What is Deep Ecology?
Deep ecology is an environmental philosophy and movement. It says nature is not just a store of resources for people. Every living thing, and the ecosystems they form, has its own worth. From this, deep ecologists conclude that humans must cut back their impact, accept smaller economies, and sometimes reduce their numbers. They contrast their view with what they call shallow ecology, which fights pollution mainly to protect human health and wealth. Many of its supporters also see a spiritual side: a sense of belonging to the wider living world.
Core beliefs
- Human and non-human life both have value in themselves.
- The richness and variety of life is valuable in its own right.
- Humans have no right to reduce that variety except to meet vital needs.
- Human numbers and impact are now too large and must fall.
- Economic, technical and political structures need deep change, not just repairs.
- A better life means higher quality of living, not a higher standard of consumption.
History
The Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess coined the term in a 1973 paper. He drew on Spinoza, Gandhi and the ecology of Rachel Carson. In 1984 Naess and the American George Sessions drafted an eight point platform for the movement. Bill Devall and Sessions published the book Deep Ecology in 1985, which spread the ideas in the United States. Earlier writers such as John Muir and Aldo Leopold, with his land ethic, are often seen as forerunners. In 1980 the group Earth First! formed, using direct action to defend wild places. Its tactics later divided the movement.
Variants
Some deep ecologists are spiritual and draw on Buddhism, Native traditions or pagan ideas. Others are mainly philosophers who work on ethics. Bioregionalists want people to live within the limits of a local region. Radical activists in Earth First! used blockades and tree sitting, and a small number sabotaged equipment. Social ecologists, led by Murray Bookchin, criticised deep ecology and argued that environmental problems come from human hierarchy and capitalism, not from humans as such.
Criticisms
Critics say deep ecology puts nature ahead of the poor. Writers from the global south argued that it suited wealthy countries that wanted wilderness while overlooking the needs of rural people. Social ecologists and ecofeminists say it blames all humans equally, rather than the powerful. Some critics find talk of lowering population cold and open to abuse, though Naess did not support coercion. Others say the claim that nature has value apart from human views is hard to prove.
In practice
Deep ecology shaped wilderness protection, ideas about rights for nature, and parts of the modern green movement. Legal moves to give rivers and forests legal standing owe something to it. Few governments follow it fully. On the 12 axes it scores strongly toward Caution on Technology and toward Local on Structure. It also scores toward Planned on Markets, and toward Cooperation on Foreign policy, since it treats environmental problems as shared across borders.