Ecological Feminism and Ecosystem Ecology1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Hypatia, Inc. Ecological Feminism and Ecosystem Ecology Author(s): Karen J. Warren and Jim Cheney Source: Hypatia, Vol. 6, No. 1, Ecological Feminism (Spring, 1991), pp. 179-197 Published by: Wiley on behalf of Hypatia, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3810040 Accessed: 30-09-2015 22:24 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Hypatia, Inc. and Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hypatia. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 131.156.157.78 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:24:03 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions EcologicalFeminism and EcosystemEcology1 KARENJ. WARRENand JIMCHENEY Ecologicalfeminism is a feminismwhich attempts to unite the demandsof the women'smovement with those of theecological movement. Ecofeminists often appeal to "ecology"in supportof theirclaims, particularly claims about the importanceof feminismto environmentalism.What is missingfrom the literature is any sustained attemptto showrespects in whichecological feminism and thescience of ecologyare engagedin complementary,mutually supportive projects. In thispaper we attempt to do that by showingten importantsimilarities which establish the needfor and benefitsof on-goingdialogue between ecofeminists and ecosystemecologists. Ecologicalfeminism is a feminismwhich attemptsto unite the demandsof the women's movement with those of the ecological movement in order to bring about a world and worldviewthat are not based on socioeconomic and conceptualstructures of domination.Many ecological feministshave claimed that what is needed is a feminism that is ecological and an ecology that is feminist (see King 1983, 1989). They have shown ways in which ecology, understoodin its broadestsense as environmentalism,is a feministissue.2 What has yet to be shown is that ecology, understoodin its narrowersense as "the science of ecology" (or, scientific ecology) also is or might be a feminist issue. Establishingthat claim involves showingthat ecological feminismmakes good scientific ecological sense.3 In this paper we discuss ten noteworthy similaritiesbetween themes in ecological feminism and ecosystem ecology-similarities that show the two are engaged in complementary,mutually supportive projects. Our goal is modest and suggestive.We are not arguingfor the strongerclaims that ecosys- tem (or, more generally,scientific) ecology must be feminist, that feminists must be ecologists, or that these similaritiesestablish that ecosystemecology is feminist. To establish these claims, much more would be needed than is providedin this paper.4Rather, we are identifyingtheoretical points of inter- Hypatiavol. 6, no. 1 (Spring1991) ? byKaren J. Warren and Jim Cheney This content downloaded from 131.156.157.78 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:24:03 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 180 Hypatia section between ecofeminismand ecosystemecology in the interestof further- ing discussionon the nature and direction of futurebridge-building between the two.5 ECOLOGICALFEMINISM AND ECOFEMINISTETHICS We take ecological feminism to refer "to a sensibility,an intimation, that feministconcerns run parallelto, are boundup with, or, perhaps,are one with concern for a naturalworld which has been subjectedto much the same abuse and ambivalent behavior as have women" (Cheney 1987, 115). Although there area varietyofecofeminist positions (Warren1987), the common thread that runs through ecofeminist scholarshipis that the domination of women and the domination of nature are "intimately connected and mutually reinforcing"(King 1989, 18). All ecofeminists endorse the view that an adequateunderstanding of the nature of the connections between the twin dominations of women and nature requiresa feminist theory and practice informedby an ecological perspectiveand an environmentalisminformed by a feminist perspective(Warren 1987, 4-5). Much of ecofeminist scholarshipconcerns the ethical nature of human relationshipsto the nonhuman naturalworld. Like feminist ethics generally, "ecofeministethics" includes a varietyof positions. What makes ecofeminist ethics feminist is a twofoldcommitment to critiquemale bias in ethics and to develop analyseswhich are not male-biased(see Jaggar1990, 23). However, ecofeministethics extends feministethical critiquesof sexismand other social "ismsof domination"to include critiquesof "naturism,"i.e., the unjustified dominationof nonhumananimals and nature by humans.As such, ecofeminist ethics critiquesnot only androcentricbut also anthrocentricand naturistbias in ethics. Ecofeministethics is groundedin the assumptionthat the domina- tions of women and of natureare morallywrong and ought to be eliminated. Likefeminist ethics (seeJaggar 1990, 24-5), the practicalimport of ecofeminist ethics is as a guide to action on issuesin the pre-feminist,patriarchal present. This guidance is aimed at assistingpersons in resisting sexist, naturist, and interconnectedracist, classist,heterosexist practices, and in envisioning and creating morally desirable alternatives. The women-initiated non-violent Chipko movement begun in 1974 in Reni, Indiais one such alternativeaction (see Shiva 1988 and Warren1988). One wayto imageecofeminist ethics is as a quilt-in-the-making(see Warren 1988, 1990). Like the AIDS Names Project Quilt, ecofeminist ethics is a quilt-in-process,constructed from "patches" contributed by personslocated in different socioeconomic, cultural, historical circumstances. Since these patches will reflect the historiesof the variousquilters, no two patches will be just the same. Nonetheless, the quilts-in-processwill each have bordersthat not only delimit the spatiotemporaldimensions of the quilt, but also put some This content downloaded from 131.156.157.78 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:24:03 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions KarenJ. Warrenand Jim Cheney 181 necessaryconditions, "boundaryconditions," on what can become partof the quilt. What these boundaryconditions do not do is delimit the interiorof the quilt, what the design or actual pattern of the quilt will be. That design will emerge out of the life experiences, ethical concerns, and specific socio- economic historicalcontexts of the quilters(see Warren1990). What are some of the boundaryconditions of ecofeministethics? Just what does, and what does not, belong on the quilt?Since ecofeminismis a critique of interrelatedsocial systems of domination, no "isms of domination" (for example,sexism, racism, classism, heterosexism, naturism) belong on the quilt (Warren 1990). This means that any conceptual framework(or, set of basic beliefs, values, attitudes,and assumptionswhich growout of and reflect one's view of oneself and one'sworld) which sanctions,justifies, or perpetuatesthese "ismsof domination"- oppressiveand patriarchalconceptual frameworks- does not belong on the quilt. What does belong on the quilt are those descriptionsand presciptionsof social realitythat do not maintain,perpetuate, or attemptto justifysocial "ismsof domination"and the power-overrelation- ships used to keep them intact. These will include patches that make visible and challenge local and global formsof environmentalabuse, the dispropor- tional effects of environmental pollution on women, children, the poor, dislocated indigenous persons, and peoples in so-called less developed countries; patches that provide present-dayalternatives to environmental exploitation; patches that document and celebrate the morally respectful dimensions of women'sexperiences with the nonhuman world;and patches that include the experiencesof indigenouspeople, when those experiencesare neither sexist nor naturist.Taken together, the patches on the quilt provide the ethical theorist with concrete, pictoralways of understandingthe nature of a morality which treats both women's moral experiences and human interactionswith the nonhumannatural world respectfully. ECOSYSTEMECOLOGY Many controversies in modern ecosystem ecology about the nature of ecosystemscan be understoodas argumentsbetween two approachesto the studyof ecosystems:the "population-community"approach and the "process- functional"approach.6 The population-communityapproach focuses on the growth of populations, the structure and composition of communities of organisms,and the interactionsamong individual organisms. It is groundedin Darwiniantheory of naturalselection. It "tendsto view ecosystemsas networks of interacting populations whereby the biota are the ecosystem and abiotic components such as soil or sedimentsare external influences"(O'Neill et al. 1986, 8). The population-communityapproach typically is identifiedwith the workof such ecologists as Clemens, Lotka,Gauss, and Whittaker. This content downloaded from 131.156.157.78 on Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:24:03 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 182 Hypatia In contrast, the process-functionalapproach is based on a quantitative, mathematical,thermodynamic, biophysical model which emphasizesenergy flowsand nutrientcycling. It assumesthat the fundamentalunits of ecosystems include both organismsand physical components,