Abstract
Environmental studies and sciences (ESS), an inherently practical field, nonetheless demands greater attention to its theoretical assumptions as a necessary step toward continued intellectual and pedagogical development and real-world relevance. This need for theory arises from the status of ESS as an integrative interdiscipline—one practitioners of ESS celebrate, yet with considerably greater challenges in achieving inclusivity and coherence than other interdisciplinary fields face. Three examples are briefly raised here: the definition of environment in ESS, how environmental actors are conceptualized, and the identity of ESS as a problem-oriented field. These three examples are initial priorities requiring better theorization, with many intellectual resources ESS can draw upon to address them. We close by reminding the reader that theories are ideas that take us places, not just idle speculation, and by advocating “theory across the (ESS) curriculum.” In addition to the three examples we cover, we invite the reader to join us in identifying and evaluating other current theoretical assumptions in ESS, in reframing ESS on more robust theoretical grounds, and in integrating this work into the curriculum.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
AESS Newsletter 1(1), Summer 2008, p. 2 (author unattributed).
References
Benda LE, Poff NL, Tague C, Palmer MA, Pizzuto J, Cooper S, Stanley E, Moglen G (2002) How to avoid train wrecks when using science in environmental problem solving. BioScience 52(12):1127–1136
Berry W (2000) Life is a miracle: an essay against modern superstition. Counterpoint, Washington, D.C
Brewer G (1999) Challenges of interdisciplinarity. Policy Sciences 32:327–337
Clark SG (2011) The policy process: a practical guide for natural resource professionals. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT
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 1): integrating knowledge, education, and action for a better world? Environ Manag 47:701–715
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 2): strategies for improvement. Environ Manag 47:716–726
Commoner B (1971) The closing circle: nature, man, and technology, 1st edn. Alfred A, Knopf, New York
Crutzen PJ, Stoermer EF (2000) The ‘Anthropocene’. IGBP Global Change Newsletter 41:17–18
Dovers, S. (2005) Clarifying the imperative of integration research for sustainable environmental management. Journal of Research Practice 1(2): Article M2
Dror Y (1970) Prolegomena to policy sciences. Policy Sciences 1:135–150
Foster J (1999) What price interdisciplinarity? Crossing the curriculum in environmental higher education. J Geogr High Educ 23(3):358–366
Glacken CJ (1967) Traces on the Rhodian shore: nature and culture in Western thought from ancient times to the end of the eighteenth century. University of California Press, Berkeley
Gross PR, Levitt N (1994) Higher superstition: the academic left and its quarrels with science. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Haraway D (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Fem Stud 14:575–599
Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248
Hayles NK (1995) Searching for common ground. In: Soulé ME, Lease G (eds) Reinventing nature? Responses to postmodern deconstruction. Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp 47–63
Ingold T (1993) Globes and spheres: the topology of environmentalism. In: Milton K (ed) Environmentalism: the view from anthropology. Routledge, London, pp 31–42
Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York
King PM (2009) Principles of development and developmental change underlying theories of cognitive and moral development. J Coll Student Dev 50(6):597–620
Lasswell HD (1971) From fragmentation to configuration. Policy Sciences 2:45–68
Lasswell HD, McDougal MS (1992) Jurisprudence for a free society. New Haven Press, New Haven
Latour B (2005) Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Lorimer J (2012) Multinatural geographies for the Anthropocene. Prog Hum Geogr. doi:10.1177/0309132511435352
Lubchenco J (1998) Entering the century of the environment: a new social contract for science. Science 279:491–497
March JG (1994) A primer on decision making: how decisions happen. The Free Press, New York
Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons. Cambridge University Press, New York
Ostrom E (2011) Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal 39:7–27
Pickett STA, Burch WR Jr, Grove JM (1999) Interdisciplinary research: maintaining the constructive impulse in a culture of criticism. Ecosystems 2:302–307
Proctor JD (1998) The social construction of nature: relativist accusations, pragmatist and critical realist responses. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 88(3):352–376
Proctor JD (2009) Environment after nature: time for a new vision. In: Proctor JD (ed) Envisioning nature, science, and religion. Templeton Foundation Press, West Conshohocken, pp 293–311
Proctor JD (2013) Saving nature in the Anthropocene. J Environ Stud Sci 3:83–92. doi:10.1007/s13412-013-0108-1
Rowe J (2008) The parallel economy of the commons. In: Gardner G, Prue T (eds) State of the world. Worldwatch Institute, Washington DC, pp 138–150
Russell DR (2002) Writing in the academic disciplines: a curricular history. SIU Press, Carbondale
Shellenberger M, Nordhaus T (eds) (2012) Love your monsters: postenvironmentalism and the Anthropocene. Kindle edition
Simon H (1957) Models of man, social and rational: mathematical essays on rational human behavior in a social setting. Wiley, New York
Taylor P (1986) Respect for nature. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Thomas WL (ed) (1956) Man’s role in changing the face of the earth. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Trompf GW (2011) The classification of the sciences and the quest for interdisciplinarity: a brief history of ideas from ancient philosophy to contemporary environmental science. Environ Conserv 38:113–126. doi:10.1017/ S0376892911000245
Turner BL II, Clark WC, Kates RW, Richards JF, Mathews JT, Meyer WB (eds) (1990) The Earth as transformed by human action: global and regional changes in the biosphere over the past 300 years. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Vincent S, Focht W (2011) Interdisciplinary environmental education: elements of field identity and curriculum design. J Environ Stud Sci 1:14–35. doi:10.1007/s13412-011-0007-2
Weinberg S (2001) Facing up: science and its cultural adversaries. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Wilson EO (1998) Consilience: the unity of knowledge. Alfred A. Knopf, New York
Zalasiewicz J, Williams M, Steffen W, Crutzen PJ (2010) The new world of the Anthropocene. Environ Sci Technol 44(7):2228–2231
Acknowledgments
This paper emerged from a session titled “Theory for our Environmental Future” held at the Association for Environmental Studies and Sciences 2012 Annual Meeting in Santa Clara University, June 22. We appreciate feedback on our presentations by session participants, as well as comments on earlier drafts of this paper by anonymous reviewers. We also acknowledge related conversations with many of our colleagues, for whom we appreciate their genuine collegiality and scholarship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This article is submitted for consideration to Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Proctor, J.D., Clark, S.G., Smith, K.K. et al. A manifesto for theory in environmental studies and sciences. J Environ Stud Sci 3, 331–337 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-013-0122-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-013-0122-3