Risk: A Pivotal Player

Jessie Todd ·
3 October 2018
   11 comments

By: Jessie Todd

Countless students will encounter sociology classes this year as they tackle their degrees and learn about society and human interactions, but some students may delve deeper into the sub-discipline of environmental sociology to better understand human relations and the natural environment. In our class, we dove deeper into environmental sociology with Dr. Dana Fisher from the University of Maryland. This week we discussed several theoretical perspectives on the relationship between society and the environment.

Class readings introduced two theories that were developed from work done in the United States and Europe, which debate the conflict between economic growth and environmental quality. Dr. Fisher also presented her work, a third theory, which attempts to resolve this disciplinary conflict by merging multiple sociological perspectives into "one meta theory that can start to resolve differences between the environment and society relationship in a more effective way"1. The three theories that we discussed are discussed below:

The Treadmill of Production
The vast majority of Americans can say that they are guilty of falling into the norm of upgrading their phones to the latest, greatest, trending technology. Niall McCarthy writes in his Forbes article that 51% of iPhone users and 47% of Android users will upgrade their cellphones when their carriers allow them to do so. This tendency falls under the sociological theory termed by Allan Schnaiberg as the "Treadmill of Production"2. This theory perceives an enduring conflict between the growing economy and the need to use natural resources. As a society, we become stuck on this treadmill that continuously takes from the environment but only gives back in the form of waste. As industrialization grows and the treadmill turns, so does the tension between national security, public health, governing bodies and the economy. Even with environmental regulations, the pressure of economic competition impedes the success of policy to protect nature's goods. If the newest versions of cellphones claim to be greener and more environmentally friendly, the cycle of buying and producing will still continue to yield "environmental bads," technological waste, and pollution. The state and institutions become addicted to the rush and competition of expanding and growing, and ecological welfare becomes the low man on the totem pole3.

The Ecological Switch
A more optimistic approach to thinking about the dynamic between society and the environment is one where superindustrialization drives the growth of the economy, technology, and environmental governance4. The theory of Ecological Modernization posits that when the government collaborates with the economy and environmental groups, nature's resources can be sustainably maintained5. By completely restructuring the power between all social actors, open communication can be established to hone environmental protections and regulation. The 2010 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act supports this idea through its creation of nearly one million jobs that supported renewable energy efforts and a green economy. To have a more efficient and sustainable economy, a "transformation, an ecological switch of the industrialization process into a direction that takes into account maintaining the sustenance base" will change the way people view production and consumption. Rather than creating excess litter and debris, society closes the gap between production and unused waste. For example, in an ecologically modernized world, your environmentally-friendly switch to a Prius would result in your old car being fully utilized for all its parts.

Computers, military equipment, monitors, and other electronic wastes are often left for landfills. (Photo from Pxhere is licensed under CC0.)
Computers, military equipment, monitors, and other electronic wastes are often left for landfills. (Photo from Pxhere is licensed under CC0.)

The Anthro-Shift
Who says theory has to be one way or another? According to Dr. Fisher and Dr. Andrew Jorgenson, the society-environment relationship is not linear; rather, it is multidirectional due to the interrelations between state, market, and civil society sectors1. Unlike the theories of the "Treadmill of Production" and "Ecological Modernization," when it comes to changing the interactions of social actors, risk is the key player in their new theory of the "Anthro-Shift." They argue that risk is the motivation for social change6. For example, major risk events like Hurricane Maria wreaked havoc on Puerto Rico's infrastructure and economy. Now, the choices that they are making following their countrywide financial, economic, and social crisis creates an opportunity for change because they are calculating the risk of their future stability. The Anthro-Shift theory says that Puerto Rico's choices on rebuilding are based on risks of health, safety, property, and well-being, as well as their perception of those risks6. The theory of the Anthro-Shift does not predict the future like an ecological model might, but rather is a tool to help understand and explain the different responses that social systems cycle through. Cuba is another example of how the Anthro-Shift theory helps us understand the different changes society chooses. The Cuban revolution was a risk that changed the entire organization of their governance and the future of their people.

Multi-directionality of the Anthro-Shift. (Figure from Fisher and Jorgenson, under review. Used with author's permission.)
Multi-directionality of the Anthro-Shift. (Figure from Fisher and Jorgenson, under review. Used with author's permission.)

There will always be ongoing conflict between the economy and the environment. As the population grows, resources will be further exploited and tension will continue to rise, but we must realize that the environment and the economy are not in opposition with each other. The economy is dependent on the environment; therefore, stability of each entity is essential.

If you get caught in the enduring debate between the Treadmill of Production or Ecological Modernization theories, maybe step back to explore other theories, such as the Anthro-Shift, which offer a variety of explanations for the different arrangements and rearrangements of society. Life is all about choices....or the risk of our choices.

References
1. Fisher, D. (2018, September) "Sociology's Engagement with the Environment". In-class Presentation: MEES 620.
2. Schnaiberg, A. (1980). The Environment: From Surplus to Scarcity. New York, Oxford University Press.
3. Schnaiberg, A., Pellow, D.N., and Weinberg, A. (2000). The Treadmill of Production and the Environmental State. Chicago, Illinois. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
4. Mol, A. P.J., (2001). Globalization and environmental reform. MIT Press.
5. Spaargaren et al, G.(1992). Sociology, Environment and Modernity: Ecological Modernization as a Theory of Social Change. United Kingdom, Society and Natural Resources.
6. Fisher, Dana R. and Andrew Jorgenson. Under Review. "Ending the Stalemate: Toward a Theory of Anthro-Shift."


Next Post > Understanding the dynamics and interdependencies of socio-ecological systems through models

Comments

  • Natalie 6 years ago

    Nice blog. I think you did a great job in summarizing the 3 theories discussed in class. I especially like the line "The economy is dependent on the environment; therefore, stability of each entity is essential."

    The pic of the landfilled electronics brings it home that there is still a ton of waste produced...and thanks for making me feel bad for upgrading my phone every time the option comes up ;-)

  • Alana Todd-Rodriguez 6 years ago

    Jessie,
    The statistic you included about upgrading our phones was very interesting! I think it frames the Treadmill of Production well. I'm glad you incorporated the term "environmental bads" into the blog, it is a simple and effective way to characterize the negative environmental effects of our actions. Great job framing the Anthro-Shift, I really appreciated Dr. Fisher's new approach as a connection between the different environmental sociology theories. You created an interesting summary of the class topics!

  • Srishti Vishwakarma 6 years ago

    Great job, Jessie! I really liked your explanation for the environmental bad. These days we are in the trap of technological world. The example of cellphone is perfect in that case. We are continuously moving towards the environmental degradation. Hence, there is a much need of Anthro-shift. I never realised before reading these articles that we are surrounded by all of these theories, today.

  • Matthew Wilfong 6 years ago

    Really great overview of the class. It was an interesting class having the author of a whole new perspective introduce the Anthro-Shift and give an overview of the past/competing theories. I am anxious to see how the Anthro-Shift is accepted by the environmental sociology community. It was hard to gauge in our class since no one else was practicing within that field. Coming from a more scientific approach, this class really made me appreciate the full extent of the environment-society interaction that I tend to stray away from. Overall, an extremely thought-provoking blog and class!

  • Alexander Sahi 6 years ago

    Theoretical approaches used in environmental sociology provide insightful frameworks into understanding how society deals with the environment. This class was a great introduction into this field and very well described in this blog. As we learned about the different approaches I could not help but wonder how the Anthro-Shift can be applied to different societies around the world. While this theory shows complexity in a multi directional format, I am still uncertain risk is the only factor that should be considered. This idea is piggy backing off of Brian's comment that, "social attitudes can undermine potentially beneficial choices," and in addition to this, it is important to consider that in any model the actor does not act rationally which can lead to these undermining actions.

  • Brian Scott 6 years ago

    As a society, we have collectively decided coal power is "bad". In an effort toward ecological modernization we have begun favoring other energy forms - wind, solar, etc.

    Burning coal has some advantages. The United States has effectively an unlimited coal supply. We can reduce the burden on other energy resources by burning coal. It would be wise to maintain an ongoing coal "presence" taking full lifetime value for existing infrastructure and keeping coal combustion technology up to date. Coal power is available any time. Renewables are great when the wind blows and the sun shines, but we need gap and peak power generation capacity. It's also much easier to manage a power network when the power sources are predictable, like coal. Coal also produces some beneficial byproducts. Farms are starting to experience sulfur limitation, in part due to the clean air act. It used to b that sulfur rained from the sky, but not now. True, too much sulfur is acid rain, but in small doses it benefits crops. Coal also produces fly ash, a necessary ingredient in concrete. It used to be that concrete companies could get ash for free - coal plants gave it away. Now ash supplies are limited - companies have to mine ash (form former coal plant disposal areas). Small local coal plants used to provide a local ash supply, now ash needs to be transported long distances. As a result, the cost of concrete has increased dramatically.

    Systems can be complex and we don't always understand the ramifications of our actions. Even when we do, social attitudes can undermine potentially beneficial choices.

  • Brendan Campbell 6 years ago

    I am interested to see how Puerto Rico bounces back from the hurricane. Hopefully they make some correct choices and can establish themselves higher than they previously were. I also thought it was particularly interesting how long we spent discussing the idea of risk in class. There is something compelling about trying to understand the unknown. How does one make predictions based on near-random circumstances? Perhaps some model that lines out current trends and then it extrapolated with some chaos function? I am not certain but needless to say is super interesting and thought provoking.

  • Morgan Ross 6 years ago

    I enjoyed the structure of this class. It was interesting to discuss some of the long-standing arguments within the Environmental Sociology field and to be introduced to a new theory. I think Anthro-Shift makes many good points about how the dynamic between economy and environment interact. However, the theory doesn't provide that "so what?" explanation. It will be interesting to see how the supporters of the Treadmill of Production and the Ecological Switch view the theory of Anthro-Shift. I hope that as research provides data to Anthro-Shift so we will be able to understand the real-world implications, rather than relying solely on theory.

  • Tan Zou 6 years ago

    Jessie, thank you for your great summary of the readings. I like how you add new examples and plots into your blog to make it more interesting and informative. I had never heard about the treadmill, ecological modernization, anthro-shift, and other theories mentioned in the readings before, so it is a very exciting learning process for me to see how these partially conflicting theories can help us better understand the society-environment relationship and understand how we understand it. For environmental science students and researchers, it is critical to have a deep understanding of these topics.

  • Shannon Hood 6 years ago

    Great synopsis, Jessie! I love this line: "The economy is dependent on the environment; therefore, stability of each entity is essential." It rings so true, especially after our class discussion on resource use. Without a shift towards more efficient resource use and greater priorities placed on the efficiencies and cleanliness of production processes, we will find ourselves in even more of an environmental calamity than we are today. It was interesting to read about the example of the shift towards ecological modernization in the Netherlands. It makes me wonder if such a shift would be possible in the United States where policy and industry are so tightly linked. The diversity in our world societies makes a universal approach to environmental sociology highly unlikely. These differences in world societies and economies make the theory behind the anthro-shift all the more relevant as we seek to understand why certain actions are taken in such diverse areas.

  • Emily Nastase 6 years ago

    The sociological perspective on the environment is not something that I've had any interest in exploring until this class. Before this, I assumed that the Treadmill of Production was a natural state for most countries, and that Ecological Modernization was "the way of the future" (as with many European countries). I hadn't considered that there might be other theories that could explain our circumstances, let alone theories that reside on differing levels (like Anthro-shift as a meta theory). This class discussion was a really interesting first glance into environmental sociology.

Post a comment