TO UNITE THE TRADITIONAL LEFTIST CRITIQUE OF LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY WITH CONTEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. HIS WORK IS UNDERMINED, HOWEVER, IN PART BY THE DUBIOUS COMPARISONS HE MAKES BETWEEN MARKET SYSTEMS AND ECOSYSTEMS, AND IN PARTICULAR BY HIS FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE SYSTEMS OPERATE IN A LIKE FASHION ACCORDING TO IMPERSONAL PRINCIPLES OF SELF-ORGANIZATION. IN THE CASE OF THE MARKET, WHILE THIS IMPERSONAL PROCESS FACILITATES COOPERATION AND EXCHANGE, IT ALSO REWORD THE INSTRUMENTAL NATURE OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES. DEEP ECOLOGISTS ARE THEREFOR RIGHT TO CRITICIZE THE UNWILLINGNESS OF PARTICIPANTS IN MARKET SOCIETIES TO APPRECIATE THE INTRINSIC VALUE OF NATURE. THE CHALLENGES THEY POSE TO THE HUMAN COMMUNITY - TO BECOME LESS ANTHROPOCENTRIC AND TO APPROACH PROPERTY RIGHTS WITH A SENSE OF STEWARDSHIP - MAY BE TAKEN UP BY AN "EVOLUTIONARY LIBERALISM," WHICH WOULD STRIVE TO ACHIEVE HARMONY BETWEEN HUMANS AND THE NATURAL WORLD UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF RULES ORDERED BY SELF-ORGANIZING PRINCIPLES.
There are two conflicting tendencies in the ecological movement, one a vague, formless, often self-contradictory "deep ecology," & the other a socially oriented "social ecology." Deep ecology has no sense that ecological problems have social origins; it contains the implicit notion that humanity "accurses" the natural world. Social ecology is avowedly rational & humanistic, concerned with social, economic, & political issues, as well as with environmental problems. F. S. J. Ledgister