Environmental Management: Principles and practice

BOX 8.3 Concepts dealing with human-environment relations which
might have discouraged social scientists from taking an interest in
environmental management
Environmental determinism
From the 1870s a number of environmental determinists argued the human-
nature relationship was such that physical factors (like climate) influence, even
substantially control, behaviour and thus society and development. For the last
half-century these views have attracted condemnation. Some, like Pepper
(1984:111–112), recognize ‘crude’ and ‘scientific’ environmental determinists.
Crude environmental determinism, and associated concepts, like comparative
advantage, were expressed by intellectuals like Richter, Kant, Ritter, Ratzel,
Semple (1911) and List. Scientific environmental determinists like Ellsworth
Huntington (1915) were a little more objective (Simmons, 1989:3).
There can be no doubt that human fortunes often reflect natural events.
However, much of what has been written by environmental determinists ignores
that humans can make different choices under similar environmental conditions,
and often modify the environment. Nevertheless, environmental determinism is
not dead and debate about its value continues, especially among social scientists,
geneticists and psychologists concerned with inheritance of traits, deviant behaviour
and upbringing, culture and anthropology (Milton, 1993; 1996). Supporters of the
Gaia hypothesis could be said to accept a type of neo-determinism, and the
interpretations of human development history put forward by Diamond (1997) are
distinctly deterministic (Stout, 1992; Frenkel, 1994; Mannion, 1996).
Social Darwinism
Closely allied to environmental determinism is the concept of social Darwinism. At
its core was the idea that humans are fundamentally controlled by nature —
competition and struggle, rather than co-operation and mutual aid, were seen as
natural and justifiable ways to behave, and the group best able to adapt to environment
would become dominant (Pepper, 1984:134; Chappell, 1993). By the 1920s eugenics
was supported by many as a way of improving a particular human group’s genetics
and thus their long-term survival and achievements. Eugenicists encouraged the
breeding of ‘desirable’ people and suppressed ‘undesirables’ —the approach was
embraced in Nazi Germany. By the 1950s it was accepted in most quarters that
social and economic development could overcome environmental factors and
determine evolution, so social Darwinism fell out of fashion.
Environmental possibilism
A concept put forward by Vidal de la Blanche, and later by Febvre (1924)
— environmental possibilism—holds that the environment constrains human
continued . . . 

---

CHAPTER EIGHT
164
endeavour and sets limits, but that choices between courses of action for man
are possible within those limits; the same environmental opportunities may be
used differently by the various cultures.