Discovering the Environment by Albert Bergesen Department of Sociology University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85721 al bcrt(m,u.arizona .cdu and Laura Parisi Department of Political Science Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, VA 24061 lparisi (a),vt.cdu Cite: Bergesen, Albert and Laura Parisi. (1997). "Discovering the Environment." Journal of World-Systems R esearch (httv ://jwsr.ucr.edu / ) 3: 364 - 368. ,:cJ 1997 Albert Bergesen and Laura Parisi. [Page 364] Journal of World-Systems Research This special issue of JWSR present<; new research on the environment from a distinctly world-system perspective. World-system studies have recently discovered the environment. The turn toward the environment in any number of disciplin es has resulted in the greening of this and that area of stud y. Now it is world-s ystem studies turn. It is a little late; but better late than never. Actually, environmental and world-system studies have a great deal to offer each other. For environmental studies the focus upon the world economy as a whole makes a great deal of sense. Industrial plants in one country, or one region of the world may generate acid rain, but it can fall on other countries. The environment knows no politica l bor ders, hence a focus upon the world economy rather than the French, American or Brazilian economy, makes more sense. It is also the case that looking for systemic effects of differ ent types of economics and political sy stems on the environment should follow the general direction of political/economic theor y, which ha<; been ratcheting its level of analysis ever upward to include more and more parts of the world a<; componen ts of a singul ar world system. In effect, if we now believe that the most p rimal locus of economic and politi ca l process resides at the leve l of global interact ions then to study th e effect s of political/economic process es upon the environmen t means study ing the dynamics of the world-system. It is somewhat inevitable. Having said this, it is also clear that there is not an obvious link between the operati onal logic of the world system and subsequent environm ental degradation. This is probably a corollary to the fact that core countries have a disproportionat e amount o f th e world's surplus, in that they disproportionately use more resources, pollut e and emit more toxins, etc. However, that hypothe sis could be offered b y traditional societal level analysis : bigger, richer countries use and abuse more of the environment. Th e core -periphery aspect of world system theory might suggest that dependent developm ent also creates more environmental dcgradation--largc core based multinational s to extractin g resourc es and destroying the environment. The validity of that proposition awaits evaluati on by systematic data. World-system implications for environmentalism, then, can potentiall y take a numb er of forms. One is to repeat arguments linking forms of economic organization ( capitali sm degrades the environment , to take one) that have been argued to produc e environm ental degradation and ratchet those up to the global, or world systemic level of an alysis. It is the operational logic of the world economy, or the capitalist world economy, that devours resource s and degrades planet Earth. Second, the core -periph ery model may have implications for the differential environmental effects, althou gh the logic here may go in the opposite direction, as highly indu strialized core state s appear to emit the most tox ic materials and proportionally consum e most of the most natural resources. Ironi cally, th en, dependent development, to the extent that it means less industr ial develo pment and specializing in raw material production, may also mean less damage to natur e (th ou gh obvi ously min eral extraction or the destruction of forests hav e n egative effects) . Extr eme economi c backwardne ss may mean less environmen tal degradation , and lower standards of liv ing may also mean less raw material consumpti on. Herc the core-periph ery model would seem to have differential effects upon humans ve rsus the en vironm ent. Be ing in the core is good for humans--hi gh income, high con sump tion , high stand ards ofli v ing -- but ba d for nature, which pays th e pric e for these human advantages . Being in the periphery is bad for human s: low standards of livin g, low leve ls of consum ption--bu t this is good for the env ironment, as less is extract ed and used. [Page 365] Journa I of World-Sys tems Research Wh at this suggests is a poten tial oppo sition in term s of human vs . nature's b etterm ent. Betterin g the hum an condition , in tradition al terms means raising the stand ard s of living , but that comes at the expense of nature . Betterin g the conditi on of n ature means leaving it alon e, ackno wledging its right to live as wilderness untouch ed by human developm ent. Now this may b e a false oppos ition , and theori sts of "sustainable development" would suggest we can h ave our deve lopmen t/environmental p ie and eat it too. M ayb e. But the opposition of humans wanting more and nature want ing to b e left alon e may b e a confli ctual situation that cannot be massaged with ideas like sustainable deve lopment or the ideo logy that less is more. Maybe that 's true. Who knows? Bu t it would seem a difficult sell to the developing world , wh ich has yet to have had more and mu st now consider having less. People already at the poverty, if not starvation level, are hard to recruit to the campaign of having even less. This position may remain popular only in the developed world. If the human and nature projects arc in opposition reconciling them may be the biggest ta..,k facing both environmental and world-system theory . Less is mor e and sustainable development arc two solutions on the table. Whether they will turn out to be sustainable answers remains to be seen. This special issue of the Journal o.lWorld-Systems Research contains a variety of papers that deal with the interface of environmental and world-system studies. Some were presented at a recent PEWS session at the American Sociological Association's annual meetings and others were submitted to this special issue. The articles in this special issue share a common main point: thinking and theorizing about environmental or ecological issues is vital to our understanding of global change. The authors mak e this point through a variety of approaches, each of which is briefly discussed below. Bart ley and Bergesen provide a review of the small but growing literatur e surrounding the environment and world-systc1rn analysis. They analyze the literature in four topic area..,: environmental degradation, natural resources and developm ent, environmental constraints and social change, and regimes, movements, and world politics. Th e authors find that there arc some general conclusions one can draw from reviewing the literature on world-syst c1rn and the environment. For example, several studies indicat e that core countries experience less deforestation than scmipcriphcral countries. Ther e is also evidence that there may b e an "environmental Kuzn ets curve" in regards to greenhouse ga.., emissions and toxic emissions. The review of the literatur e suggest.., that natural resource strategics arc an important component of the ris e of peripheral countries to semipcriphcral status a.., well a.., achieving hegemonic status in the world system. Ind eed, severa l studies also indicat e the importanc e of ecological degradat ion in altering social structures in the world-system and the world-system itself. Finally, th e literature points to a growing awareness among the global community that global cooperation is vital to solving environmental problems. There ha.., been an incrca..,c in env ironmental treaties a.., well a.., environmental social movements. Interestingly enough however, participation in treaties and the location of these burgeoning social mov ement.., is affected by world- system position . Core countries tend to participate in environm ental treaties mor e frequently than non-cor e countries whereas semip cripheral and peripheral countries arc increa..,ingly the sites for n ew environmen tal social movem ents. [Page 366] Journa I o.l World-Systems Research Chew provide s a more theoretical overview and analysis of the relationship between th e world system and th e environment. He argues that world-system ana lysis would b e more accurate if ecologica l considerations arc included in theorizing because contemporary world-syst ems theory is too focu sed on the social or anthropoc entric dim ensions of global processes. In order to understand global change, we must introduce and incorporat e a ecological dimension (our relations with Nature) to the analysis. The end result would be a shift from humancentric approaches to understanding global dynamics to what he calls an ccoccntric one. This perspective entails understanding "the ecological relation ships between human and other living beings and natural processes a-; a basic dimension defining the trend-, and dynamics of the world-system" (p. 384) rather than viewing environmental phenomena a-; an outcome of system dynamics. He applies the ecocentric paradigm to several system phenomena, such a-; accumulation processes and cycles, core - periphery relations and hegemonic rivalry, and crises and world-views to reveal quite different explanations for global processes. For example, in his application of th e ecocentric paradigm to core-periphery relations, Chew concludes that continuous environmental degradation caused by core-sponsored development in the periphery ha-; a long-term effect on the future relocation of production. The application of an ecoccntric world-system theory can help us pursue ecological integrity and justic e that a humancentric one cannot. Cha-;c-Dunn and Hall also argue that examining ecological processe s is necessa ry to our understanding of world-system change/evo lution. Focusing on factors such as population pressure and ecological depletion, the authors develop a conceptual model for comparing world-systems. They find that different types of world-systems (e.g. simple to complex) face the same environmental concerns and challenges and that eco logical conc erns arc a major impetus behind the development of social structures. However, the consequenc es of environmental degradation vary over tim e and space. For example, the authors contend that since the modern world system is global, the "possibiliti es of escape from ecolog ical ruin arc greatly reduced" (p. 419). Earlier system configurations were more able to deal with environmental degradation and population pressure because they "could expand spatially in order to resolve internal contradictions" (p. 419). Hence, the contemporary world system, despite technological advances, is less able to resolve problems of environmental degradation due to its sheer size, precluding any spatial expansion . Although the authors arc pessimistic about the ability of capitalism and the mod ern world system to effect ively solve the problems that ecological depletion produces, th ey offer some potential futur e scenarios that may help us achieve sustainabl e development. [Page 367] Journal of World-Systems Researc h Some world-systems scho lars approach environmental problem-s olving through the use of quantitative studies . For instance, Burns , ct al., argue that there is a lack of quantitativ e, cross-national research that examine s the effects of social proc esses on env ironmental outcomes. Their study on the social antecedents of greenh ouse ga-; emissions (C02 and CH4) attempts to fill this void. Furth ermor e the study is ground ed in a world-system-; perspective a-; they theo rize that the "social dynamic s ofleading to C02, CH4 and to en vironment al degradation generally, may operate quite differently across structural pos itions in the world system" (p. 435). In order to test this theory, they test the effects of social dyn amics, operationa lized a-; level of economic dcvclopm e nt (GNP), energy consumption, agricultural activity (total cattle population), and the amount of forested area in 1991, relative to 1960, of the core, semi-core, scmipcriphcry, and periphery on two dependent variables: C02 emissions from industrial sources and CH4, or methane, emissions, since both types of emissions contribute to the greenhouse effect. Their main findings arc that C02 emissions arc most closely related to the core position in the world-system whcrca~ CH4 emissions arc most closely related with the semi-core position. However, the social dynamics that arc a~sociatcd with the type and amount of emissions arc quite different in the core and semi-core. In the core, C02 emissions arc mediated by energy consumption, while in the semi-core, CH4 emissions arc mediated by agricultural activity and shifting patterns of industrialization. All of the articles in this special issue of Journal of World-Systems Research argue that the time for world-systems research to "discover" the environment is here and indeed imperative if we arc to understand, and possibly influence, global change. W c hope that these articles will help provide a theoretical and empirical blueprint for more "green" world-systems analyses. [Page 368] Journa I of World-Systems Research