Friday, April 29, 2022

3 Terms, 3 Approaches to Ecological Civilization




amazon link

The present trajectory of life on this planet is unsustainable, and the underlying causes of our environmental crisis are inseparable from our social and economic systems. The massive inequality between the rich and the poor is not separate from our systems of unlimited growth, the depletion of natural resources, the extinction of species, or global warming. As climate predictions continue to exceed projections, it is clear that hopelessness is rapidly becoming our worst enemy. What is needed—urgently—is a new vision for the flourishing of life on this planet, a vision the authors are calling an ecological civilization. Along the way they have learned that this term brings hope unlike any other. It reminds us that humans have gone through many civilizations in the past, and the end of a particular civilization does not necessarily mean the end of humanity, much less the end of all life on the planet. It is not hard for us to conceive of a society after the fall of modernity, in which humans live in an equitable and sustainable way with one another and the planet. This book explores the idea of ecological civilization by asking eight key questions about it and drawing answers from relational philosophies, the ecological sciences, systems thinking and network theory, and the world’s religious and spiritual traditions. It concludes that a genuinely ecological civilization is not a utopian ideal, but a practical way to live. To recognize this, and to begin to take steps to establish it, is the foundation for realistic hope.


https://ecociv.org/



ECOLOGICAL CIVILIZATION

Jump to navigationJump to search

Ecological civilization is the final goal of social and environmental reform within a given society. It implies that the changes required in response to global climate disruption and social injustices are so extensive as to require another form of human civilization, one based on ecological principles. Broadly construed, ecological civilization involves a synthesis of economic, educational, political, agricultural, and other societal reforms toward sustainability.[1]

Although the term was first coined in the 1980s, it did not see widespread use until 2007, when “ecological civilization” became an explicit goal of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).[2][3] In April 2014, the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations and the International Ecological Safety Collaborative Organization founded a sub-committee on ecological civilization.[4] Proponents of ecological civilization agree with Pope Francis who writes, "We are faced not with two separate crises, one environmental and the other social, but rather with one complex crisis which is both social and environmental. Strategies for a solution demand an integrated approach to combating poverty, restoring dignity to the excluded, and at the same time protecting nature."[5] As such, ecological civilization emphasizes the need for major environmental and social reforms that are both long-term and systemic in orientation.[1]

History

In 1984, former Soviet Union environment experts proposed the term “Ecological Civilization” in an article entitled “Ways of Training Individual Ecological Civilization under Mature Socialist Conditions,” which was published in the Scientific Communism, Moscow, vol. 2.[6]

Three years later, the concept of ecological civilization (Chinese: 生态文明; pinyin: shēngtài wénmíng) was picked up in China, and was first used by Qianji Ye (1909―2017), an agricultural economist, in 1987.[6] Professor Ye defined ecological civilization by drawing from the ecological sciences and environmental philosophy.[7]

The first time the phrase “ecological civilization” was used as a technical term in an English-language book was in 1995 by Roy Morrison in his book Ecological Democracy.[8]

The term is found more extensively in Chinese discussions beginning in 2007.[2][3] In 2012, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) included the goal of achieving an ecological civilization in its constitution, and it also featured in its five-year plan.[1][9] In the Chinese context, the term generally presupposes the framework of a “constructive postmodernism,” as opposed to an extension of modernist practices or a “deconstructive postmodernism,” which stems from the deconstruction of Jacques Derrida.[1]

Both “ecological civilization” and “constructive postmodernism” have been associated with the process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead.[1] [10]David Ray Griffin, a process philosopher and professor at Claremont School of Theology, first used the term “constructive postmodernism” in his 1989 book, Varieties of Postmodern Theology.[11] A more secular theme that flowed out of Whitehead's process philosophy has been from the Australian environmental philosopher Arran Gare in his book called The Philosophical Foundations of Ecological Civilization: A Manifesto for the Future. [12]

The largest international conference held on the theme “ecological civilization” (Seizing an Alternative: Toward an Ecological Civilization) took place at Pomona College in June 2015, bringing together roughly 2,000 participants from around the world and featuring such leaders in the environmental movement as Bill McKibben, Vandana Shiva, John B. Cobb, Jr., Wes Jackson, and Sheri Liao.[13] This was held in conjunction with the 9th International Forum on Ecological Civilization--an annual conference series in Claremont, CA established in 2006.[14]

Out of the Seizing an Alternative conference, Philip Clayton and Wm. Andrew Schwartz co-founded the Institute for Ecological Civilization (EcoCiv), and co-authored the book What is Ecological Civilization: Crisis, Hope, and the Future of the Planet,[15] which was published in 2019.

Since 2015, the Chinese discussion of ecological civilization is increasingly associated with an “organic” form of Marxism.[1] “Organic Marxism” was first used by Philip Clayton and Justin Heinzekehr in their 2014 book, Organic Marxism: An Alternative to Capitalism and Ecological Catastrophe.[16] The book, which was translated into Chinese and published by the People’s Press in 2015, describes ecological civilization as an orienting goal for the global ecological movement.[17]

See also

References

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Zhihe Wang, Huili He, and Meijun Fan, "The Ecological Civilization Debate in China: The Role of Ecological Marxism and Constructive Postmodernism—Beyond the Predicament of Legislation", last modified 2014, Monthly Review, accessed November 1, 2016.
  2. ^ Jump up to:a b Zhang Chun, "China's New Blueprint for an 'Ecological Civilization'", last modified September 30, 2015, The Diplomat, accessed November 1, 2016.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b James Oswald, "China turns to ecology in search of ‘civilisation’", last modified August 3, 2016, Asian Studies Association of Australia, accessed November 1, 2016.
  4. ^ Zhu Guangyao, "Ecological Civilization: A national strategy for innovative, concerted, green, open and inclusive development", last modified March 2016, United Nations Environment Programme, accessed November 1, 2016.
  5. ^ Francis, Pope. Laudato Si': On Care for Our Common Home. p. Ch 4, #139.
  6. ^ Jump up to:a b Arran Gare, "Barbarity, Civilization and Decadence: Meeting the Challenge of Creating an Ecological Civilization", in Chromatikon V: Yearbook of Philosophy in Process, ed. Michel Weber and Ronny Desmet (Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain, 2009): 167.
  7. ^ Jiahua Pan, China's Environmental Governing and Ecological Civilization (Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag GmbH, 2016), 35.
  8. ^ Jiahua Pan, China's Environmental Governing and Ecological Civilization (Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag GmbH, 2016), 34.
  9. ^ John B. Fullerton, "China: Ecological Civilization Rising?", last modified May 2, 2015, Huffington Post, accessed November 1, 2016.
  10. ^ Cobb, Jr., John B.; Scwhartz, Wm. Andrew (2018). Putting Philosophy to Work: Toward an Ecological Civilization. Minnesota: Process Century Press. ISBN 978-1940447339.
  11. ^ John B. Cobb, Jr., "Constructive Postmodernism" Archived 2013-08-08 at the Wayback Machine, 2002, Religion Online, accessed November 1, 2016. See David Ray Griffin, William A. Beardslee, and Joe Holland, Varieties of Postmodern Theology (Albany, State University of New York Press, 1989)
  12. ^ Arran Gare: "The Philosophical Foundations of Ecological Civilization: A Manifesto for the Future" (Routledge, 2016)
  13. ^ Herman Greene, "Re-Imagining Civilization as Ecological: Report on the 'Seizing an Alternative: Toward an Ecological Civilization' Conference", last modified August 24, 2015, Center for Ecozoic Societies, accessed November 1, 2016.
  14. ^ "CONFERENCE LIST". postmodernchina.org. Retrieved 2019-12-24.
  15. ^ Philip Clayton and Wm. Andrew Schwartz (2019). What is Ecological Civilization?: Crisis, Hope, and the Future of the Planet. Anoka, Minnesota. ISBN 978-1-940447-41-4. OCLC 1112736444.
  16. ^ "Spotlight: Organic Marxism, China's ecological civilization drive in spotlight at int'l conference", last modified May 1, 2016, Xinhua News Agency, accessed November 1, 2016. See Philip Clayton and Justin Heinzekehr, Organic Marxism: An Alternative to Capitalism and Ecological Catastrophe (Claremont: Process Century Press, 2014).
  17. ^ Philip Clayton and Justin Heinzekehr, Organic Marxism: An Alternative to Capitalism and Ecological Catastrophe, trans. Xian Meng, Guifeng Yu, and Lixia Zhang (Beijing: The People's Press, 2015).

External links



* * * * * * * * *




ECO-INNOVATION

Jump to navigationJump to search

Eco-innovation is the development of products and processes that contribute to sustainable development, applying the commercial application of knowledge to elicit direct or indirect ecological improvements. This includes a range of related ideas, from environmentally friendly technological advances to socially acceptable innovative paths towards sustainability. The field of research that seeks to explain how, why, and at what rate new "ecological" ideas and technology spread is called eco-innovation diffusion.

Concept

The idea of eco-innovation is fairly recent.[1] One of the first appearances in the literature was in a book by Claude Fussler and Peter James.[2] In a subsequent article, Peter James defined eco-innovation as "new products and processes which provide customer and business value but significantly decrease environmental impacts".[3] Klaus Rennings[4] employs the term eco-innovation to describe three kinds of changes related to sustainable development: technological, social and institutional innovation.

Eco-innovation is sometimes called "environmental innovation", and is often linked with environmental technology, eco-efficiency, eco-design, environmental design, sustainable design, or sustainable innovation. While the term "environmental innovation" is used in similar contexts to "eco-innovation", the other terms are mostly used when referring to product or process design, and when the focus is more on the technological aspects of eco-innovation rather than the societal and political aspects. Ecovation is the process by which business adopts ecological innovation to create products which have a generative nature and are recyclable.

As a technological term

The most common usage of the term "eco-innovation" is to refer to innovative products and processes that reduce environmental impacts, whether the main motivation for their development or deployment is environmental or not.[5] This is often used in conjunction with eco-efficiency and eco-design. Leaders in many industries have been developing innovative technologies in order to work towards sustainability. However, these are not always practical, or enforced by policy and legislation.



As a social process

Another position held (for example, by the organisation Eco Innovation) is that this definition should be complemented: eco-innovations should also bring greater social and cultural acceptance. In this view, this "social pillar" added to James's[3] definition is necessary because it determines learning and the effectiveness of eco-innovations. This approach gives eco-innovations a social component, a status that is more than a new type of commodity, or a new sector, even though environmental technology and eco-innovation are associated with the emergence of new economic activities or even branches (e.g., waste treatment, recycling, etc.). This approach considers eco-innovation in terms of usage rather than merely in terms of product. The social pillar associated with eco-innovation introduces a governance component that makes eco-innovation a more integrated tool for sustainable development.

Examples

Diffusion

Literature in the field of eco-innovations often focuses on policy, regulations, technology, market and firm specific factors rather than diffusion. However, understanding of diffusion of eco-innovations recently has gained more importance given the fact that some eco-innovations are already at a mature stage.[6] Survey research shows that most customers hold positive attitudes towards various types of eco-innovations. At the same time, adoption rates of solutions such as dynamic electricity tariffs remain unsatisfactorily low.[7] The "Not In My Back Yard" (NIMBY) concept is often used to describe what at first seems to be a confusing intention-behavior gap between high levels of public support for eco-innovations and frequent non-engagement or even local hostility towards specific project proposals.[8] Social psychology and economic behavior models could and should be used to overcome these challenges.[9][10]

See also

References

  1. ^ Díaz-García, Cristina; González-Moreno, Ángela; Sáez-Martínez, Francisco J. (2015). "Eco-innovation: insights from a literature review". Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice. 17 (1): 6–23. doi:10.1080/14479338.2015.1011060. S2CID 142928354.
  2. ^ Fussler, C. & P. James, 1996; Driving Eco-Innovation: A Breakthrough Discipline for Innovation and Sustainability, Pitman Publishing: London, 364 p.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b James, P., 1997; 'The Sustainability Circle: a new tool for product development and design', Journal of Sustainable Product Design 2: 52:57, http://www.cfsd.org.uk/journal
  4. ^ Rennings, Klaus (2000). "Redefining innovation - eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics". Ecological Economics. 32 (2): 319–332. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00112-3.
  5. ^ Carrillo-Hermosilla, J., del Rio, P. & Könnölä, T., 2009; Eco-Innovation: When Sustainability and Competitiveness Shake Hands, Palgrave Mcmillan: Hampshire, 256 p.
  6. ^ Karakaya, Emrah; Hidalgo, Antonio; Nuur, Cali (2014). "Diffusion of eco-innovations: A review". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 33: 392–399. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.083.
  7. ^ Kowalska-Pyzalska, A. (2015). Social acceptance of green energy and dynamic electricity tariffs - A short review (PDF). 2015 Modern Electric Power Systems (MEPS). pp. 1–7. doi:10.1109/MEPS.2015.7477192. ISBN 978-1-5090-3101-6. S2CID 24787410.
  8. ^ Devine-Wright, Patrick, ed. (2011). Renewable energy and the public: from NIMBY to participation. Taylor & Francis.
  9. ^ Gyamfi, Samuel; Krumdieck, Susan; Urmee, Tania (2013). "Residential peak electricity demand response—Highlights of some behavioural issues". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 25: 71–77. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.04.006.
  10. ^ Byrka, Katarzyna; Jȩdrzejewski, Arkadiusz; Sznajd-Weron, Katarzyna; Weron, Rafał (2016). "Difficulty is critical: The importance of social factors in modeling diffusion of green products and practices". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 62: 723–735. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.063.

External links



* * * * * * * * *





BRIGHT GREEN ENVIRONMENTALISM

Jump to navigationJump to search

Bright green environmentalism is an ideology based on the belief that the convergence of technological change and social innovation provides the most successful path to sustainable development.

Origin and evolution of bright green thinking

The term bright green, coined in 2003 by writer Alex Steffen, refers to the fast-growing new wing of environmentalism, distinct from traditional forms.[1][2] Bright green environmentalism aims to provide prosperity in an ecologically sustainable way through the use of new technologies and improved design.[3]

Proponents promote and advocate for green energy, electric automobiles, efficient manufacturing systems, bio and nanotechnologies, ubiquitous computing, dense urban settlements, closed loop materials cycles and sustainable product designs. One-planet living is a commonly used phrase.[4][5] Their principal focus is on the idea that through a combination of well-built communities, new technologies and sustainable living practices, quality of life can actually be improved even while ecological footprints shrink.

Around the middle of the century we’ll see global population peak at something like 9 billion people, all of whom will want to live with a reasonable amount of prosperity, and many of whom will want, at the very least, a European lifestyle. They will see escaping poverty as their nonnegotiable right, but to deliver that prosperity at our current levels of efficiency and resource use would destroy the planet many times over. We need to invent a new model of prosperity, one that lets billions have the comfort, security, and opportunities they want at the level of impact the planet can afford. We can’t do that without embracing technology and better design.[6]

The term bright green has been used with increased frequency due to the promulgation of these ideas through the Internet and recent coverage in the traditional media.[7][8][9]

Dark greens, light greens and bright greens

Alex Steffen describes contemporary environmentalists as being split into three groups, dark, light, and bright greens.[10]

Light Green

Colors of the Greens

Light greens see protecting the environment first and foremost as a personal responsibility. They fall into the transformational activist end of the spectrum, but light greens do not emphasize environmentalism as a distinct political ideology, or even seek fundamental political reform. Instead they often focus on environmentalism as a lifestyle choice.[10] The motto "Green is the new black" sums up this way of thinking, for many.[11] This is different from the term lite green, which some environmentalists use to describe products or practices they believe are greenwashing.

Dark Green

In contrast, dark greens believe that environmental problems are an inherent part of industrialized, capitalist civilization, and seek radical political change. Dark greens believe that currently and historically dominant modes of societal organization inevitably lead to consumerism, overconsumption, waste, alienation from nature and resource depletion. Dark greens claim this is caused by the emphasis on economic growth that exists within all existing ideologies, a tendency sometimes referred to as growth mania. The dark green brand of environmentalism is associated with ideas of ecocentrism, deep ecology, degrowth, anti-consumerism, post-materialism, holism, the Gaia hypothesis of James Lovelock, and sometimes a support for a reduction in human numbers and/or a relinquishment of technology to reduce humanity's effect on the biosphere.

Contrast between Light Green and Dark Green

Jonathan Bate in The Song of the Earth feels that usually there will be deep divisions in a theory. He feels that one group is “light Greens” also known as “environmentalists” who see protecting the environment first and foremost as a personal responsibility. The other group is “dark Greens” also known as “deep ecologists”. In contrast, they believe that environmental problems are an inherent part of industrialized civilization, and seek radical political changes. This can be simply stated as “Know Technology” vs “No Technology”. (Suresh Frederick in Ecocriticism: Paradigms and Praxis)

Bright Green

More recently, bright greens emerged as a group of environmentalists who believe that radical changes are needed in the economic and political operation of society in order to make it sustainable, but that better designs, new technologies and more widely distributed social innovations are the means to make those changes—and that society can neither stop nor protest its way to sustainability.[12] As Ross Robertson writes,

[B]right green environmentalism is less about the problems and limitations we need to overcome than the "tools, models, and ideas" that already exist for overcoming them. It forgoes the bleakness of protest and dissent for the energizing confidence of constructive solutions.[9]



International perspective

While bright green environmentalism is an intellectual current among North American environmentalists (with a number of businesses, blogs, NGOs and even governments now explicitly calling themselves bright green—for instance, the City of Vancouver's strategic planning document is called "Vancouver 2020: A Bright Green Future"[13]), it is in Northern Europe, especially Scandinavia, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, that the idea of bright green environmentalism has become most widespread and most widely discussed. For instance, the official technology showcase and business expo for the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen was called Bright Green in reference to this idea, while the Danish youth climate activism movement is called Bright Green Youth.[citation needed]

See also

References

  1. ^ Shear, Boone (2011). "Bright Green Environmentalism". In Newman, Julie (ed.). Green Ethics and Philosophy: An A-to-Z Guide. SAGE Publications. p. 39. doi:10.4135/9781412974608.n14. ISBN 9781412996877.
  2. ^ Steffen, Alex (August 6, 2004). "Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green Future: Reports from the Team". Worldchanging.com. Archived from the original on 2015-01-01. Retrieved 3 October 2016.
  3. ^ Adamczyk, Monika; Ryu, Jae Hyung (September 22, 2006). "Green schools show New Haven students the light". The Yale Herald. Vol. XLII, no. 3. Archived from the original on October 15, 2006. Retrieved October 5, 2021.
  4. ^ "Bright Green Living wiki mission statement". socialtext.net. (Note: Wiki is inactive.)
  5. ^ Steffen, Alex (21 April 2006). "On Earth Day". Worldchanging.com. Archived from the original on 2016-01-24. Retrieved 3 October 2016.
  6. ^ Cooper, Arnie (April 2010). "The Bright Green City – Alex Steffen's Optimistic Environmentalism". The Sun.
  7. ^ Schechner, Sam (March 21, 2008). "Will 'Bright Green' Bring Discovery The Long Green?". Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on July 11, 2010. Retrieved 4 December 2014.
  8. ^ Weise, Elizabeth (2008-04-23). "Ed Begley acts on his eco-beliefs". USA Today. Retrieved 2010-04-26.
  9. ^ Jump up to:a b Robertson, Ross. "A Brighter Shade of Green—Rebooting Environmentalism for the 21st Century". EnlightenNext.org. Archived from the original on 2013-04-03. December 2007
  10. ^ Jump up to:a b Steffen, Alex (27 Feb 2009). "Bright Green, Light Green, Dark Green, Gray: The New Environmental Spectrum". Worldchanging.com. Archived from the original on 2016-01-12. Retrieved 3 October 2016.
  11. ^ Menkes, Suzy (April 17, 2006). "Eco-friendly: Why green is the new black". International Herald Tribune. London. Archived from the original on May 9, 2006. Retrieved October 5, 2021.[dead link]
  12. ^ "Don't Just Be the Change, Mass-Produce It". Worldchanging.com. September 12, 2007. Archived from the original on 2015-09-07. Retrieved 3 October 2016.
  13. ^ "Vancouver Makes a Bright Green Future its Official Goal". Worldchanging.com. 20 October 2009. Archived from the original on 2014-02-18. Retrieved 3 October 2016.

External links



at

No comments:

Post a Comment