Is there a coherent green political ideology?

“We shall only survive if we equip ourselves to live differently than we have up till now.” - Rudolf Bahro

Where the twentieth century came to be dominated by concerns regarding nuclear disaster, this century may well be concerned by the logical extension of the previous fear, that of environmental damage and catastrophe. A "green" ideology has developed alongside these fears which seeks solutions to, and a socio-political understanding of, these problems.(1) These global dangers form the underlying motive which drives the green ideology, so in this way any genuine concern with environmental change or disaster is green. However, understanding and evaluating green ideology is problematic because it does not seems to be entirely coherent; it has no central cannon, no founding theorist, no single movement, no simple explanation.

This is because the green movement is widespread and found throughout all levels of the social strata, within different cultures and across the spectrum of political positions. Two other major problems are that some of the ideological tenets are dependant on controversial theories and data found in various sciences and that the ideological genealogy is complex and vast, rooted in many diverse and unrelated historical movements including the seventeenth century English Diggers, the Frankfurt School (especially Marcuse), American Indian religions and feminism. To make matters simpler than this vast global and historical picture, I will have to concentrate on green ideology within the West, and mainly the UK within the twentieth century and recent years.

In attempting to find some ideological coherence among green movements it will be best to examine the major theories and practices within these movements, and contrast and evaluate their place in a possible green ideological cannon on the basis of their integrity, authenticity, usefulness and inter-relation with each other, whilst touching upon some fringe theories and practices as a counter-weight to emphasise the marginalised elements of the movement. However, before green ideology is discussed, clarity as to what "ideology" means is required, so that a worthwhile understanding of green ideology might take place. The word "ideology" has been used in many ways: to characterise ideas, ideals, beliefs, passions, values, world-views, religions, political philosophies and morality. This wide variety of senses can be applied to the green movements, as can those defined by thinkers like Mannheim, Marx and Talcott Parsons. However the definitions of such thinkers are ideological themselves, expressing the problem of the essentially contested concept.

A definition has to be seriously considered of course, but this will be a filter through which the whole question will be addressed and will provide a very different conclusion than were another definition to be chosen instead. As a heuristic device I prefer Peter Railton’s understanding of it. He claims that "perhaps the most important usage in contemporary politics and philosophy is narrow and normative, ideology is a collection of beliefs and values held by an individual or group for other than purely epistemic reasons." Two elements are involved here. The first is as a "style of explanation in which prevalence of certain beliefs and values is attributed to a non-epistemic role that they serve for those that hold them"; this could be for the satisfaction of interests or ensuring social stability or gaining legitimacy for example. The second element is as a "style of criticism in which beliefs and values are called into question precisely by giving this sort of interest-based or social-symbolic explanation of their prevalence".(2) Understood in this way, "ideology" provides the lens necessary to view the green style of explanation and criticism and attempt a conclusion.

Considering the current election campaign, it would be pertinent to examine the ideology of the Green Party in depth, in addition to the fact that as the parliamentary political wing of the green movement, the Party’s ideology is important because of its social exposure and the potential it has to make cultural and political changes from Westminster and local councils. Understanding a central green movement in this way will allow comparisons to be made with other greens. The Green Party’s "statement of core values" is especially useful to consider because they contain most of the major themes found throughout the green movements.(3) The basis of these core values is justice, a notion upon which the Greens are building their electoral campaign. Initially, I would suggest justice is the basis of all green ideology, thus providing a basic coherence.

The core values begin with the idea that "humankind is especially responsible for the care of the planet, holding it in trust for all other living things and for future generations." This expresses the idea of stewardship, which can be interpreted in various ways. It can be seen as one of two positions described by Garner as "moral orthodoxy" or "radical challenge to moral orthodoxy".(4) Our stewardship is expressed either in our moral obligations, whatever these maybe, to animals (and presumably the rest of nature by extension), born from humanities moral superiority (in the first position), or expressed in our protection of animals (and nature’s) moral worth, perhaps even to the point where we defend their rights (in the second position). Another interpretation of stewardship can be drawn from biblical exegesis and the passage in Genesis in which humanity were told "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth", though this could also be interpreted as humanities ownership and domination over the earth.(5)

However, this Christian notion of stewardship (which is much closer to the first position Garner illustrated than the second) is a popular one in Western cultural tradition and not specific to just Green ideology. Furthermore, though Christian stewards have some notion of intergenerational justice, it mainly concerns past generations, as expressed by the continuation of Christian tradition.(6) Future intergenerational justice is not as important a consideration in their feudal ontology, instead it seems to be a specifically Green idea, expressed well by Brian Barry‘s remark that "those alive at any time are custodians rather than owners of the planet, and ought to pass it on in at least no worse shape than they found it in."(7) This is integral to the movements ideology as a whole because without concern for the future and future generations, past and present environmental problems are less urgent and less important and our current exploitative attitudes and practices can continue unabated because the consequences (especially "sleepers" and those other effects which are very long-term) become insignificant.

The above idea of intergenerational justice (especially to the future) is closely tied to the idea of sustainability and the limits to growth idea as found in the core value: "no activities which may cause irreversible damage to our environment or planet should be undertaken."(8) Sustainability is part of the implementation of the intergenerational justice theory and thus necessary to Green ideology.

Sustainability is a complex notion, having six core ideas which involve: environmental-economic integration, futurity (where the ties to intergenerational justice and limits to growth are the most explicit in these), environmental protection (which can be carried to violent or ideological extremes by animal rights groups and ecocentric groups), equity, quality of life and participation (these three tie sustainability to issues of social justice discussed below).(9) The notion and practice of sustainability encourages the preservation or conservation (an important distinction which expresses the interests of, and how long-term a view is taken by, a group employing this notion) of natural capital and a demand for structural change in economic and industrial practices as a means to this end.

However, sustainability is problematic and cannot be accepted as a wholly Green practice because there is political argument over how it should be implemented. This has lead to sustainability as both a practice and, more typically, as a notion being appropriated by non-green groups and used for their own ends, typically to justify or obfuscate their practices behind the mask of environmental care. One popular weak-sustainability theory amongst these non-green (and even some green groups) in the theory of ecological modernisation, which seems to be born from "environmental-economic integration", the first of the core sustainability ideas above. Ecological modernisation "suggests that economic and environmental goals can be integrated within the framework of an advanced industrial economy."(10) Ecological modernisation might be less sinister than imagined though, perhaps it is providing a reformist (rather than revolutionary) step in the Green direction.

This has lead to notions of green capitalism which is a distinct ideology from Green ideology. This is because the green critiques of progress, industrialism, urbanisation and capitalism are rejected by the former, instead these concepts are valourised. These critiques threaten ecological modernisation with the charge of delusion; though these green capitalist reformists may think they can sustain the capitalist machine and the environment, the argument that natural capital can be exchanged for artificial capital suggests that it is not the integration of capitalism with nature that is taking place, but the replacement and re-construction of nature that is occurring, based on the assumption that natural capital is analogous in value to artificial capital.

Another facet to the notion of sustainability, and Green ideology as a whole, is social justice. Murray Bookchin elucidates why this is the case through his theory of social ecology. Bookchin notes that "nearly all ecological problems are social problems" and that society and nature are intimately bound, mainly because society is an evolutionary development from nature, it is "second nature." Bookchin emphasises this point by criticising the false dualistic antagonisms constructed by other theorists, dualisms like "society and nature", which are patently absurd in the light of the evolutionary development Bookchin discusses.(11) Domination is the reason for these dualisms and it is the basic problem because "in order to harness the natural world, it has been argued for ages, it is necessary to harness human beings as well, in the form of slaves, serfs, and workers."(12) This inequality prevents humanity from working synchronically with nature and within itself and is thus the cause of our environmental and social problems.(13) This notion of social justice is found amongst the Green Party’s core values as "Basic human needs should be met first: food, shelter, clothing, health and education for all the world's peoples."(14) This could be called intra-generational justice, which is necessarily connected to intergenerational justice.

There must be some axiological basis for an ideology of justice, and Greens are not exempt from this requirement. This basis is centred around the debate as to who exactly deserves these forms of justice, as defined by their belonging or not to our moral community. The dialogue between the work of Golding, Callahan and Barry provide the basic debate about moral community.(15) Though some philosophically interesting points are raised by Golding, only Callahan and Barry can be considered to contribute to and express Green ideology. Barry because his concern is with intergenerational justice and the asymmetry of power and knowledge between us now and our descendants later; that is, he is concerned with our domination of them.(16) Callahan because his conception of community involves everyone "otherwise the ground is set for hazardous exclusions",(17) which ties in with the core value of holism expressed in the Green Party’s core value that "our policies must reflect the interdependence of all living things and the interconnectedness of all political and social activity."(18)

This holism is concerned with all of the world, throughout time (but especially now and the future), and all that live on it. As a result, Green ideology must consider the whole globe its moral community and support, or remain tolerant at least, of multiculturalism and minority groups and new social movements, many of which are subject to oppression or exploitation.

Though this global scale may seem unrealistic or grandiose, it is the only sure way that exploitation can be avoided and nature protected, mainly because environmental degradation is everyone’s concern, as nature does not recognise our artificial boundaries, nor does it operate in a compartmentalised manner; this is why Ulrich Beck’s risk theory is also an invaluable Green ideological tool.(19) Furthermore, Andrew Dobson has pointed out that our knowledge of nature is derived from examining the whole of the natural system through examining the interaction of parts and in doing so Greens have drawn upon holistic modern physics.(20)

Ironically this makes use of a science which in some ways has brought us to this dangerous time, so now the problem is becoming part of the solution, despite the green critique of technicism. In this light, people are regarded as being an interacting part within the global whole. This has lead certain biocentric greens (Earth First! and deep ecologists) to theorise total equality (biospherical egalitarianism) between natural parts (people, other animals, plants, rocks). But this has proven to be objectionable on the grounds that clashes between parts exist and cannot be resolved on these grounds.(21) Nevertheless, holism seems to be a widely shared concept across the movements.

The above Green Party core values illustrate clearly that justice is the central tenet of Green ideology, Green justice being a triune of inter-species justice, intergenerational justice and intra-generational justice. Even fringe ideologies seem based on similar notions of justice, but emphasis is placed on a different area of justice. For example Earth First!’s form of justice is ecocentric and based mainly on interspecies justice. The core values that follow are drawn from the Green critiques of progress, industrialism, urbanisation and capitalism. These are employed in a wide variety of ways by most of the green movement and as a result, this does not allow for an final definition of green ideology except understood simply as a basic style of critique with concerns in justice. Because these processes have been criticised by other ideological camps, greens have drawn upon these disparate cannons for the own uses, whilst maintaining the basic Green ideology of justice.

Perhaps one of the most striking critiques that can be made of the capitalist system is "we should work for world peace rather than prepare for war." Pacifism is closely associated with Green ideology, though the activities of some small animal rights groups and other, higher profile groups like Earth First!, employ violence as a means to a green end. However, small scale violence is not akin to international war and this value could be interpreted as a desire to dismantle the capitalist war machine which supports and is supported by nationalistic and xenophobic ideologies that are at odds with Green holism, rather than decrying small scale resistance in the aid of beings that are almost powerless against humanity. Defending the defenceless, defending beings that are viciously exploited and destroyed, must be part of Green ideology if greens wish to ensure a holistic and compassionate approach. The disgusting and bloody work of the UK government in its slaughtering of animals during the foot and mouth problem is a gore covered monument to this cultures extreme anthropocentric values which must be challenged, with violence if necessary, as those very values which are supporting the destruction of the environment and of human and animal minds and bodies.

As a major Green ideological factor, pacifism is related to the issues of justice above and to the following Green Party statement: "The values of caring, cooperation, nurturing and sharing must be encouraged to replace the values of competitiveness, domination and aggression which have characterised our society for so long." The influence of feminism in Green ideology is here the most overt and necessary in its support of pacifism and its emphasis on the former, traditionally "feminine" traits against the patriarchal war-ist state and the latter, supposedly "masculine" traits that empowers it. Feminism is closely related to Green ideology in other ways too. The ideology of anti-hierarchy is found in biospherical egalitarianism and in feminism.(22) The ideology of anti-dualism is found in social ecology and feminism.(23)

Eco-feminism understands the relationship between the oppression of women, of nature and of new social movements like homosexual groups as being based on "otherness". This otherness is the difference between the white patriarchal heterosexual male and everyone/thing else. These oppositions are the patriarchal justification for war, oppression and exploitation and these differences must be either dissolved (as in androgyne theories),(24) completely separated (as in separatist theories)(25) or understood as complementary and celebrated so as to prevent this continued damage (as in theories of difference).(26) However, feminism is a broad school of thought difficult to make too many generalisations about, in the same way that green ideology is broad; both share some of the same positions and both are eclectic in their use of other ideologies.

This ideological eclecticism from the political spectrum is shown in the following core values: "Laws must be agreed which protect the planet, which increase rather than diminish individual freedoms, rights and choices, and which, when necessary, mediate between peoples where those freedoms and rights conflict" and "Increased personal freedoms and rights must be balanced by increased personal responsibility." A unique blend of liberalism and conservatism are found in this statement. Liberalism is expressed in the concern with freedoms, choices and rights (and indeed this is to be extended to animals and the future-born in inter-species and intergenerational justice).(27) Conservatism is expressed in the desire for state and legal mediation between these liberal concerns, and the emphasis on duty and responsibility.

However, this latter influence is slight, typically conservative emphasis on rights and responsibilities pertain to private property and social tradition. In the light of previous and following core values right-wing ideologies can be seen to have small influence. As an example of greater left-wing influence, socialist ideology is clearly expressed in the value that "Economic activity and work should be personally fulfilling and geared to the needs of all the world's peoples, not just the wants of a few" and Communism in the notion that "All land belongs to the community occupying it, never to individuals." Indeed left wing ideology is among the other core values that talk of "basic human needs" and disappointingly, in the presumption made in the Greens "Philosophical Basis" that "People have a natural desire to make a contribution to the common good."(28) From such diverse influences, a coherent Green ideology is difficult to theorise.

Finally, another important ideological resources upon which the Greens have drawn is anarchism, expressed as "Progress should be measured in terms of quality of life for all the world's peoples: personal freedom, human fulfillment (sic) and spiritual growth rather than centralised power, uniformity and material wealth." These elements are the most puzzling within Green ideology, but are nonetheless widespread though out the movement. The anarchic factor inspires the Green support for decentralisation and is shared by many other green groups, including deep-ecologists and bioregionalists and encourages the well-known ideologies and practices of self-sufficiency, even survivalism.(29)

Though it is useful to contain a critique of scientism, postivism and technicist hopes that "progress" will save us if only we wait, it has been recognised that some centralisation will be necessary to deal with large-scale global problems if ever the decentralist dream is to come true. However, the decentralist dream would require vast physical changes in the urban landscape which may not only result in more pollution due to this process, but is likely to be hugely expensive and long-term in its work (cities torn down to as to be rebuilt as collections of small villages, roads ripped up and transport infrastructures demolished to discourage violating the bioregions, people re-housed and moved in vast numbers, re-educated so as to survive rurally, the face of the global economy radically altered and so on).

I do not think how such a change would occur has even be thought through, unless some very slow and very long term reform is hoped for, (or slate-wiping disaster!?). It seems that it may not be a matter of decentralising though, but stopping centralisation instead (hence the Green Party policy of rejecting the Euro, European army and WTO). The emphasis above on the need for spirituality growth also seems odd, as do green ideas seeking a new spirituality.(30)

Though this is understandable as a critique of the environmental consequences of Christianity, it smacks of neo-paganism. These kind of nature religions seem to be popular of late and are found throughout (and without) the green movement. Paganism (a poor term for a vast number of pre-Christian, non-Greco-Roman religions) has its ideological problems and may not lend itself to green ideology in its original forms, its influence seems ambivalent but might nevertheless provide more coherence. The rise of Earth Mother worship may inspire a new sense of respect for women and nature and undo some of the damage patriarchal religion has inflicted, or it could bind women closer to the essentialist and biologist concepts that oppress them. The rise of pantheism and panentheism in particular supports the value of holism and could inspire a new respect for animals and nature or it could lead to misunderstandings and a tension between the urban lifestyle of its practitioners and their utopian desires to be at one with a personified (and hence fundamentally misunderstood) nature.

Green eclecticism and core values may have resulted in a new kind of ideology with its core being "the belief that our ethical relations with non-human nature and the finite character of resources need to be central in political reflections".(31) These ethical relations take the form of the triune justice described above.

Though Dobson claims that "political prescriptions (of Green ideology) are fundamentally left-liberal",(32) if this is true, it does not deny there is a Green ideology, just that this ideology is not as expansively embracing of elements across the political spectrum as some theorists might think. If it is not a synthesis of the political wings, then Green ideology is at least an overview of the spectrum, and in this way provides a critique of the whole system because, like feminism, it does not sit comfortably in any place and is in some senses outside this system as well as within it.(33)

However, Dobson considers it necessary to differentiate between ideologies with an environmentalist aspect where "conservation, pollution control, waste re-cycling etc. can be slotted with relative ease into more well-known ideological paradigms"(34) and ecology which corresponds to the notion of "a coherent green ideology". For Dobson, ecology is a separate ideology on the left-wing, some ideas of which have been appropriated by the other ideologies resulting in environmentalism. Ecology is an ideology in its own right because is has "a description of the political and social world... a programme for political change and... a picture of the kind of society that ecologists think we ought to inhabit..."

These criteria for ideology are similar to those suggested by Railton above, and are generally accepted as definitive, thus providing us with a convincing statement of a coherent green ideology which can be considered to be competing within the political spectrum and, as a whole, impossible to appropriate.(35)

The wide diversity of thought green ideology presents are mainly based on the noted core values of the Green Party, but offer a great deal of variety of perspective beyond this also. This is part of its weakness and leads to the problem of coherence. It is also a strength, allowing many different possible solutions and explanations. This very range itself seems to be part of the Green core values, the value of diversity (which can be read as concerning humans as well as the rest of nature) and holism. Furthermore, the diversity of theory can result in the diversity of practice. As Ryle argues: "A society adapted to ecological constraints... could take widely varying forms."(36)

This appears to offer a choice between political systems as diverse as anarchy to deliberative democracy to authoritarianism. Green theorists like William Ophuls or eco-feminists like Bella Abzug have considered an authoritarian regime or coercive measures (like supporting Chinese population control policies in Abzug’s case) as a means to Green ends.(37) However, though some coercive measures can be justified, authoritarian groups lacks legitimacy in democratic societies and authoritarian practices can result in the kind of domination that results in lack of diversity in thought and practice and the marginalisation of groups that Green ideology is opposed to.

The final core value that appears to be at the basis of Green ideology and which provides it with further coherence across the movement is the emphasis on change in lifestyle and a re-valuation of values. This is implicit in all of the core values discussed and best summed up by Rudolf Bahro as "We shall only survive if we equip ourselves to live differently than we have up till now."(38) Re-valuation is the task that thinkers like Nietzsche, Foucault and some radical feminists have set themselves, which involves cultural critique and an axiological, anti-nihilist attempt to ground an ethics (for example, in Nietzsche’s case his grounding might have been life-affirmation).

Tentatively, I'd like to suggest that several more core values present in the (rather plastic) Green ideology identified, that originate from this re-valuing technique and provide some rigidity to green ideology. Importantly for issues of natural capital and sustainability, the value of nature is related to the aesthetic value of art, both ease the pain of life via aesthetic contemplation (this is a strong anthropocentric value and one of Nietzsche’s arguments). The valuing of sentience in non-human life and the understanding that other living organisms feel pain is the basis of inter-species justice (this is perhaps a weak anthropocentric value but probably an ecocentric value).

Finally, much of Green ideology seems to be underpinned by the necessity of conservation and preservation of environmental resources for our sake (a strong anthropocentric value) and its own sake, based on its intrinsic value (this is an ecocentric value). Though this latter value is philosophically problematic, a value system could be built on this basis where faith or the acceptance of absurdity or uncertainty are the tools with which the philosophical problems of intrinsic value are overcome, perhaps forming the basis of the new spirituality some greens seek.

  • (1) A note on semantics: I use "Green" to mean the Green Party and "green" to refer to the green movements.
  • (2) Peter Railton in - The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, p392
  • (3) The Green Party’s core values can be found on http://www.greenparty.org.uk/
  • (4) R. Garner - Environmental Politics, p51
  • (5) Genesis, 1:28. A similar sentiment can be found in the Qur-An: "(Allah) has made the earth your couch, And the heavens your canopy; and sent down rains from the heavens; And brought forth therewith Fruits for your sustenance... It is He Who hath created for you all things that are on earth..." (Al-Baqarah 22 and 29).
  • (6) As a note of caution, it is difficult to make generalisations about a vast and varied system of belief like Christianity.
  • (7) B. Barry, "Justice between generations: power and knowledge" in Smith (ed) - Thinking Through the Environment, p88
  • (8) It is also found in the values: "In a world of finite resources uncontrolled economic growth cannot continue indefinitely." And "A society which is dependent upon finite natural resources is unsustainable."
  • (9) The six core ideas of sustainability are found in M. Jacobs - Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept, p26-27
  • (10) A. Gouldson and J. Murphy - "Ecological Modernisation: Restructuring Industrial Economies," in Jacobs, M. (ed) Greening the Millenium, p74
  • (11) M. Bookchin - "Society and Ecology," p417 - p419 in Dryzek and Schlosberg - Debating the Earth.
  • (12) M. Bookchin - ibid, p424
  • (13) M. Bookchin - ibid, p423
  • (14) The need for social justice is further emphasised by: "The equal rights of all people should be protected, irrespective of nation, colour, sex, sexuality, age, physical or mental ability." And "As valuable resources become scarce competition for those resources grows: competition which often leads to aggression, conflict and even war."
  • (15) This debate is found in Smith (ed) - Thinking Through the Environment
  • (16) B. Barry, "Justice between generations: power and knowledge" in Smith (ed) - Thinking Through the Environment.
  • (17) D. Callahan - "What obligations do we have to the future?" in Smith (ed) - Thinking Through the Environment, p73
  • (18) The Green Party’s policy concerning asylum seekers, for example, expresses the courage of their convictions.
  • (19) See U. Beck, World Risk Society.
  • (20) A. Dobson - Green Political Thought, p38
  • (21) A. Dobson - Green Political Thought, p43
  • (22) For example, M. A. Warren’s "The Power and Promise of Ecological Feminism" in H. LaFollette (ed) Ethics in Practice.
  • (23) For example, Y. King’s "Toward an Ecological Feminism and a Feminist Ecology" in Dryzek and Schlosberg (eds.) - Debating the Earth.
  • (24) For example, A. Dworkin’s early writings and in de Beauvoir to some degree.
  • (25) For example, A. Dworkin’s recent writings, or M. Daly’s writings.
  • (26) A. Phillip’s writings and post-modern and queer theories for example.
  • (27) L. Martell - Ecology and Society, p141
  • (28) http://www.greenparty.org.uk/policy/mfss/pbasis.html. Italics are mine.
  • (29) J. Connelly and G. Smith - Politics and the Environment p50 and see A. Naess The Shallow and the Deep, Long-range Ecology Movement. A Summary.
  • (30) For example: "The malaise that afflicts our land and our people is political, economic and spiritual." from Philosophical Basis. Or "The new culture will once more have a spiritual dimension" from R. Bahro - "Basic Positions of the Greens: for an Ecological Answer to an Economic Crisis" in Dryzek and Schlosberg (eds.) - Debating the Earth.
  • (31) J. Connelly and G. Smith - Politics and the Environment, p54
  • (32) L. Martell - Ecology and Society, p159
  • (33) J. Connelly and G. Smith - Politics and the Environment, p55
  • (34) A. Dobson - Green Political Thought, p202
  • (35) A. Dobson - Green Political Thought, p201-202
  • (36) L. Martell - Ecology and Society, p159
  • (37) See J. Connelly and G. Smith - Politics and the Environment, p45 and L. Martell - Ecology and Society, p142-148 and A. Dobson - Green Political Thought, p114-124 for more examples and discussion on authoritarianism, coercive measures and democracy.
  • (38) R. Bahro - "Basic Positions of the Greens: for an Ecological Answer to an Economic Crisis" in Dryzek and Schlosberg - Debating the Earth, p458

Bibliography

Bahro, R - Basic Positions of the Greens: for an Ecological Answer to an Economic Crisis in Dryzek and Schlosberg - Debating the Earth (Oxford University Press 1998)

Barry, B - Justice between generations: power and knowledge, in Smith - Thinking Through the Environment (Routledge 1999)

Beck, U - World Risk Society, (Polity 2000)

Bookchin, M - Society and Ecology, in Dryzek and Schlosberg - Debating the Earth, (Oxford University Press 1998)

Bullock, A and Trombley, s. (eds.) - The Dictionary of Modern Thought, (HarperCollins Publishers 1999)

Callahan, D - What obligations do we have to the future? in Smith - Thinking Through the Environment (Routledge 1999)

Connelly, J and Smith, G - Politics and the Environment, (Routledge 1999)

Dobson, A - Green Political Thought, (Routledge 2000)

Garner, R - Environmental Politics (MacMillan Press Ltd 2000)

The Green Party - Philosophical Basis

The Green Party - Statement of Core Values

Gouldson, A and Murphy, J - Ecological Modernisation: Restructuring Industrial Economies (1997)

Honderich, T. - The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, (Oxford University Press 1995)

Jacobs, M - Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept, (1999)

King, Y. - Toward an Ecological Feminism and a Feminist Ecology in Dryzek and Schlosberg - Debating the Earth, (Oxford University Press 1998)

Martell, L. - Ecology and Society, (Polity 1994)

Naess, A. - The Shallow and the Deep, Long-range Ecology Movement. A Summary.

Warren, M. A. - The Power and Promise of Ecological Feminism in H. LaFollette - Ethics in Practice (Blackwell 1997)

 My Writings:

Other:

Links:

Please consider making a small donation to keep this site ad-free.