Ecology and Community
Fritjof Capra
On a basic level I agree with Capra that through ecoliteracy we can gain insight into creating sustainable communities but this is far different then depending on the principles of ecology as the solution to creating sustainable communities. Of course I cannot disagree that recycling, networking, cooperation etc. are important elements of creating sustainable communities but Capra disregards the novelty of the current human systems and how they differ from other ecosystems. For one, with the advancement of technologies and the rapid pace of global networking there has been little opportunity in the past century for communities to reach “equilibrium.” In addition Capra discusses how network loops enable all communities to organize themselves and learn. In reality human communities are selective and manipulative learners. History has shown that cognitive processes allow for the justification of non-regulatory behaviors which are not in the best interest of the community as a whole. By stating that a community can become more sustainable by learning and self-regulating one is assuming that all members of that community will process “feedback information” the same way. In addition ecosystems function as a unit in nature which has natural laws which are not applicable to our current state of functioning. In essence I think that Capra makes valid connections between ecosystems and sustainable communities but at the same time I feel that failure to acknowledge the uniqueness and novelty of our current communities is a weakness.
1 comment:
LR>>
Valid points re: Capra.
One can read Capra literally and figuratively. I suggest a literal interpretation to capture a visual image of community as a complex system. I'd then switch to thinking by analogy. Can natural systems help us visualize and understand social systems? How might we use and apply terms/ concepts of natural systems (i.e., homeostasis, regulation, boundary, internal/external process, etc.) to help understand social systems.
Analogy is an important theoretical constuct used in policy analysis. It's the basis of Richard Neustadt's book, Thinking in Time, about using history as tool of analysis. Also, it's become fairly prominent in more recent intro books on policy theory and policymaking. Erik Bleich has an article in Comparative Political Studies (2002),
"Integrating ideas into policy-making analysis: frames and race policies in britain and france". Note discussion of 'frames' in last half of article and its use to help isolate key ideas about policy making. Bleich is using frame as heuristic in much same way Wilkinson uses social field.
Recall two important pieces of advice Shields offers about inquiry> One is the ability o suspend judgment for a bit. The other is becoming comfortable finding and using theory as a tool rather than a reflection of truth.
Can we use theory and conceptual frameworks to help us understand complex systems (community as complex social phenomenon)? Analogy is useful tool.
Post a Comment