■ Study Notes

Chapter 2: Environmental Sociology as a Field of

Inquiry
+ Contemporary Theoretical Approaches to Environmental Sociology

1. How Did Environmental Sociology Begin? (Earth Day 1970)

Earth Day 1970 is considered the starting point of modern environmental sociology. It began as a
small event (a national teach-in about the environment) but grew into a massive event with millions of
participants. It was called 'Day 1' of the new environmentalism.

When the 'Environmental Decade' of the 1970s started, sociologists had NO ready body of theory to
explain the relationship between society and the environment. The three founding fathers of sociology
— Durkheim, Marx, and Weber — had some environmental ideas hidden in their work, but these
were never properly explored.

Why was the environment ignored? Because American interpreters of these thinkers preferred
social explanations over physical/environmental ones. Environmental topics appeared mostly in rural
sociology but never formed a strong body of work.

2. Geographical & Biological Determinism — and Why They Failed

Before modern sociology developed, two old theories tried to explain human society through nature:

Theory What it says Key Thinker Problem

Geographical Geography/climate shapes Henry Buckle, Overestimates

Determinism human society and Ellsworth geography; called
behaviour. Huntington 'fallacious
theories'.

Biological Darwin's 'survival of the Herbert Spencer, Justified racism,

Determinism / fittest' applies to human William Sumner inequality;
Social society too. dismissed by
Darwinism 1920s.

Simple Explanation: These old theories thought the environment or biology FULLY determined how
society works. But both were rejected because they were too simplistic, often racist, and ignored the
role of culture, values, and human action.

By the 1920s, sociology shifted toward social planning and reform ('Meliorism' — the idea that
society can be improved through deliberate effort). Psychology replaced biology as the foundation of
sociological theory (symbolic interactionism — Mead, Cooley, Thomas).

3. Sociologists as 'Hucksters' for Development

William Catton and Riley Dunlap (from late 1970s) argued that most sociologists held a 'Human
Exemptionalist Paradigm' (HEP) — the belief that human society is EXEMPT from ecological laws
that govern other species.

This meant sociologists:

• Believed in unlimited growth and progress through science and technology

• Ignored environmental limits (like climate change, resource depletion)
• Actually promoted ('huckstered') technological and economic development
Modernisation Theory (1955–1975): Books like Inkeles & Smith's Becoming Modern (1974) argued
that becoming 'modern' meant mastering nature. They viewed nature as something to be controlled
and overcome. The factory was seen as the true 'school in modernity.' This anti-ecological attitude
dominated sociology for decades.

Key Quote Idea: Modernisation theorists asked people whether man will 'fully understand' floods and
droughts — saying YES was considered a sign of being modern. This view directly opposes ecological
thinking.

4. Classical Sociological Theory and the Environment

The three founding figures of sociology — Durkheim, Weber, and Marx — each had something to
say about nature, though it was often indirect.

A. Émile Durkheim
• Focused on 'social facts' — things external to individuals (laws, customs, morals) that constrain
behaviour.
• Insisted social phenomena must be explained by other social facts, NOT by biology or
psychology.
• Used biological concepts (like organism) in his theory of society as an analogy.
• His Division of Labour in Society (1893) described how specialised work reduces competition
over scarce resources — which some scholars read as a response to an ecological crisis of
population and resources.
• Problem: He misread Darwin and was unaware of modern ecology, so his environmental insight
remained undeveloped.

B. Max Weber
• Key concept: Formal Rationalisation — society increasingly runs on cold, efficient, calculated
logic.
• Applied to nature: efficiency becomes the only goal. Clear-cutting a forest is 'formally rational'
(efficient profit) but ecologically destructive — Weber called this 'ecological irrationality'.
• Murphy adds: Intensification and Magnification of rationality = the more we try to control
everything by calculation, the more unwanted ecological side-effects we get (e.g. nuclear
accidents, industrial pollution).
• Also: In modern society, people depend on experts for technology — but experts sometimes fail,
creating environmental emergencies.
C. Karl Marx
• Most widely used by environmental sociologists today.
• Marx & Engels: capitalism alienates workers from nature. The industrial revolution drove
people off land into polluted cities. Soil was drained of its fertility.
• Key concept: Metabolic Rift (Foster 1999) — Marx used the biological idea of 'metabolism'
(exchange of materials between organisms and environment) to describe how capitalism breaks
the natural cycle. Food is grown, shipped to cities, but nutrients are never returned to the soil. This
is the metabolic rift — humanity's estrangement from nature.
• Interesting fact: Marx was actually an early advocate of organic farming, writing about returning
waste to the soil as fertiliser!
Easy Example: A farm grows wheat and ships it to London. The nutrients in the wheat come from the
soil. But human waste from London goes into the Thames river, not back to the farm. The soil slowly
loses fertility. This break in the cycle is the Metabolic Rift.

5. Emergence of Environmental Sociology (1970–2005)

Key catalysts that sparked the field:

• Earth Day 1970 — launch of the environmental movement

• Silent Spring (1962) by Rachel Carson — exposed damage from agricultural pesticides
• The Limits to Growth (1972) — apocalyptic predictions about resource depletion
• Energy Crisis (1970s) in the US — deepened interest in resource scarcity

First use of 'Environmental Sociology': Samuel Klausner in his 1971 book On Man in His
Environment. The American Sociological Association (ASA) formed a Section on Environment and
Technology in 1976.

Stage Focus

Stage 1 (1970s) Apply existing sociological perspectives to environmental issues (public

opinion, social movements, activists)

Stage 2 (Later) Develop a NEW, distinct environmental sociology focusing on

society-environment interactions

HEP vs NEP: Catton & Dunlap introduced the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) — humans are NOT
exempt from ecological constraints; we are just one species among many. This replaced the old
Human Exemptionalist Paradigm (HEP).

Environmental sociology spread globally — Europe (especially UK, Netherlands, Germany), Japan
(JAES founded 1992), Korea (KAES founded 2000), and the Asia-Pacific region.

6. Two Foundational Theories of Environmental Destruction

Two major explanations dominate environmental sociology:

A. Ecological Explanation — Catton & Dunlap's 'Competing Functions of the Environment'

The environment serves THREE functions for humans, and these compete with each other:
Function What it means Problem if overused

1. Supply Depot Source of natural resources (air, Resource shortages, scarcity

water, forests, fossil fuels)

2. Living Space Space for homes, cities, Overcrowding, habitat loss

transportation

3. Waste 'Sink' for garbage, sewage, pollution Health problems, ecosystem

Repository disruption

Easy Example: A landfill near a city uses land as a waste dump (Waste Repository), but that same
land could be farmland (Supply Depot) or housing (Living Space). The three functions compete. As we
use more of one, the others suffer.

B. Political Economy Explanation — Schnaiberg's 'Treadmill of Production'

Alan Schnaiberg (1980) developed the most influential Marxist-based environmental theory.

• Treadmill of Production = the capitalist economy MUST constantly grow. It always needs to
produce more, sell more, and expand — even if this destroys the ecosystem.
• Companies use advertising to make people want new products (not just need them).
• Politicians support growth because their legitimacy depends on economic expansion.
• When resources run short, the response is NOT to consume less — it's to find NEW areas to
exploit.
• Dialectic Tension: A clash between 'use values' (preserving nature, rare species) and 'exchange
values' (making money from natural resources).
Simple Analogy: A treadmill keeps moving — you can't stop it or you'll fall. Capitalism is the same. It
must keep producing more and more, even if it damages the planet.

7. Two Theories of Environmental Improvement (Modernism)

Theory Main Thinker Core Idea Criticism

Risk Society Ulrich Beck Modern societies have shifted from Beck contradicts
Thesis class-based inequality to himself — risks are
RISK-based inequality. New risks both 'objectively real'
(pollution, nuclear accidents, AND 'socially
climate change) are global, constructed'. Too
invisible, and affect everyone. vague about political
Society must become more solutions.
democratic and reflexive to
manage these risks.
 Ecological Mo Mol & We can fix environmental Too optimistic about
dernisation Spaargaren problems WITHOUT abandoning technology. Ignores
(EM) capitalism or industrialism. Use power relations.
new GREEN technologies and Silicon chips and
'clean' production. The economy nuclear power were
itself can be 'ecologised'. also called 'clean'
once. EM may be
naive.

Beck's famous line: 'Hunger is hierarchical, smog is democratic.' — meaning old class-based
problems (poverty, hunger) affected the poor more, but new environmental risks like air pollution affect
everyone equally.

8. The Great Debate: Realism vs. Constructionism

This is called 'the most enduring and at times rancorous debate' in environmental sociology.

Realism Social Constructionism

Core Belief Environmental problems are REAL physical Environmental problems are
threats that exist independently of how we shaped by how society
think about them. DEFINES, NEGOTIATES, and
CONSTRUCTS them.

What they Fixing the real organisational/physical Asking: Who defines what is a
focus on causes of environmental damage. problem? Why do some issues
get attention and others don't?

Example Global warming is a measurable, dangerous The 'obesity crisis' was

reality we must address now. declared with 400,000 deaths
— later corrected to 26,000.
Problems can be exaggerated.

Criticism Ignores how cultural/political factors shape May accidentally support

what we see as problems. climate deniers by questioning
scientific certainty.

Key Point: Constructionists do NOT deny environmental problems are real. They say the
MAGNITUDE and WAY we understand those problems is shaped by social, political and cultural
processes. As Dryzek says — pollution IS real, but people can make very different things of it
politically.

9. Beyond the Divide: Co-Constructionism & Socionature

The newest attempt to move BEYOND the realism vs. constructionism debate is called
Co-Constructionism or the analysis of 'Socionature'.

• Alan Irwin says the social and the natural are 'actively-generated co-constructions.' Everything
we call 'natural' has a social dimension and vice versa.
 • Bruno Latour's Actor-Network Theory (ANT) — even non-human things (animals, viruses,
rivers) can be 'actants' with power to shape social situations.
• Socionature (Swyngedouw) — society and nature are inseparable. They are always socially
produced and transformable together.
Simple Question the Co-constructionists ask: Is GM (genetically modified) food a social or
environmental problem? Is the destruction of the rainforest natural or social? Answer: It's BOTH — you
can't fully separate them.

10. ■ Quick Revision — All Key Terms

Term Simple Meaning

Earth Day 1970 Starting point of modern environmental sociology and the
environmental movement.

Geographical Determinism Theory that geography/climate shapes human society.

Rejected as too simplistic.

Social Darwinism Applying Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' to human society. Used
to justify inequality. Rejected.

HEP (Human Old sociological belief that humans are EXEMPT from
Exemptionalism Paradigm) ecological limits.

NEP (New Ecological New belief that humans ARE subject to ecological constraints,
Paradigm) like other species.

Metabolic Rift (Marx/Foster) Capitalism breaks the natural nutrient cycle between humans
and nature (e.g., soil depletion in farming).

Formal Rationalisation Society runs on cold efficiency — which leads to 'ecological

(Weber) irrationality' (destroying nature for profit).

Treadmill of Production Capitalism must constantly grow and produce more, even at the
(Schnaiberg) cost of the environment.

Competing Functions of Environment serves as Supply Depot, Living Space, and Waste
Environment Repository — these compete with each other.

Risk Society (Beck) Modern society is now defined by managing global, invisible
risks created by modernisation itself.

Ecological Modernisation Belief that environmental problems can be solved by greening

(Mol & Spaargaren) capitalism with clean technology.

Realism Environmental problems are objectively real physical threats.

Social Constructionism Environmental problems are shaped by social definition,

politics, and culture.

Co-Constructionism / Nature and society are inseparable — they co-produce each

Socionature other.
 Actor-Network Theory Non-human things (animals, viruses) also have 'agency' and
(Latour) shape social outcomes.

■ Notes prepared from: Environmental Sociology as a Field of Inquiry (Ch.1) + Contemporary Theoretical Approaches
(Ch.2)