5
1
Three different processes are frequently studied in political ecology. The first is
when international capital invests in a business in a way that threatens local
livelihoods through environmental impacts and access to land. This might involve
mining as in the case of Avatar, or it might be about agricultural production,
manufacturing or the construction of power plants, or in the case of urban political
ecology, when poor or marginalized communities are squeezed out of a
neighbourhood following gentrification.
Second, external actors such as big international conservation organizations may
influence national governments, usually in the Global South, to restrict local use of
land and natural resources in order to protect the global environment and climate.
This includes initiatives to establish new national parks, or climate mitigation
projects such as production of biofuel or to sequester carbon to conserve forests or
establish new forest plantations.
Third, some political ecologists also study environmental change: What processes
of environmental change do actually take place? What are impacts as well as causes.
Examples are desertification, deforestation and soil erosion. Often, political ecology
has questioned the general scope of these processes, their root causes as well as
dominating views and policies related to these environmental issues.
Political ecology is a relatively new academic tradition that emerged in the 1980s,
which provides perspectives and analytic tools to investigate the three mentioned
processes among others. Local situations are studied in the light of national and
global influences, and political ecology provides a critical alternative to other ways
of studying environmental issues. This implies that political ecologists examine
power relationships and question mainstream claims about environment and
development that often are taken for granted.
There are two common misunderstandings about political ecology. The first is
that this is a school of thought within the discipline of ecology, while political
ecology is actually an interdisciplinary field. Often elements from ecology and other
natural sciences play important roles, but political ecology draws primarily on social
sciences. Therefore, ‘ecology’ should be seen to reflect the field’s broad focus on
environmental issues. Some scholars with background from natural sciences as well
as from the humanities do political ecology studies, although the field is dominated
by scholars from various social sciences, first of all human geography and
anthropology, but also development studies, sociology and political science.
The second misunderstanding is that political ecology is political in the sense
that political statements are made on environmental questions without sound
foundations in empirical knowledge. Thus, some believe that political ecology merely
implies claims- making on environmental issues without empirical research. However,
as a research-based approach, the ambition for scholars within political ecology, as
in any other field, should be to be open to any findings based on empirical
investigation.
As we will soon show, the ‘political’ in political ecology is actually drawn from
the older field of political economy. In addition, and similar to fields such as political
science, political geography and political philosophy, the political aspect of political
ecology involves a focus on various forms of power.
Political Ecology on Pandora
1
Three different processes are frequently studied in political ecology. The first is
when international capital invests in a business in a way that threatens local
livelihoods through environmental impacts and access to land. This might involve
mining as in the case of Avatar, or it might be about agricultural production,
manufacturing or the construction of power plants, or in the case of urban political
ecology, when poor or marginalized communities are squeezed out of a
neighbourhood following gentrification.
Second, external actors such as big international conservation organizations may
influence national governments, usually in the Global South, to restrict local use of
land and natural resources in order to protect the global environment and climate.
This includes initiatives to establish new national parks, or climate mitigation
projects such as production of biofuel or to sequester carbon to conserve forests or
establish new forest plantations.
Third, some political ecologists also study environmental change: What processes
of environmental change do actually take place? What are impacts as well as causes.
Examples are desertification, deforestation and soil erosion. Often, political ecology
has questioned the general scope of these processes, their root causes as well as
dominating views and policies related to these environmental issues.
Political ecology is a relatively new academic tradition that emerged in the 1980s,
which provides perspectives and analytic tools to investigate the three mentioned
processes among others. Local situations are studied in the light of national and
global influences, and political ecology provides a critical alternative to other ways
of studying environmental issues. This implies that political ecologists examine
power relationships and question mainstream claims about environment and
development that often are taken for granted.
There are two common misunderstandings about political ecology. The first is
that this is a school of thought within the discipline of ecology, while political
ecology is actually an interdisciplinary field. Often elements from ecology and other
natural sciences play important roles, but political ecology draws primarily on social
sciences. Therefore, ‘ecology’ should be seen to reflect the field’s broad focus on
environmental issues. Some scholars with background from natural sciences as well
as from the humanities do political ecology studies, although the field is dominated
by scholars from various social sciences, first of all human geography and
anthropology, but also development studies, sociology and political science.
The second misunderstanding is that political ecology is political in the sense
that political statements are made on environmental questions without sound
foundations in empirical knowledge. Thus, some believe that political ecology merely
implies claims- making on environmental issues without empirical research. However,
as a research-based approach, the ambition for scholars within political ecology, as
in any other field, should be to be open to any findings based on empirical
investigation.
As we will soon show, the ‘political’ in political ecology is actually drawn from
the older field of political economy. In addition, and similar to fields such as political
science, political geography and political philosophy, the political aspect of political
ecology involves a focus on various forms of power.
Political Ecology on Pandora