2
WHAT IS GREEN?
Transformation imperatives and
knowledge politics
Melissa Leach
Introduction
The idea that our societies and economies are in urgent need of green trans formation
is beginning to take hold – albeit to varying extents – across political, policy and
public debate. Quite what sort of transformation is required, and how to achieve
it, is a matter of high contention. But what does the other part of the term, ‘green’,
mean? The ‘green’ terminology that now attaches to everything from policy
concepts, political parties, campaigning organizations, movements and even
consumer products can imply that this is a settled idea, connoting a clear set of
shared values. At its bluntest, it suggests that the environment, and nature, matter,
but dig beneath the surface and we find ‘green’ to be as contested a term as
transformation. Its unthinking use begs important questions about the directions
of societal and economic change, and where it is leading – what are ‘green’ goals
and outcomes – and about the processes that might get us there, and who is involved.
Embedded in both are questions about values, power and knowledge: who gets
to define green with what consequences, and who and what are included and
excluded. Such discursive politics (Burchell et al., 1991; Hajer, 1995; Fairhead and
Leach, 2003) are the focus of this chapter.
‘Green’ has carried many meanings in political and policy debates. Amid large,
diverse literatures extending back many decades, one can broadly distinguish
ecocentric and biocentric positions in which green is associated with the
conservation of ‘nature’ for its own sake, including the rights of non-human species
(Eckersley, 1992). In contrast, anthropocentric positions – our focus – emphasize
the value of nature and ecosystems to human purposes. Here, multiple versions
(see also Spratt, this book) include ‘light green’ positions, which see the environ -
ment as relatively robust, and green goals achievable by relatively modest economic
shifts to price nature correctly, substitute for non-renewable resources, or redirect
DOI: 10.4324/9781315747378-2
WHAT IS GREEN?
Transformation imperatives and
knowledge politics
Melissa Leach
Introduction
The idea that our societies and economies are in urgent need of green trans formation
is beginning to take hold – albeit to varying extents – across political, policy and
public debate. Quite what sort of transformation is required, and how to achieve
it, is a matter of high contention. But what does the other part of the term, ‘green’,
mean? The ‘green’ terminology that now attaches to everything from policy
concepts, political parties, campaigning organizations, movements and even
consumer products can imply that this is a settled idea, connoting a clear set of
shared values. At its bluntest, it suggests that the environment, and nature, matter,
but dig beneath the surface and we find ‘green’ to be as contested a term as
transformation. Its unthinking use begs important questions about the directions
of societal and economic change, and where it is leading – what are ‘green’ goals
and outcomes – and about the processes that might get us there, and who is involved.
Embedded in both are questions about values, power and knowledge: who gets
to define green with what consequences, and who and what are included and
excluded. Such discursive politics (Burchell et al., 1991; Hajer, 1995; Fairhead and
Leach, 2003) are the focus of this chapter.
‘Green’ has carried many meanings in political and policy debates. Amid large,
diverse literatures extending back many decades, one can broadly distinguish
ecocentric and biocentric positions in which green is associated with the
conservation of ‘nature’ for its own sake, including the rights of non-human species
(Eckersley, 1992). In contrast, anthropocentric positions – our focus – emphasize
the value of nature and ecosystems to human purposes. Here, multiple versions
(see also Spratt, this book) include ‘light green’ positions, which see the environ -
ment as relatively robust, and green goals achievable by relatively modest economic
shifts to price nature correctly, substitute for non-renewable resources, or redirect
DOI: 10.4324/9781315747378-2