Closes a collection of essays on the governance of environmental flows amid globalization, reflecting on the fledgling field of environmental flows while also accounting for the broader concern of environmental sociology & political science. The emergence of the environmental flows perspective in light of the sociointellectual context of the development of US & international environmental sociology & political sciences. Key intellectual sources of the environmental flows perspective are discussed, along with how there is continuity in ecological modernization to environmental flows as well as some notable discontinuities. It is concluded that there are two distinct tendencies within environmental social sciences: de-privileging governance & stressing the new character of environmental governance. The potential & shortcomings of the environmental flows perspective are outlined, asserting that global environmental flows indicate how diversified environmental sociology & political science have become. However, while this new research agenda has been advanced, it is contended that issues of power, nation-states, distribution, & identities cannot be dismissed. References. D. Edelman
Closes a collection of essays on the governance of environmental flows amid globalization, reflecting on the fledgling field of environmental flows while also accounting for the broader concern of environmental sociology & political science. The emergence of the environmental flows perspective in light of the sociointellectual context of the development of US & international environmental sociology & political sciences. Key intellectual sources of the environmental flows perspective are discussed, along with how there is continuity in ecological modernization to environmental flows as well as some notable discontinuities. It is concluded that there are two distinct tendencies within environmental social sciences: de-privileging governance & stressing the new character of environmental governance. The potential & shortcomings of the environmental flows perspective are outlined, asserting that global environmental flows indicate how diversified environmental sociology & political science have become. However, while this new research agenda has been advanced, it is contended that issues of power, nation-states, distribution, & identities cannot be dismissed. References. D. Edelman
The increasing role of social science in environmental policy & knowledge generation has resulted in an environmental discourse that is epistemologically realist, postivistic, disembedded, technological, & cognitivist. Such a discourse tends to mask important cultural, social, & existential dimensions of environmental crises & has become part of the modern environmental problem rather contributing to its solution. A constructivist, hermeneutic, poetic, & situated approach to environmental phenomena is needed. Examples of such accounts in three broad domains are highlighted: (1) environment, knowledge, & indeterminancy; (2) subjectivity & individuation; & (3) problems with current ways of incorporation of environmental considerations within political institutions. Ulrich Beck's contributions to illuminating the modern environmental problematic are discussed. 10 References. D. Generoli
Does the result of the discussion that there is more than one rationality at stake in environmental policy-making imply a relativistic methodological conclusion? There are three reasons that could pull us toward a relativistic notion of rationality: (1) The existence of competing cultural models of nature forces us to abandon the idea of nature as something outside society. Nature exists for us only through culture. To the extent that we have to accept that nature is a cultural construction, the notion of 'hard facts' vanishes. Nature is - like all social facts - a soft fact. This will open our way of 'regulating nature' through environmental politics and policies to moral claims and moral discourse. (2) Environmental policy cannot be based on the authoritative nature of 'hard facts'. Nature as a collective good is a soft fact that will increase communication and argumentation about what should be done because of the possibility of competing claims of these facts. A political culture of communicating 'as-if-facts' develops. Groups begin to argue as if there were 'hard facts'. To free political communication from 'hard facts' will accelerate communication - and the remaining problem is to guarantee communicability and solve the problem of emerging communicative power. (3) Cultural analysis leads us to question the very basis of modern rationality: the idea of bare facts. Policy analysis as the most advanced form of rationalizing the reproduction of modern societies has given us the possibility to explore the cultural basis of this advanced form of formal rationality. When environmental policy analysis can no longer be based upon this type of rationality we are forced to base the rationality of policy decisions on soft facts. Thus policy-making will be drawn into the communication of 'as-if-facts' (which are soft facts) using institutional power to validate them. That there are no hard facts, that we can talk about everything, that everything is a social construction: all these claims come close to a relativistic position. We do not, however, have to draw such a relativistic conclusion from these arguments. There are again at least three reasons that limit this potential relativism: (1) As long as there is a struggle over 'as-if-facts', rationality lies in the process of communicating such soft facts. The institutionalization of procedures of negotiating and communicating interpretations of facts contains the possibility of procedural rationality. This does not imply a return to absolutism, but rather an 'anti-antirelativism' (Geertz 1984). The purity model is not only a second type of rationality developed within the European tradition that competes with others but also creates the conditions of arguing about the relative weight of each. (2) The observation of two traditions in one culture is an argument against the hegemonic role of one culture and also an argument against relativism. Therefore the purity model becomes the key to an understanding of new and so far suppressed elements of rationality in environmental policy-making. Since this model is the dominated one its thematization not only lays bare the suppressed model but also lays the bare fact of suppression as such which has repercussions on the legitimacy of the dominant model. (3) To conceive nature - in line with what we have called the Jewish model - as an indivisible, holistic entity justifies the construction of nature as a collective good to be shared equally by all. Thus a new ground for fairness and justice can be laid in the modern discourse of a just and fair society. The reconstruction of cultural traditions regulating the relationship of man to nature allows us to identify the forms of symbolically mediated relationships between the two. We do not only use nature for instrumental purposes, we also use it to 'think' the world (to use an expression of Tambiah (1969)). We use natural differences to make sense of social differences, which in turn gives meaning to natural differences (Douglas 1975). Nature, in a sense, gives lessons on how to conceive differences. Moving our focus from justice to purity gives us a better understanding of the differences underlying the emerging modern European culture of environmentalism. The analysis of cultural movements carrying counter cultural traditions thus forces us not only to broaden our theoretical notion of the cultural 'code' underlying European culture, it also forces us to see the carriers of counter cultural traditions as more than movements of protest against modernity and modernization. I claim that the two competing models relating man to nature have become the field of a new emerging type of social struggle over two types of modernity in advanced modern societies. It is my contention that the culture of environmentalism contains the elements for an alternative way of organizing social relations in modern society.
In addressing the debate on the role & function of nation-states in environmental politics, a collection of essays focuses on the relationship between globalization, the environment, & the state. Three domains in the studies & debates on globalization & governance are emphasized: (1) conceptualizing the changing nature of the state & its role in global environmental governance; (2) stressing the environmental dimension as critical to the dynamics of globalization & governance; & (3) assessing the consequences of globalization & the changing role of the environmental state for understanding the concept of the environment. After discussing the conceptualization of the environment in terms of environmental flows, focus turns to the essay's theoretical basis, starting with a review of the sociological & political science literature on environmental governance & global modernity. Attention is given to the notion of "hybrid arrangements." Contributions are introduced in closing. Figures, References. D. Edelman
In addressing the debate on the role & function of nation-states in environmental politics, a collection of essays focuses on the relationship between globalization, the environment, & the state. Three domains in the studies & debates on globalization & governance are emphasized: (1) conceptualizing the changing nature of the state & its role in global environmental governance; (2) stressing the environmental dimension as critical to the dynamics of globalization & governance; & (3) assessing the consequences of globalization & the changing role of the environmental state for understanding the concept of the environment. After discussing the conceptualization of the environment in terms of environmental flows, focus turns to the essay's theoretical basis, starting with a review of the sociological & political science literature on environmental governance & global modernity. Attention is given to the notion of "hybrid arrangements." Contributions are introduced in closing. Figures, References. D. Edelman
In addressing the challenges posed by the conceptualization of the environment & the posture toward globalization & the national state, discussion begins with a look at how an environmental flows perspective can help. Three key imperatives for an environmental flow research agenda are then laid out. Attention turns to the role of the US in the international power relations governing environmental politics, arguing that understanding the dynamics of contemporary global society requires understanding US sociopolitical tendencies. It is argued that the US will have an adverse impact on environmental governance given a deeply entrenched right-wing agenda. With some light shed on contemporary US hegemony, attention is given to the US-based criticism of ecological modernization theory. It is contended that environmental flow research must resist the implication of some flow analyses that indicate the irrelevance of notions of social structure, nation-states, & modernity to understanding global socioeconomic & environmental changes. Further, any perspective that views the US as essentially epiphenomenal will not advance the environmental social sciences. References. D. Edelman
In addressing the challenges posed by the conceptualization of the environment & the posture toward globalization & the national state, discussion begins with a look at how an environmental flows perspective can help. Three key imperatives for an environmental flow research agenda are then laid out. Attention turns to the role of the US in the international power relations governing environmental politics, arguing that understanding the dynamics of contemporary global society requires understanding US sociopolitical tendencies. It is argued that the US will have an adverse impact on environmental governance given a deeply entrenched right-wing agenda. With some light shed on contemporary US hegemony, attention is given to the US-based criticism of ecological modernization theory. It is contended that environmental flow research must resist the implication of some flow analyses that indicate the irrelevance of notions of social structure, nation-states, & modernity to understanding global socioeconomic & environmental changes. Further, any perspective that views the US as essentially epiphenomenal will not advance the environmental social sciences. References. D. Edelman
The need for a new approach to social science research on environmental problems is examined. In the comtemporary era of proliferating cultural tensions, environmental policymakers must possess culturally contextualized information to make policy decisions. Unfortunately, the domination of positivism & reductionism in government-funded social science research & policy analysis is ill-suited for generations of realistic & sensitive social knowledge, & can exacerbate cultural tensions &, ultimately, environmental conflicts. Examples of the kinds of problems that can occur when governments rely solely on social science research that pays inadequate attention to the cultural dimensions of environmental conflicts are provided: (1) the capital costs of nuclear power; (2) the social impacts of biotechnology; & (3) the public understanding of sustainability. Social science must reexamine not only theoretical & methodological issues, but also the institutionalization of its research. 50 References. D. Generoli
Introduces a collection of essays whose main premise is that the global environmental crisis is basically political. Contributors demonstrate the relevance of political theory for (1) understanding the political character of environmental problems; (2) comprehending how humanity reached the point where the long-term survival of all species is in question; & (3) recognizing & responding to the fact that ecological catastrophe might only be avoided through a shift in dominant values, social institutions, & modern lifestyle. Environmental political theory is here viewed as "deep" environmental politics in contrast to other scientifically oriented or policy analyses seen as "shallow" for not reaching down to the value-based foundation of the environmental crisis & pursuing social change. The practical scholarly goals of the volume are discussed, highlighting its value for education, before briefly presenting the contributions. J. Zendejas
The author asserts that environmental NGO's are the quintessential environmental actor, & assesses the ability of environmental social movement organizations (SMO) to operate as agents of global environmental change in the new millennium by projecting the possible future trends of these organizations along four themes. The analysis of environmental NGO's dependence on scientific technology indicates a weak ability to mobilize populations. The solutions orientation that impacts environmental SMO's is problematized in the cases of the ozone layer, mad cow disease & population. The difficulty of attaining global representativeness without the universal language of science is discussed in terms of developing world wide policy. The inadequate ability to transcendence of the status quo by environmental SMO's is discussed in terms of ecological modernization & protests against universal capitalism. The four themes support the conclusion that environmental SMO's are not equipped for a leading role in global environmental campaigning in future years. References. J. Harwell
The need for the social sciences to reevaluate the assumptions they hold about time is examined. Time has different meanings in different cultures & social contexts. The social sciences have adopted an Enlightenment notion of time as a linear, unidimensional, & ordered concept with limited relevance for late modernity that presents an obstacle to engaging with environmental crises in an adequate manner. Globalization, particularly of communication technologies, the acceleration of innovation processes, the dislocation of environmental impacts from benefits & control systems, & the increasing human control of nature have rendered obsolete distinctions between social & natural time & demand the development of a framework for conceptualization of the environmental crisis that emphasizes the immaterial, the unquantifiable, & the unpredictable. 54 References. D. Generoli
Draws on descriptions of the uranium development process in Valerie Kuletz's The Tainted Desert (1998) to examine information compiled by survivors, activists, & others harmed by the nuclear industry that reveals tendencies to deny credibility & exclude data. Focus is on the impact of uranium development on indigenous people. Differences between understandings of nature by local/indigenous groups & government/scientific groups are explored to argue that the key difference is between those who hold an intersubjective view of nature, & those who "objectify" nature to epistemologically separate subject & object, nature & culture. A historical framework is provided for understanding how science has used a "mechanism of exclusion" to promote "progress" & unrestrained development. The local & indigenous people of the US Southwest who see Yucca Mountain, the Nevada Test Site, & NM's Grants Uranium Belt as nature that exists beyond being an object of scientific experimentation have been regularly excluded from the scientific discourse. The need to inject environmental & social justice into scientific constructions of nature is discussed. 17 References. J. Lindroth
A conclusion to an essay collection on environmental political theory sheds light on key questions emerging from the contributions. The idea is to promote contemplation, thus encouraging the advance of individual &, by extension, civilizational humanity, seen here as the purpose of political theory. Discussion centers on a critical notion in environmental political theory: that of the normative political basis of the environmental crisis. J. Zendejas
