Environmental Political Theories

Doyle and Mceachern discuss Political theories and environmental conflict in Chapter Two of "Environment and Politics". Resistance, reform and environmental radical critique are discussed.

The move for environmental movements in the past and lack of commitments over several cases is evident. Ecological post modernism describes those who see environmental damage as a product of "enlightenment thinking". Which rationalizes the ability of humans to use "nature" for their own ends in the name of progress and an ever-increasing standard of living. Post modernists tend to emphasize the importance of locality and the difference as against centralization and notion of a homogenized sameness.

The author's then move on to talk about traditional political theories from the right and the left standpoints. They suggest that there is "no one environmentalism and there is no one green economics. Finally Doyle and Mceachern focus on the role of religion within environmentalists. How one's surrounding can dictate one's views on the environment and its governance as a result.

In Jon Anderson's essay, "From 'zombies' to 'coyotes': Environmentalism Where are We", he identifies the three main problems with environmentalism. The three he discusses are be disconnection, development and denial. Anderson explains mindset in our society that the environment is disconnected from our everyday lives, as if it were an alien or "zombified"; there is a lack of relationship with the non-human world and the human one. Unsustainable and materialistic lifestyles and that neoliberalism "locks" people into unsustainable consumption patterns and therefore little success is achieved through environmentalist practices due to our society's need for consumption and possessions.

In my opinion the authors had many views on environmentalism and were focused on two roots, one being a more shallow position, while the other is more deep set on environmental change. Many recognize that radical change may be necessary but it is important to consider goals and strategy first. I think that the existence of various forms of environmentalism and green economics are a natural result of different political regimes, religion and geography. The nature versus nurture comes into play and we see the effect that societal impact can have. However, in terms of determining appropriate and successful solutions to our current environmental crisis, the variety poses negative impacts. We have seen numerous conferences, summits and agreements that governments have participated in but there has been no substantial change in the harm being done to the environment. It would seem that the existence of various forms and definition of environmentalism and green economics have created difficulties for reaching international agreements as every country has their own definition and agenda