{"title":"Planetary boundaries, societal boundaries, and collective self-limitation: moving beyond the post-Marxist comfort zone","authors":"Ingolfur Blühdorn","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2022.2099124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Issues of boundaries, limits, and restriction have shifted, once again, into the center of eco-political debates. An article recently published in this journal by Ulrich Brand and colleagues made the case that supposedly objective planetary boundaries, as specified by Earth-system scientists, always remain contingent on social norms. Hence, the debate on planetary boundaries needs to be supplemented, they argue, by a debate on societal boundaries. Addressing the critical social sciences, in particular, they seek to open a dialogue on collectively defined self-limitation, which they regard as a promising means for setting such boundaries. This article aims to contribute to, and help shape, this dialogue. Taking the intervention by Brand and his co-authors as a prompt, and focusing on so-called advanced modern societies in the Global North, this article flags up important parameters that condition the success or failure of any attempt at collective self-limitation. Calling to mind the dual commitment of eco-critical social science not only to transforming contemporary society but, no less importantly, to providing a nuanced diagnosis and analysis of its present condition, the article calls on critical social science to move beyond the established claims, hopes, and beliefs of post-Marxist analysis, conceptualized here as the post-Marxist comfort zone. In particular, the article draws attention to the dilemma that the logic and dynamic of emancipation, which (eco-)critical social theorists and sociologists commonly present as the centerpiece of their transformative agenda, can itself negatively impact the prospects for collective self-limitation.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2022.2099124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Abstract Issues of boundaries, limits, and restriction have shifted, once again, into the center of eco-political debates. An article recently published in this journal by Ulrich Brand and colleagues made the case that supposedly objective planetary boundaries, as specified by Earth-system scientists, always remain contingent on social norms. Hence, the debate on planetary boundaries needs to be supplemented, they argue, by a debate on societal boundaries. Addressing the critical social sciences, in particular, they seek to open a dialogue on collectively defined self-limitation, which they regard as a promising means for setting such boundaries. This article aims to contribute to, and help shape, this dialogue. Taking the intervention by Brand and his co-authors as a prompt, and focusing on so-called advanced modern societies in the Global North, this article flags up important parameters that condition the success or failure of any attempt at collective self-limitation. Calling to mind the dual commitment of eco-critical social science not only to transforming contemporary society but, no less importantly, to providing a nuanced diagnosis and analysis of its present condition, the article calls on critical social science to move beyond the established claims, hopes, and beliefs of post-Marxist analysis, conceptualized here as the post-Marxist comfort zone. In particular, the article draws attention to the dilemma that the logic and dynamic of emancipation, which (eco-)critical social theorists and sociologists commonly present as the centerpiece of their transformative agenda, can itself negatively impact the prospects for collective self-limitation.
期刊介绍:
Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy is a refereed, open-access journal which recognizes that climate change and other socio-environmental challenges require significant transformation of existing systems of consumption and production. Complex and diverse arrays of societal factors and institutions will in coming decades need to reconfigure agro-food systems, implement renewable energy sources, and reinvent housing, modes of mobility, and lifestyles for the current century and beyond. These innovations will need to be formulated in ways that enhance global equity, reduce unequal access to resources, and enable all people on the planet to lead flourishing lives within biophysical constraints. The journal seeks to advance scientific and political perspectives and to cultivate transdisciplinary discussions involving researchers, policy makers, civic entrepreneurs, and others. The ultimate objective is to encourage the design and deployment of both local experiments and system innovations that contribute to a more sustainable future by empowering individuals and organizations and facilitating processes of social learning.