Sociologia dell’ambiente: un profilo genealogico

Titolo Rivista SOCIOLOGIA URBANA E RURALE
Autori/Curatori Luigi Pellizzoni
Anno di pubblicazione 2018 Fascicolo 2018/115
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 16 P. 85-100 Dimensione file 178 KB
DOI 10.3280/SUR2018-115008
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Environmental sociology was born forty years ago as a result of emergent ecological concerns. After the New Ecological Paradigm and the first eco-Marxist analyses the interest prevailed in the "social construction of environmental problems". Subsequently the perspective of practices has gained salience. "New materialism" has seen the discipline active especially in regard to new mobilizations. In the meantime the framework has changed, with the rise of neoliberalism and global environmental change. A reading of Sociologia Urbana e Rurale confirms substantive interests and evolutionary lines of the discipline. Today one has to tackle the ambiguous challenge of the Anthropocene and the resurgence in new forms of old cleavages.

Parole chiave:New Ecological Paradigm, eco-Marxism, co-production, neoliberalism, Anthropocene, new materialism

  1. Arias-Maldonado M. (2013). Rethinking sustainability in the Anthropocene. Environmental Politics, 22(3): 428-446. DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2013.76516
  2. Asafu-Adjaye J., Blomqvist L., Brand S. et al. (2015). An Ecomodernist Manifesto. Disponibile al sito: http://www.ecomodernism.org/manifesto [accesso 30 Marzo 2016].
  3. Beck U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
  4. Castree N., Adams W., Barry J. et al. (2014). Changing the intellectual climate. Nature Climate Change, 4: 763-768.
  5. Catton W., Dunlap R. (1978). Environmental sociology: a new paradigm. American Sociologist, 13(1): 41-49.
  6. Clark N., Yusoff K. (2017). Geosocial formations and the Anthropocene. Theory, Culture & Society, 34(2–3): 3–23. DOI: 10.1177/026327641668894
  7. Coole D., Frost S. (eds). (2010). New Materialisms. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
  8. Crutzen P., Schwägerl C. (2011). Living in the Anthropocene: Towards a new global ethos. Yale Environment, 360. Disponibile al sito: http://e360.yale.edu/feature/living_in_the_anthropocene_toward_a_new_global_ethos/2363 [accesso 15 Dicembre 2017].
  9. Devall B., Sessions G. (1985). Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered. Salt Lake City, UT: Peregrine Smith.
  10. Douglas M., Wildavsky A. (1982). Risk and Culture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  11. Duncan O. (1964). Social organization and the ecosystem. In Robert F. (ed.). Handbook of Modern Sociology. New York: Rand McNally, 36-82.
  12. Dunlap R, Catton W. (1979). Environmental sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 5: 243-273.
  13. Escobar A. (2010). Postconstructivist political ecologies. In Redclift M., Woodgate G. (eds.). The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology. Second Edition. Cheltenham: Elgar, 91-105. DOI: 10.4337/9781849805520.0001
  14. Fischer-Kowalski M. (1997). Society’s metabolism: On the childhood and adolescence of a rising conceptual star. In Redclift M., Woodgate G. (eds.). The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology. Second Edition. Cheltenham: Elgar, 119-137. DOI: 10.4337/9781843768593.0001
  15. Foster J.B. (2000). Marx’s Ecology. Materialism and Nature. New York: Monthly Review Press.
  16. Geels F., Kern F., Fuchs G. et al. (2016). The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: a reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014). Research Policy, 45: 896-916.
  17. Goldman M., Schurman R. (2000). Closing the “Great Divide”: new social theory on society and nature. Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 563-84.
  18. Hajer M. (1997). The Politics of Environmental Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  19. Hannigan, J. (1995). Environmental Sociology. London: Routledge.
  20. Jacques P., Dunlap R., Freeman M. (2008). The organisation of denial: conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism. Environmental Politics, 17(3): 349-385. DOI: 10.1080/0964401080205557
  21. Jasanoff S. (1999). STS and public policy: getting beyond deconstruction. Science Technology & Society, 4(1): 59-72. DOI: 10.1177/09717218990040010
  22. Jasanoff S. (2004).The idiom of co-production. In Jasanoff S., ed., States of Knowledge. The Co-Production of Science and Social Order. London: Routledge, 1-12.
  23. Latour B. (2005). Reassembling the Social. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J., Behrens W.W. (1972). The Limits to Growth. New York: New American Library.
  25. Minervini D. (2013). Governance in a bottle. In Zapata M.J., Hall C.M. (eds.). Organising Waste in The City. International Perspectives on Narratives and Practices. Bristol: Policy Press, 99-120.
  26. Mol A.P.J. (1997). Ecological modernization: industrial transformations and environmental reform. In Redclift M., Woodgate G. (eds.). The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology. Second Edition. Cheltenham: Elgar, 138-149. DOI: 10.4337/9781843768593.0001
  27. Moore J. (2011). Transcending the metabolic rift: a theory of crises in the capitalist world ecology. Journal of Peasant Studies, 38(1): 1-46. DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2010.53857
  28. Mythen G. (2007). Reappraising the risk society thesis: telescopic sight or myopic vision? Current Sociology, 55(6): 793-813.
  29. O’Connor J. (1973). The Fiscal Crisis of the State. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
  30. Pellizzoni L. (2013). Une idée sur le déclin? Evaluer la nouvelle critique de la délibération publique. Participations, 3(2): 87-118.
  31. Pellizzoni, L. (2016) Ontological Politics in a Disposable World: The New Mastery of Nature. London: Routledge.
  32. Puig de la Bellacasa M. (2011). Matters of care in technoscience: assembling neglected things. Social Studies of Science, 41(1): 85-106. DOI: 10.1177/030631271038030
  33. Rosa E., Machlis G., Keating K. (1988). Energy and society. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 149-172.
  34. Schlosberg D., Coles R. (2016). The new environmentalism of everyday life: sustainability, material flows and movements. Contemporary Political Theory, 15(2): 160-181.
  35. Schmidt A. (1971). The Concept of Nature in Marx. London: Verso.
  36. Schnaiberg A. (1975). Social syntheses of the societal-environmental dialectic: the role of distributional impacts. Social Science Quarterly, 56: 5-20.
  37. Schnaiberg A. (1980). The Environment: From Surplus to Scarcity. New York: Oxford University Press.
  38. Shove E., Watson M., Spurling N. (2015). Conceptualising connections: energy demand, infrastructures and social practices. European Journal of Social Theory, 18(3): 274-287. DOI: 10.1177/136843101557996
  39. Struffi L. (2001). Lezioni di sociologia dell’ambiente. Trento: Università degli Studi di Trento.
  40. Thacker E. (2007). The Global Genome. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  41. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987). Our Common Future, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  42. Williams R. (1980). Ideas of nature. In Id. Problems in Materialism and Culture. London: Verso, 67-85.

  • Quantitative Sustainability Giovanni Carrosio, pp.139 (ISBN:978-3-031-39310-5)

Luigi Pellizzoni, Sociologia dell’ambiente: un profilo genealogico in "SOCIOLOGIA URBANA E RURALE" 115/2018, pp 85-100, DOI: 10.3280/SUR2018-115008