Environmental Threat and Social Organization

• Author: Lawrence Krader
• DOI: 10.1177/000271627038900102
• Published date: 01 May 1970
• Date: 01 May 1970
• Subject Matter: Articles

11

Environmental

Threat

and

Social

Organization

By

LAWRENCE

KRADER

Lawrence

Krader,

Ph.D.,

New

York

City,

is

Secretary-General

of

the

International

Union

of

Anthropological

and

Ethnological

Sciences.

He

has

taught

at

a

number

of

universities,

most

recently,

at

the

City

University

of

New

York;

has

conducted

eco-

logical

studies

with

grants

from

the

National

Science

Foundation,

the

American

Council

of

Learned

Societies,

and

the

Social

Science

Research

Council,

as

well

as

under

the

auspices

of

the

United

Nations

Educational,

Scientific,

and

Cultural

Organization;

and

is

the

author

of

a

number

of

works

on

ecology.

ABSTRACT:

The

neutral

approach

of

the

natural

scientist

to

the

study

of

the

physical

environment

contrasts

with

the

social

science

approach.

The

unit

of

study

is

the

same:

in

both

cases

it is

the

society,

but

instead

of

value-free

adapta-

tions

(of

the

natural

sciences),

the

social

sciences

tend

to

evaluate

environmental

relations

as

beneficent

or

dangerous

to

man.

American

society

has

its

adaptive

niche

on

the

North

American

continent,

but

in

its

brief

history,

we

note

a

change

in

attitude

from

the

first

settlers’

confident

belief

that

nature

will

provide

for

man’s

wants,

to

our

present

sense

of

the

threat

to

social

existence

generated

by

environmental

problems.

This

is

coupled

with

a

growing

conviction

that

past

policies

of

uncontrolled

depletion

have

brought

about

the

change

from

an

ecology

of

abundance

to

an

ecology

of

scarcity.

In

order

to

comprehend

our

present

strait,

compare

the

civilizations

of

olden

Central

Asia,

where

water

was

in

scarce

supply.

There,

however,

water

was

not

a

threat,

but

a

positive

value;

its

scarcity

was

dealt

with

by

practical

legal

and

technical

means.

Thus,

there

is

no

necessary

connection

between

scarcity

and

a

given

set

of

attitudes.

We

are

passing

through

a

climacteric

at

present

regarding

quantity

and

quality

of

water

supply,

and

as

we

change

our

philosophy

of

natural

resources

generally,

so

do

we

change

our

management

policies

toward

them

in

particular.

We

are

making

up

our

minds

that

what

was

cheap

or

free

will

now

become

expensive.

The

pills

of

rising

costs

and

taxes

are

a

bitter

dosage.