Elena Bilheimer, EcoNews Journalist
Antro or Ecocentric?
With so many different nonprofits and organizations pushing for environmental protection, it can sometimes be easy to assume that they all share the same motives. However, there are many unique ways to care about and engage with environmental issues. In the book Communicating Nature: How We Create and Understand Environmental Messages, author and professor Julia Corbett describes a spectrum of various environmental ideologies, using the labels “anthropocentric” and “ecocentric” as endpoints to represent the range of beliefs that exist about the natural world.
These ideologies are all present in American society and can be recognized in the strategies utilized by leading environmental organizations and the choices made by governing bodies. While ideologies are often personal and subjective, Corbett’s spectrum can help provide a map for understanding how and why groups working for the same outcome might choose different methods and means.
Corbett defines an ideology as a “fully formed belief system concerning the natural world” that oftentimes guides the way people act toward their environment and all that it encompasses. She makes a clear differentiation between an ideology and an opinion, as ideologies are not easily swayed by external events or experiences. Ideologies are deeply influenced by childhood experiences, historical, political, and cultural backgrounds, and the personal relationships developed with places and land. While these belief systems inform behavior, they might not always be in complete alignment, as it is often difficult or sometimes impossible to take actions that contradict the dominant ideology of a particular culture. Corbett also points out that “Even within a single ideology, adherents disagree on definitions and core beliefs and have staked out subunits within the same perspective. Because ideology ultimately rests at the individual level, interpretations naturally vary” (28).
On the left side of Corbett’s spectrum is a triangle, representing anthropocentrism, with humans at the top and the rest of the world beneath. Anthropocentrism is a human-centered point of view in which humans are superior and more worthy than the rest of creation. On the other side of the spectrum is ecocentrism, represented by a non-hierarchical circle, symbolizing the interdependent nature of all living and nonliving elements of the world. From this perspective, humans are not more relevant than other components of an ecosystem, but are instead part of a much larger web of life that thrives through an array of reciprocal relationships.
Overview of Ideologies
Unrestrained Instrumentalism
Unrestrained instrumentalism is characterized by the conviction that resources exist only to serve immediate human welfare and desires and need not be restrained at all. The environment and other creatures are not taken into account, and are instead viewed as tools for the development and continued growth of human society. Adherents of unrestrained instrumentalism include those who advocate for free enterprise with no concern for the potential consequences.
Conservationism
Conservationism differs from the previous ideology by recognizing that there should be some restraints on resource use. However, the focus remains solely on human benefit, as the goal is to utilize and manage the natural world to protect it for future generations. Resources need to be maximized for human use, but the actions taken to ensure this don’t require a reformulation of institutions or individual lifestyles. Examples of conservationists include the first sportsmen and environmental groups in the 1900s, as well as the governmental framework that was put into place to manage the first national parks and forests. Critics of this ideology label it a “shallow ecology”, for failing to actually protect and respect components of the natural world that aren’t directly related to human interest.
Preservationism
Going beyond their economic and utilitarian worth, preservationism takes into account the scientific, aesthetic, and religious value of the natural world. Preservationism is often associated with issues involving formally designated wilderness, and the fight to protect the beauty, functionality, natural wonder, and scientific discoveries that can be derived from other species and the environment. According to Corbett, conservation and preservation have been the dominant approach of the mainstream environmental movement over the past 100 years, as the methods and goals of both are often considered realistic and feasible. Corbett still considers this approach to be on the anthropocentric side of the spectrum because the human experience of nature is still necessary to determine its worthiness, or “value is granted to the nonhuman world with human strings attached” (37).
Ethics and Values-Driven Ideologies
Moving closer to ecocentrism, this category is defined by the idea that nonhuman entities have intrinsic worth regardless of their benefits or costs to humans. These entities thus have a right to exist, and humans have a moral and ethical obligation to act as stewards to protect them.
Certain entities, such as animals, are assigned more value from humans than other aspects of the environment, including the ecosystem as a whole, fungi, and minerals and rocks. Relying on already existing legal and political institutions to incite change, these ideologies are reformist rather than radical. The 1973 Endangered Species Act embodies this framework, as many of the species have little utilitarian value to humans but have been given a right to exist under law.
Animal rights and land-based ethics are two prominent ideologies that fall within this category. Under land-based ethics, introduced by author Aldo Leopold, the entire functioning ecosystem is appreciated, including the biotic and abiotic contributors. In his book A Sand County Almanac, Leopold stated that humans had an obligation to not damage the “holistic integrity” of ecosystems, as he believed that ecosystems deserve the ability to continue to evolve on their own. This belief recognizes the “telos” of natural elements, which Corbett describes as a capacity for self-direction and autonomy. This shift in perspective grants other living and nonliving things the possibility to be seen as objects, with their own purpose and function, rather than subjects of human interest. Corbetts states, “The criterion of telos puts this ideology much closer to the eco-centric end of the spectrum than rights-based ideologies. But all ethics and value-based ideologies fail to connect human beliefs about the natural world to systems of power that are integral in either maintaining or changing relationships. In other words, it’s one thing to say humans ‘should’ morally treat the natural world and it’s another to find the root causes or needed social change to support those relationships” (40).
Transformative Ideologies
This classification of ideologies is the closest to ecocentrism on Corbett’s spectrum, and encompasses a multitude of different philosophies and paradigms. They all call for radical social change, going beyond reformist environmentalism and challenging systems of oppression, power, and exploitation. Based on a completely different relationship structure between humans and other parts of the natural world, they attempt to address inequality through concrete actions and tangible methodologies.
Ecological Sensibility
Ecological sensibility builds upon land-based ethics to include systems of land management. It stresses noninterference and restrained use of resources, while also giving guidelines for how to interact with the natural world in a way that respects its telos and complexity. One of the key components of ecological sensibility is a focus on larger systems, taking into account root causes and factors. However, Corbett mentions that it does not account for the potential constraints that could limit its widespread application, as the current institutions are not designed to accommodate these actions.
Deep Ecology
During the 1970s, deep ecology emerged as a response to the “shallow ecology” of conservationism and preservationism. As doubts about whether or not the mainstream environmental movement could transform the instrumental mindset of dominant American culture rose, deep ecology concentrated on dealing with the root causes of ecological degradation while also calling for a profound philosophical and religious restructuring of society. In addition to recognizing the intrinsic worth of all life, “self realization” is a key component of deep ecology. Corbett mentions that this ideology is well known and still present in prominent organizations, exemplified in advocacy group Earth First!. Critics of deep ecology question its focus on population control and its continued fixation on the individual without recognizing the role of identity and privilege in social systems.
Social Ecology
Social ecology includes the subcategory of Eco-Marxism, which centers on the role of capitalism in ecological deterioration and the inherent contradiction of ever increasing growth on a finite planet. The second subcategory of social ecology was proposed by Murray Bookchin and advocates for abolishing hierarchy in the social system so that the relationship between humans and the natural world naturally reflects this shift. This approach is criticized for not fully accounting for power dynamics.
Ecofeminism
Intersectionality plays a large role in ecofeminism, which asserts that any oppression experienced by humans within social systems is interconnected with the oppression of other species and the environment. According to Corbett, androcentrism (the practice of centering the male experience and viewpoint) is viewed as responsible for the exploitation and injustice experienced by marginalized groups and the natural world. In order to create change, society would have to address this foundational issue. Ecofeminism is sometimes accused of being reductionist, as it is unclear whether all forms of environmental exploitation can be directly linked to patriarchy.
Native American Ideologies
Corbett explains that while there are a variety of different Indigenous ideologies and worldviews, they share a common theme that the planet exists as a living entity and humans play an equal and reciprocal role in the web of relationships and systems that sustain it. Animals and other living and nonliving components of the world are treated with deep respect, and the land is often considered inextricable from self.
Eastern Traditions
Buddhism, Taoism, and Shintoism are three Eastern philosophies and religions that Corbett gives as examples of more ecocentric ideologies. The concepts of connectedness and continuity, emotional engagement, and interdependence are themes throughout all of them. Nature is seen as all-inclusive and deeply interconnected, and an intimate knowing and engagement with the natural world is encouraged and fostered. There is often no separation of self from the wider world, as all relationships are viewed as interdependent.
Where Do We Fit?
Although not everyone or every organization fits perfectly into one of these categories, developing a deeper understanding of the variety of approaches to environmental work can potentially improve communication and collaboration between different entities. It is worth noting that the concept of environmental justice is not included in Corbett’s analysis, which is what the NEC has chosen to focus on in recent years. Over the past 50 years, the NEC as an organization has embraced different frameworks and shifted along Corbett’s spectrum. For the NEC right now, concentrating on environmental justice means recognizing the intersectionality of all issues and addressing social inequality as an integral component of environmental advocacy work. Although this ideology is subject to change and shift over time, the NEC will strive to continue to prioritize the wellbeing of the earth and all its inhabitants as the organization evolves.