Advertisement

Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 362–367 | Cite as

Environmental engagement in troubled times: a manifesto

  • James D. Proctor
  • Jennifer Bernstein
  • Philip Brick
  • Emma Brush
  • Susan Caplow
  • Kenneth Foster
Article

Abstract

These are troubled times: our scholarly efforts in environmental studies and sciences seem under assault on all fronts. Yet we argue not just for environmental action, but for greater emphasis on environmental engagement as a foundation for effective action. The etymology of engagement suggests connection, commitment, and communication—a risky yet indispensable ingredient of effective action. We exemplify this approach to environmental engagement in four contexts of increasing scope: within our environmental studies and sciences community, across the college campus, among our fellow Americans, and at the global scale. In all such contexts, engagement is no end-run around conflict; it is political just like any form of action. Yet by engaging, we can be the environmental leadership that is so plainly missing and desperately needed to produce meaningful change.

Keywords

Engagement Activism Politics Environmental studies and sciences Higher education United States Globalism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We wish to honor input and inspiration provided by our colleagues as part of ongoing face to face and digital conversations on engagement, and via a set of environmental engagement workshops and presentation panels held at the Association for Environmental Studies & Sciences Annual Conference, June 2017, University of Arizona. We also appreciate the helpful comments of two anonymous reviewers.

References

  1. Arendt H (1970) On violence. Harcourt, Brace & World, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck U (2006) Cosmopolitan vision. Polity, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck U (2010) Climate for change, or how to create a green modernity? Theor Cult Soc 27:254–266.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409358729 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brick PD, Snow D, van de Wetering S (2001) Across the great divide: explorations in collaborative conservation and the American West. Island Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  5. Brooks D (2018) Respect first, then gun control. The New York TimesGoogle Scholar
  6. Chaloupka, W (2002) The tragedy of the ethical commons: demoralizing environmentalism. In: Bennett J, Shapiro MJ The politics of moralizing. Taylor and Francis, New York, pp 113–140Google Scholar
  7. Chapman RL (2007) How to think about environmental studies. J Philos Educ 41:59–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charnley S, Sheridan T, Nabhan G (eds) (2014) Stitching the West back together: conservation of working landscapes. Univ. of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark SG, Rutherford MB, Auer MR, Cherney DN, Wallace RL, Mattson DJ, Clark DA, Foote L, Krogman N, Wilshusen P, Steelman T (2011a) College and university environmental programs as a policy problem (part 2): strategies for improvement. Environ Manag 47:716–726.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-9635-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark SG, Rutherford MB, Auer MR, Cherney DN, Wallace RL, Mattson DJ, Clark DA, Foote L, Krogman N, Wilshusen P, Steelman T (2011b) College and university environmental programs as a policy problem (part 1): integrating knowledge, education, and action for a better world? Environ Manag 47:701–715.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-9619-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cooke SJ, Vermaire JC (2015) Environmental studies and environmental science today: inevitable mission creep and integration in action-oriented transdisciplinary areas of inquiry, training and practice. J Environ Stud Sci 5:70–78.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0220-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cruz S (2017) The relationships of political ideology and party affiliation with environmental concern: a meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 53:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foa RS, Mounk Y (2016) The democratic disconnect. J Democr 27:5–17.  https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heise UK (2008) Sense of place and sense of planet. Oxford UP, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kahan D (2014) Climate-science communication and the measurement problem. Advances in. Polit Psychol 36:1–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kennedy EB, Ho J (2015) Discursive diversity in introductory environmental studies. J Environ Stud Sci 5:200–206.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0245-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Latour B (2004) Whose cosmos, which cosmopolitics? Common Knowl 10:450–462.  https://doi.org/10.1215/0961754X-10-3-450 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Latour B (2015) Waiting for Gaia. Composing the common world through art and politics. In: Yaneva A, Zaera-Polo A (eds) What is Cosmopolitical design? Ashgate, Farnham, pp 21–33Google Scholar
  19. Lovell J (2014) The tale of two schools. New York Times Magazine. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/05/04/magazine/tale-of-two-schools.html. Accessed 30 Oct 2017
  20. Maniates MF (2013) Teaching for turbulence. In: State of the world 2013. Springer, pp 255–268Google Scholar
  21. Maniates MF, Whissel JC (2000) Environmental studies: the sky is not falling. Bioscience 50:509–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moeller, E (2017) New dialogue: campus conservatives address climate change. The Concordian. http://theconcordian.org/2017/04/20/new-dialogue-campus-conservatives-address-climate-change. Accessed on 26 Nov 2017
  23. Nisbet MC (2014) Disruptive ideas: public intellectuals and their arguments for action on climate change. WIREs Clim Chang 5:809–823.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. OED Online (2017) Engagement, n. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/62197?redirectedFrom=engagement. accessed 2 Dec, 2017
  25. Partzsch L (2017) ‘Power with’ and ‘power to’ in environmental politics and the transition to sustainability. Environ Polit 26:193–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Proctor JD (2015a) Replacing nature in environmental studies and sciences. J Environ Stud Sci 6:748–752.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0259-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Proctor JD (2015b) Theory in, theory out: NCSE and the ESS curriculum. J Environ Stud Sci 5:218–223.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0237-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Proctor JD (2017) Ecotypes: creative tensions in environmental ideas. Association for Environmental Studies and Sciences Annual Meeting, Tuscon AZ 24 JuneGoogle Scholar
  29. Proctor JD, Clark SG, Smith KK, Wallace RL (2013) A manifesto for theory in environmental studies and sciences. J Environ Stud Sci 3:331–337.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-013-0122-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Proctor JD, Bernstein J, Wallace RL (2015) Introduction: unsettling the ESS curriculum. J Environ Stud Sci 5:195–199.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0253-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Robbins P, Moore SA (2015) Teaching through objects: grounding environmental studies in things. J Environ Stud Sci 5:231–236.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0242-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rodrik D (2017) Populism and the economics of globalization. NBER Working Paper No. 23559.  https://doi.org/10.3386/w23559
  33. Romero A, Silveri P (2006) Not all are created equal: an analysis of the environmental programs/departments in US academic institutions from 1900 until May 2005. Journal of Integr Biol 1:1–15Google Scholar
  34. Sheridan TE, Sayre NF, Seibert D (2014) Beyond “stakeholders”: and the zero-sum game. In: Charnley S, Sheridan T, Nabhan G (eds) Stitching the West back together: conservation of working landscapes. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 53–75Google Scholar
  35. Singer P (1972) Famine, affluence, and morality. Philos Public Aff 1:229–243Google Scholar
  36. Singer P (2002) One world. Yale UP, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  37. Soulé ME, Press D (1998) What is environmental studies? Bioscience 48:397–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stengers I (2010) Cosmopolitics. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  39. Stengers I (2011) Cosmopolitics II. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  40. Stephens B (2018) Free speech and the necessity of discomfort. The New York TimesGoogle Scholar
  41. Villotti L, Brethauer WK (2013) Predicting the future? Public Roads 77Google Scholar
  42. Vincent S, Focht W (2010) In search of common ground: exploring identity and core competencies for interdisciplinary environmental programs. Environ Pract 12:76–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vincent S, Roberts JT, Mulkey S (2015) Interdisciplinary environmental and sustainability education: islands of progress in a sea of dysfunction. J Environ Stud Sci 6:1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0279-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weber EP (2003) Bringing society back in: grassroots ecosystem management, accountability, and sustainable communities. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  45. Weinberg, Adam (2017) Promoting civic agency and free speech on college campuses. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/civic-agency-and-free-speech-on-college-campuses_us_58a4ad3be4b080bf74f0439e. Accessed 26 Nov 2017

Copyright information

© AESS 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • James D. Proctor
    • 1
  • Jennifer Bernstein
    • 2
  • Philip Brick
    • 3
  • Emma Brush
    • 4
  • Susan Caplow
    • 5
  • Kenneth Foster
    • 6
  1. 1.Environmental Studies ProgramLewis & Clark CollegePortlandUSA
  2. 2.Spatial Sciences InstituteUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Environmental Studies Department, Politics DepartmentWhitman CollegeWalla WallaUSA
  4. 4.The Breakthrough InstituteOaklandUSA
  5. 5.Department of Behavioral and Social SciencesUniversity of MontevalloMontevalloUSA
  6. 6.Department of Political ScienceConcordia CollegeMoorheadUSA

Personalised recommendations