Çevre sosyolojisi: Kavramsal ve teorik gelişmeler
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2010
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Bu makalenin temel amacı, çevre sosyolojisinde kavramsal ve teorik gelişmeleri incelemektir. Bu inceleme yapılırken makale çevre sosyolojisinin tanımını ve alanını, geleneksel sosyolojiye olan eleştirilerini; ve toplum ve fiziksel çevre arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeye yönelik ortaya çıkan kuramsal perspektifleri sunacaktır. Bu teorik perspektifler Kuzey Amerika’da gelişen Yeni Ekoloji paradigması, Eko-Marksist perspektif, Kapitalist Sanayileşmiş Rasyonalitenin Rasyonelsizliği teorisi ve Avrupa’da gelişen Risk Toplumu teorisi ve Ekolojik Modernleşme teorisini kapsamaktadır. Geleneksel Kuzey Amerika çevre sosyolojisi, çevresel bozulma ve yıkımın nedenlerini açıklamaya yönelik faktörler üzerine yoğunlaştığı için sürdürülebilir toplum nasıl olur veya ne tür sosyal düzenlemeler getirirsek çevresel iyileştirmelere katkıda bulunuruz sorusu üzerinde çok az durmuştur. Bunun tersine, Avrupa’da gelişen ekolojik modernleşme teorisi endüstrileşmiş kapitalist toplumlar çevre krizini aşmak için ne tür reformlar geliştirmişlerdir sorusunu analiz ederek genel anlamda çevre problemlerini çözmeye yönelik neler yapılıyor ve neler yapılmalıdır sorusu üzerinde durmaktadır.
William R. Catton and Riley E. Dunlap are among the first sociologists who analyzed the meaning of the rise of environmentalism for sociology. They have played an important role in the definition, development and institutionalization of environmental sociology within sociology. Environmental sociology is defined as a sub-discipline of sociology that analyzes mutual interrelations or relationships between society and physical environment. They argued that environmental sociologists must integrate environmental variables into their sociological analyses. Since the 1970’s environmental sociologists have integrated environmental variables as either independent variables or dependent and control variables into their sociological analyses. Most environmental sociologists agree that mainstream sociology was constructed as if nature did not matter. Moreover, they also agree that classical sociologists failed to recognize the significance of biophysical environment and to theorize inseparable interrelations between society and environment. Even though environmental sociologists critiqued the definition of mainstream sociology and classical sociological theories when they defined the field of environmental sociology, they utilized classical social theories when they constructed their green perspectives. For example, William R. Catton and Riley E. Dunlap have been influenced by Durkheim’s sociology when they established New Ecological Paradigm (NEP). Similarly, John Bellamy Foster, James O’Connor and Alan Scheinberg who established eco-Marxist perspective utilized Max’s sociology when they theorized the relationship between society and environment. Raymond Murphy has been influenced by Weber’s sociology while developing irrationalities of rationalization of industrialized capitalism theory. Risk society theory, developed by Ulrich Beck, and the Ecological modernization theory, developed by Herbert Huber and others, have been influenced by modernization theory. New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) emphasizes on culture as being the sources of environmental problems and solutions to them. According to NEP, modern social consciousness has been influenced by dominant western worldview, and this consciousness is the main causal force for creating environmental problems in societies. Eco-Marxist perspective includes treadmill theory and the theory of second contradiction. In general, for eco-Marxist perspective, capitalist system is the main causal force for environmental crisis. Capitalist societies try to solve economic and social crisis by economic growth. Economic growth means more production and consumption that lead to the use of more natural resources and creating more environmental pollution. Thus, environmental degradation and crisis is necessary for the continuation of the capitalist system. According to treadmill of production theory, owners of the industry, the state and workers tend to build an alliance to facilitate economic growth because they all benefit from it. Thus, the state plays a contradictory role in helping environmental destruction and protection. For Murphy, in his irrationalities of rationalization of industrialized capitalism theory, the root causes of environmental problems is monopoly power –seeking profit in capitalist market or communist party power seeking dominance and power—its exploitive relations with nature. Thus, bureaucratic elite power and decisions are the sources of risks of industrial accidents, accumulation of toxic waste and ecological degradation. For Beck, societies are transforming from simple modernization to risk society. He argues that in risk society, people feel that they are under risks due to environmental degradation. In addition, in risk society, conflicts concentrated on pollution and the distribution of environmental risks. The ecological modernization theory argues that global environmental problems can be solved within the existing or a little modified social, economic and political institutions without departing from economic growth, capitalism and globalization. So, in contrast to the eco-Marxist perspective, the ecological modernization theory argues that capitalism and its institutions are not in fundamental conflict with the environment. Current economic institutions and mechanisms can be modified and transformed according to the ecologic rationality criteria. While the North American environmental sociology tends to focus on explaining the root sources of environmental degradation and problems, the North European environmental sociology tends to focus on the questions of what should have been done and what needs to be done to solve environmental problems. These theoretical assumptions have been continued to be tested not only in North American and European countries but also in developing countries, which would provide further theoretical and empirical contributions to the environmental sociology.
William R. Catton and Riley E. Dunlap are among the first sociologists who analyzed the meaning of the rise of environmentalism for sociology. They have played an important role in the definition, development and institutionalization of environmental sociology within sociology. Environmental sociology is defined as a sub-discipline of sociology that analyzes mutual interrelations or relationships between society and physical environment. They argued that environmental sociologists must integrate environmental variables into their sociological analyses. Since the 1970’s environmental sociologists have integrated environmental variables as either independent variables or dependent and control variables into their sociological analyses. Most environmental sociologists agree that mainstream sociology was constructed as if nature did not matter. Moreover, they also agree that classical sociologists failed to recognize the significance of biophysical environment and to theorize inseparable interrelations between society and environment. Even though environmental sociologists critiqued the definition of mainstream sociology and classical sociological theories when they defined the field of environmental sociology, they utilized classical social theories when they constructed their green perspectives. For example, William R. Catton and Riley E. Dunlap have been influenced by Durkheim’s sociology when they established New Ecological Paradigm (NEP). Similarly, John Bellamy Foster, James O’Connor and Alan Scheinberg who established eco-Marxist perspective utilized Max’s sociology when they theorized the relationship between society and environment. Raymond Murphy has been influenced by Weber’s sociology while developing irrationalities of rationalization of industrialized capitalism theory. Risk society theory, developed by Ulrich Beck, and the Ecological modernization theory, developed by Herbert Huber and others, have been influenced by modernization theory. New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) emphasizes on culture as being the sources of environmental problems and solutions to them. According to NEP, modern social consciousness has been influenced by dominant western worldview, and this consciousness is the main causal force for creating environmental problems in societies. Eco-Marxist perspective includes treadmill theory and the theory of second contradiction. In general, for eco-Marxist perspective, capitalist system is the main causal force for environmental crisis. Capitalist societies try to solve economic and social crisis by economic growth. Economic growth means more production and consumption that lead to the use of more natural resources and creating more environmental pollution. Thus, environmental degradation and crisis is necessary for the continuation of the capitalist system. According to treadmill of production theory, owners of the industry, the state and workers tend to build an alliance to facilitate economic growth because they all benefit from it. Thus, the state plays a contradictory role in helping environmental destruction and protection. For Murphy, in his irrationalities of rationalization of industrialized capitalism theory, the root causes of environmental problems is monopoly power –seeking profit in capitalist market or communist party power seeking dominance and power—its exploitive relations with nature. Thus, bureaucratic elite power and decisions are the sources of risks of industrial accidents, accumulation of toxic waste and ecological degradation. For Beck, societies are transforming from simple modernization to risk society. He argues that in risk society, people feel that they are under risks due to environmental degradation. In addition, in risk society, conflicts concentrated on pollution and the distribution of environmental risks. The ecological modernization theory argues that global environmental problems can be solved within the existing or a little modified social, economic and political institutions without departing from economic growth, capitalism and globalization. So, in contrast to the eco-Marxist perspective, the ecological modernization theory argues that capitalism and its institutions are not in fundamental conflict with the environment. Current economic institutions and mechanisms can be modified and transformed according to the ecologic rationality criteria. While the North American environmental sociology tends to focus on explaining the root sources of environmental degradation and problems, the North European environmental sociology tends to focus on the questions of what should have been done and what needs to be done to solve environmental problems. These theoretical assumptions have been continued to be tested not only in North American and European countries but also in developing countries, which would provide further theoretical and empirical contributions to the environmental sociology.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Çevre ve Toplum, Çevre Sosyolojisi, Çevre Sosyolojisi Teorileri, Environment and Society, Environmental Sociology, Environmental Sociological Theories
Kaynak
Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
Sayı
24