ufz centre for environmental research leipzig-halle in the helmholtz association ecological...

UFZ Centre for Environmental ResearchLeipzig-Hallein the Helmholtz Association

Ecological Imperialism – a new level in the Domination of Nature

Postfordist Relationships with Nature and Adornos Theory of Non-Identity

Christoph Goerg, UFZ-Leipzig

Christoph Goerg CNS-Anniv.Conf. Toronto 2005

2UFZ Centre for Environmental ResearchLeipzig-Hallein the Helmholtz Association

Theses:

• There is a need for a broader understanding of the role of societal relationships with nature in history

critical theory of Theodor W. Adorno

• Recent forms of ecological imperialism are connected not only with growing global domination and violence, but also with technical, juridical and practical measures directed towards the domination of nature

postfordist relationships with nature



Ecological Imperialism

Empire/Imperialism requires rethinking of conventional environmental politics (regarding regime-formation/ cooperation)

– appropriation of natural resources for capitalist accumulation

– power relations: undermining traditional patterns of resource use

– global forms of domination, inscribed in International Institutions and Organizations (WTO, WB etc.)

– violence and war as a measure of domination and as a symptom of social crises

end of cooperative strategies?

linear tendency towards (self-)destruction?



Neo-Imperialism – an end to neoliberalism?

• Unilateralism and war – indicators for an end of multilateral, neoliberal Globalization?

1. Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) from the beginning shaped by the interests of dominant national states changing strategies of the US-Government

2. struggles about International Regulation between dominant states and at the same time a need for defending their common interest competition-cooperation paradox

3. Environmental action possible under capitalist conditions rethinking global institutional regulations rethinking the role of nature in history



Societal relationships with nature (1)

following Adorno:

• interconnections between society and nature are constitutive for each of them

• at the same time society and nature are non-identical with each other – dialectical relationships in a strict sense

• mediation between them through a historical process of the “dialectic of enlightenment” – growing domination of nature and its failure (for both: nature and society)

• does not mean: to get really control over nature

• subsumption under capitalist conditions (“Inwertsetzung” – valorization)



Societal relationships with nature (2)

recent experiences:• subsumption neglects the “non-identity of nature” – ecological risks,

costs, uncertainty, insecurity, etc. – modern version of the “revolt of nature” – “nature strikes back”

• preventive action to avoid/minimize risks and costs– trying to enhance control over nature in a reflexive way: respect

uncertainty to reinforce subsumption

“ecological modernization” as a new step in the “dialectic of enlightenment”

reflexive domination of nature in Postfordism



Postfordist relationships with natureContradictions and contestations:

Conflicts:• about the meaning of

ecological problems• about the shaping of livelihood

conditions and nutrients• at global, national and local

level

conflicts in shaping societal relationships with nature

Contradictions:• subsumption creates new

dependency• valorization and costs: not per

se rational (for capitalism)• control and risks: return of

“non-dominated” nature

growing uncertainty,

insecurity and dependency



Example: Genetic resources and the loss of Biodiversity

• inextricable mix of – global environmental problem – international distributional conflict about economic valuable resources – local livelihood conditions (regarding agriculture, health etc.)

• Convention on Biological Diversity: – not an efficient instrument for species protection/nature conservation – weak instrument, dominated by other agreements (i.p. WTO-TRIPS)

and strong national governments (USA)– neoliberal strategies inscribed – not only external clash with WTO-

TRIPS

insufficient action against the loss of BD reinforces valorization



Conflict structures in Biodiv Governance

north-south dimension(High-Tech- vs

Megadiv-countries)

national dimension(National Governments vs local

communities/Indigenous Peoples)

global-local dimension(global discourses vs localmanagement strategies)

Sectoral dimension(trade liberalisation, agriculture

and environmental issues)

stakeholders(business, environmental NGOs,

social movements etc)



Lessons from Biodiversity politics:

• Biodiversity/genetic resources subsumed under capitalist/neoliberal strategies (valorization)– not only an economical, but also a scientific and technical process

– ignores non-identity and therefore produces risk and destruction

• cooperative environmental politics important and functional for neoimperialism– Imperialist strategies not only exercised by means of violence and war,

but also through scientists, lawyers, NGOs and others

– contested: resistance on all levels - scientific struggles, alternative PR-interpretations, self-organization of weaker actors, etc.

new level in the subsumption = domination of nature



Conclusions:

• institutions matter – historical phases, no linear development

• no absolute power – conflicts and resistance inscribed in national states and international institutions

• not necessarily self-destructive – environmental action possible under capitalist/neo-imperialist conditions

• highly selective – subsumption of nature, neglecting non-identity and producing new risk/dangers

no hope regarding the acknowledgement of the “Non-Identity of Nature”

“dialectic of enlightenment” ongoing

ufz centre for environmental research leipzig-halle in the helmholtz association ecological...

Documents