1A Realist Constructivist Answer Ayush

INTRODUCTION:
Sociology of the environment is a new field of sociology that has developed in

relation to people's growing concern about environmental issues. It has a dual focus.
On the one hand it deals with the ways in which people in society relate to the
natural world. On the other hand, it deals with 'environmentalism' as a social
movement
1. In the realist approach, the problems of the environment are quite real.
Inevitably, social scientists will follow the lead of the natural sciences in
identifying the problems. The task of sociology is to explain the social causes
of environmental problems. A second approach attacks realism and argues
that there is no one reality of environmental problems. People have their own
interpretations of the environment. This second perspective comes from a
sociological tradition which says that society is not a real thing - it is socially
constructed. This perspective is known as constructionism
1. The realist are divided among reformists and radicals on their disagreements
about the social causes of problems such as global warming. The reformists
see the problem as stemming from ignorance and old fashioned technologies.
The radicals think that basic aspects of current economic and social structure
make such environmental problems inevitable. Reformists believe that we
need to reform our economy and foster cultural change. Radicals believe
nothing sort of a fundamental or radical change in social structure will be
sufficient.
2. The reformist approach aims to make small reforms to the economic and
political structures of the current society to deal with environmental problems.
They do not aim to discard market economies. In the reformist model,
economic growth continues. Environmental damage is cut back. New
Environmental technology becomes the new growth industry. Governmental
interventions also induce changes. For example carbon tax on the use of
fossil fuels, Kyoto protocol etc.
3. The radical theorists maintain that a much more drastic change in society is
required to deal with global warming and other environmental problems. They
do not believe in the solutions offered by the reformist school. Critics of the
reformist approach think there are a number of problems with the economic
structure of capitalist societies. They do not believe that there can be growth
without environmental consequences. Radicals also do not believe that
environmental reforms will benefit the economy. You need to actually reduce
energy use drastically to avoid global warming. Radicals believe that the
reformists greatly underestimate the costs of environmental technologies.
1. The radicals offer alternatives for a sustainable society by suggesting a
different economic model by overthrowing the existiong one: In the mixed
economic model, the virtues of three different kinds of economic structures
are mixed in equal parts to create the ideal, economic and political climate for
a sustainable society. Capitalism in the private sector, Socialism in the public
sector and anarchism in a large community sector.
2. Within the constructionist approach, these kinds of discussion are considered
as "unsociological"
3. Basic position is that environmental problems are socially constructed as
problems; they are not simply revealed by science and then taken up by a
concerned public. According to the constructionists, what is real is being
defined by scientists. Sociologists are working according to an agenda set by
science with only a partial sociology of nature being possible. Environmental
concern for environmental problems is more to due to a feeling of great
personal insecurity. It is only partly about environmental damage. It is a
metaphor and conceals a project to restore collectivist and welfarist principles.
Realists begin by saying that global warming is a real problem and one we
should justifiably be worried about. For Franklin, it erupts out of people's
problems with job security and other social horrors.
Realists see global warming as a real environmental problem; something that is

going on because of the way society interacts with the environment.
In examining ways on how to tackle global warming, realists take their lead from
scientists that specify what kinds of social actions could lead to a reduction in
greenhouse gases.
Constructivists hold political and social structures responsible for climate change and analyse
its social and structural impact upon the institutions and masses . They argue that people’s
perceptions and social groups, the improvements in mitigation technology over time, and the
responsiveness of political institutions are key drivers of climate change, even more so than
individual actions.
Manual Castells talks about network society as a combination of economic

globa and IT to create a new kind of capitalist economy based on social
networks connected across the world by instant communication
He also distinguishes the spaces of flows from the spaces of places where the
space of flows dominates network soc
Social prod of wealth in risk soc is accompanied with Social prof of risks.
Beck sees these processes as having social dimensions
The risk of modernisation also strikes those who produce or profit from them,
the attempt to achieve wealth also destroys wealth of Raw Material
it breaks up social classes and national unity.
Identification of something as risk or Hazard is not totally a scientific
enterprise. It is a political project.
Castells sees environmentalism as a kind of resistance to the network society and

the apparatus of power associated with that. Beck looks at current. environmental
problems as aspects of risk society
1. Leahy concludes by stating that though Franklin claims that there are a lot of
philosophical differences between constructionism and realism, the two
approaches are actually not different from one another. They are different
takes on the realities of the connections between nature and people.
Evanoff outlines a constructivist approach to environmental ethics which attempts to
reconcile realism and constructionism. He argues that realism and constructionism are only
different ways of looking at a phenomenon. They cannot and do not exist independent of
one another.
2. Evanoff argues that though explanations of nature are culturally variable, these
explanations or constructions are also constrained by how things actually (really) are in the
social world. Social constructions are constrained by reality. In simpler words this means
that our ideas about nature/environment are shaped by the real world. At the same time
what is real is also being explained by means of evidences not borrowed from science alone.
3. Though there is no denying the fact that while both the physical and human attitudes
towards nature are in part socially constructed, even then nature retains a measure of
autonomy or wildness apart from human constructions
He thus proposes a dialectic position which sees humanity and nature as shaped and being
shaped by the other while each maintains some degree of autonomy.
While realists would tend to accept scientific explanations of a phenomenon,
constructionists would claim that scientific evidence is not enough; we need look into other
processes cultural, political and social that go into the making of a particular phenomenon.
This is so because science in itself is not absolute or real
The human body needs to eat. Realists would provide biological explanations for the food
items that we eat. Constructionists on the other hand would look at political, cultural and
social explanations to explain why we eat some kind of food more, how that food is produced
and distributed, the social circumstances in which it is consumed etc
Evanoff believes that what, how and why we eat certain kinds of food is part biological and
part construction. Our choice itself is constrained by reality indicating that realism and
constructionism are not stark contrasts. They overlap. Their points of emphases are
different. Neither realism nor constructionism denies the existence of any phenomenon.
In conclusion, we need to move beyond the realism and constructionism debate since they
are not either-or options rather reconciling both helps us to have a wider perspective of
environmental issues.
He then uses Vogel’s notion of nature as a social construct and offers counter arguments to
the same. Again, the objective is to substantiate his viewpoint that nothing in this world is
absolutely real just as nothing is totally constructed as constructions themselves are
dependent upon reality

1A Realist Constructivist Answer Ayush

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1A Realist Constructivist Answer Ayush

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1A Realist Constructivist Answer Ayush

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTRODUCTION:

Sociology of the environment is a new field of sociology that has developed in

Realists see global warming as a real environmental problem; something that is

Manual Castells talks about network society as a combination of economic

Castells sees environmentalism as a kind of resistance to the network society and

You might also like