As defined by Joan Martinez-Alier (2002), “political ecology is the study of ecological distribution conflicts, meaning conflicts over access to, and control over, natural resources, particularly as a source of livelihoods, including the costs of environmental destruction.”
“Peace—- understood as a set of economic, cultural, and ecological processes that bring about a measure of justice and balance to natural and social orders—is the deepest meaning of the ecology of difference that aims toward a plurality of knowledges and worlds” (Escobar 2006).
Escobar, A. (2006). Difference and conflict in the struggle over natural resources: A political ecology framework. Development, 49(3), 6-13. doi:10.1057/palgrave.development.1100267
- Escobar argues that it is useful to think about environmental issues under three interconnected categories: economic, ecological, and cultural, because most conflicts over natural resources involve all three simultaneously. Furthermore, globalization has not led to a “flattening of differences,” homogeneity has occurred through dominant cultural forms seen today, but differences are still apparent. A question that is becoming more relevant in the context of globalization, culture, and development is how to achieve equality while still respecting differences. Escobar notes the tendency of elite, rich groups to control the world’s access to resources increases the more diversity is affirmed especially within subordinate groups that constitute the world’s majority. While economic distribution conflicts have been studied in relation to social power, the economical dimension ignores the ecological and cultural influences of distribution and equality in general. This is important to think critically about, as there are values of nature that cannot be assessed by market prices, for example when communities consider nature as sacred and uncommodifiable. Furthermore, unequal economic distribution ignores cultural processes at the base of a human’s relationship to the natural world. Many communities signify their natural environment, then utilizing it, which differs greatly from the capitalist ideas of seeing nature as a resource external to humans in which can be utilized in any way they see fit. Escobar argues for a new way of thinking about the relationship between difference and equality of access across ecological, economic, and cultural distribution conflicts, as the standard neoliberal doctrine cannot accommodate these demands. In closing, Escobar calls for an understanding of equal distribution as the search for a “shared sense of peace and justice.” In my opinion, the article really emphasizes the need for balance among the three categories of economic, ecological, and cultural, stressing the importance of each concept within natural resource issues, a “plurality of knowledge.”
*See abstract filing cabinet for more information