Environmental consciousness, post-materialism and sustainability | Edexcel A-Level Politics
Updated: 2 days ago
For Specification 9PL0
Edexcel A-Level Politics | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 75–90 minutes
Environmental consciousness, post-materialism and sustainability are central to understanding how ecologists believe humanity must respond to environmental problems. These Environmental consciousness, post-materialism and sustainability A-Level Politics revision notes examine whether ecological change requires a transformation in human values, why ecologists criticise consumerism and materialism, and why they disagree about what a sustainable society should look like. The topic develops the ecological principles introduced in ecology, holism and environmental ethics [1. Ecology, holism and environmental ethics] and prepares you to compare the different strands of ecologism.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define environmental consciousness and explain its implications for human nature and society.
Explain why ecologists criticise materialism and consumerism.
Analyse what ecologists mean by post-materialism and anti-consumerism.
Define sustainability and explain why all ecologists consider it important.
Compare strong and weak understandings of sustainability.
Evaluate the extent of agreement between deep greens, shallow greens and social ecologists over how environmental change should be achieved.
Revision Notes 📚
Environmental consciousness, post-materialism and sustainability A-Level Politics revision
The Edexcel specification identifies environmental consciousness, post-materialism and anti-consumerism, and sustainability as three core ideas of ecologism.
They are closely connected.
Ecologists argue that ecological problems cannot be addressed simply by making isolated policy changes. The values that shape human behaviour, economic activity and society must also be considered.
A useful chain is:
Environmental consciousness → changed understanding of humanity's relationship with nature → rejection of materialism and excessive consumerism → new priorities for society and the economy → sustainability.
However, ecologists disagree over how radical these changes need to be. This disagreement becomes particularly important when comparing deep-green, shallow-green and social ecology [3. Deep green, shallow green and social ecology].
Environmental consciousness
The specification defines environmental consciousness as a state of being in which a person's sense of self is fully realised through a deep identification with the non-human world.
It provides the basis for:
a new form of environmental ethics
a different relationship between humanity and nature
changes to social organisation
Environmental consciousness therefore goes considerably further than simply knowing that environmental problems exist.
Someone might recognise pollution, environmental destruction or ecological limits without changing their basic understanding of humanity's relationship with nature.
Environmental consciousness instead involves a change in how humans understand themselves.
The individual does not see nature merely as something outside humanity to be managed or consumed. Human identity becomes connected to the wider non-human world.
Environmental awareness versus environmental consciousness
This distinction is useful for avoiding a common misunderstanding.
Environmental awareness | Environmental consciousness |
Recognising that environmental problems exist | Deep identification with the non-human world |
May lead to individual policy or lifestyle changes | Implies a transformed understanding of the human self |
Does not necessarily require radical social change | Can imply profound changes to human nature and society |
Compatible with relatively conventional assumptions | Challenges established attitudes towards humanity and nature |
The Edexcel specification specifically requires students to consider the extent to which radical change in human nature and society is necessary.
Environmental consciousness and deep-green ecologism
Environmental consciousness is particularly associated with deep-green ecologism.
Deep greens argue that environmental problems reflect something fundamentally wrong with humanity's relationship with the natural world.
A sufficiently ecological society therefore cannot be created simply through:
more efficient production
different consumer choices
technological improvements
Instead, humans need to reconsider their place within nature.
This connects environmental consciousness to the deep-green commitment to ecocentrism, in which ecological balance rather than humanity alone becomes the central point of value.
The important distinction is between changing behaviour and changing consciousness.
A shallow-green approach can seek environmentally responsible behaviour while retaining a broadly human-centred outlook.
A deep-green approach demands a more profound transformation in how individuals understand themselves in relation to nature.
How radical must the change be?
This creates one of ecologism's major divisions.
Deep greens
Deep greens connect environmental consciousness with a profound transformation of human values.
Their argument is that environmental destruction cannot be resolved while humans continue to see themselves as separate from and superior to the non-human world.
Their approach is therefore radical, rather than simply reformist.
Shallow greens
Shallow greens are more reformist.
They accept that human attitudes and behaviour need to become more environmentally responsible, but do not demand the same transformation of human consciousness.
Their position is associated with enlightened anthropocentrism rather than full ecocentrism.
Social ecology
Social ecologists also favour radical change, but explain the environmental crisis differently.
Rather than making individual environmental consciousness the central issue, social ecology connects environmental degradation to existing social structures.
Sustainability therefore depends on radical social change.
This distinction is developed further in deep-green, shallow-green and social ecology [3. Deep green, shallow green and social ecology].
From environmental consciousness to social organisation
Environmental consciousness has political consequences because changes in human values affect how society is organised.
If humans cease to regard greater material consumption as the main measure of progress and happiness, this challenges:
consumerism
industrialism
continual economic expansion
social priorities based upon acquiring more material goods
Environmental consciousness therefore leads naturally into the ecological critique of materialism and consumerism.
Materialism
In this context, materialism refers to placing great importance on material possessions, material wealth and the acquisition of goods.
Ecologists criticise a society in which progress or personal fulfilment is primarily understood in terms of possessing or consuming more.
The ecological criticism is both environmental and social.
Environmentally, ever-increasing material demands place pressure on a finite ecological system.
Socially, ecologists challenge the assumption that greater material wealth automatically creates greater human fulfilment.
This is particularly important to E. F. Schumacher, whose ideas concerning economics are explored in Leopold, Carson and Schumacher [4. Leopold, Carson and Schumacher].
Official Edexcel mark schemes use Schumacher to illustrate the ecological argument that human happiness should not simply be connected to increasing material wealth or ever-greater quantities of goods.
Consumerism
The specification defines consumerism as a psychological and cultural view focused on consuming goods and services as a means of feeling good about ourselves and driving economic growth.
This definition contains two important elements:
Personal fulfilment: consumption becomes associated with feeling good or living successfully.
Economic growth: continued consumption encourages increased production and economic expansion.
Ecologists challenge both.
The criticism is therefore deeper than saying that people "buy too much".
Consumerism is understood as a cultural system of values that encourages individuals and economies continually to seek more.
Why ecologists oppose consumerism
All ecologists are critical of existing levels of materialism and consumerism.
The basic ecological argument is:
Consumerism encourages greater demand for goods and services.
Greater demand encourages greater production.
Production uses resources and contributes to environmental pressures.
A finite ecological system cannot support unrestricted exponential economic expansion.
Consumerist values therefore conflict with ecological sustainability.
Official Edexcel mark schemes identify substantial agreement across ecologism that industrialism, materialism and consumerism cannot continue indefinitely within ecological limits.
Industrialism, materialism and consumerism
These ideas are closely related.
Industrialism is defined by Edexcel as involving large-scale production, faith in science and technology, capital accumulation and continuous economic growth to satisfy material needs.
The relationship can be represented as:
Materialist values → desire for more goods → consumerism → increased production → continued economic growth → pressure on ecological systems
Ecologists therefore challenge not only specific environmentally damaging products but also the values that drive production and consumption.
Post-materialism
Post-materialism means moving beyond a society in which material possessions and ever-higher consumption are treated as the main measures of happiness, progress or fulfilment.
Post-materialism does not simply mean that humans should possess no material goods.
Instead, it questions whether:
more consumption necessarily means a better life
economic growth should be the main measure of progress
material wealth should dominate human priorities
Official Edexcel material describes the post-materialist ecological alternative as one that places greater emphasis on quality of life rather than simply quantity of goods.
Anti-consumerism
Anti-consumerism is opposition to a culture in which continual consumption is treated as desirable in itself and as the main means of producing personal satisfaction and economic progress.
All strands of ecologism seek movement towards a more post-materialist and anti-consumerist society.
There is therefore considerable agreement about the problem.
The major disagreement concerns the solution.
Where ecologists agree about post-materialism and anti-consumerism
Deep greens, shallow greens and social ecologists broadly agree that:
existing levels of materialism and consumerism are environmentally damaging
society needs to change its values and lifestyles
environmental problems cannot be solved while consumption continues to expand without ecological restraint
happiness and progress should not simply be measured according to increasing material possessions
production and consumption must take account of ecological sustainability
The 2025 Edexcel mark scheme specifically identifies all three as areas of agreement within ecologism.
Where ecologists disagree
Despite agreement over the criticism of existing consumerism, the strands differ significantly over what comes next.
Shallow green | Deep green | Social ecology |
Reformist | Radical | Radical |
Can accept forms of green consumerism | Seeks a deeper move away from consumerist values | Connects consumerism to wider social structures |
Green capitalism can contribute to environmental solutions | Environmental change requires transformation of human values and relationship with nature | Environmental change requires transformation of hierarchical social relations |
Existing economic structures can be made more sustainable | Existing growth-centred assumptions require more fundamental change | Existing social and economic structures require radical change |
This is exactly the kind of comparison needed in an Edexcel 24-mark ecologism essay.
Green capitalism
Green capitalism is a specified ecological term.
Edexcel defines it as the view that the market can deliver environmental solutions through:
faith in technological solutions
capitalism responding to environmentally aware consumers
This is most compatible with shallow-green ecologism.
The argument is that consumers can choose environmentally preferable products and businesses can respond to demand.
Environmental reform can therefore occur without abandoning the market economy itself.
Green consumerism and its limits
The shallow-green position allows environmentally conscious consumption to help drive change.
This creates a significant ideological disagreement.
Deep greens and social ecologists argue that simply replacing one type of consumption with another does not necessarily challenge the underlying assumption that human wellbeing should depend upon continually consuming goods.
The disagreement can therefore be expressed as:
Shallow green: make consumption greener.
Deep green and social ecology: the underlying culture of consumerism itself must change much more fundamentally.
The 2025 examiner material identifies this distinction as central to successful answers on post-materialism and anti-consumerism.
E. F. Schumacher and post-materialism
Schumacher is particularly useful in this debate.
Official Edexcel mark schemes connect his thinking to criticism of measuring happiness and progress simply through material goods and economic output.
His ecological economic outlook instead gives greater importance to:
quality of life rather than quantity of possessions
meeting needs rather than continually expanding wants
questioning conventional assumptions about economic growth
Schumacher's specified ideas are developed fully in Leopold, Carson and Schumacher [4. Leopold, Carson and Schumacher].
Murray Bookchin and anti-consumerism
Social ecology provides a different radical critique.
Official Edexcel mark schemes associate Murray Bookchin with an economy orientated towards needs rather than wants and with radical transformation of the social structures associated with environmental destruction.
This is important because it demonstrates that deep greens and social ecologists may agree that existing consumerism must be replaced while disagreeing about why environmental destruction occurs and how change should happen.
Bookchin's wider social-ecological argument is explored in Bookchin and Merchant [5. Bookchin and Merchant].
Sustainability
Sustainability is one of the most important and contested ideas within ecologism.
Edexcel defines sustainability as:
the capacity of the ecological system to maintain its health over time.
All ecologists agree that society and the economy must become sustainable.
What they disagree about is:
why sustainability requires change
what type of sustainability is necessary
how sustainability should be achieved
how much economic growth can continue
whether capitalism can deliver it
how much political and social change is required
This is why Edexcel describes sustainability as one of the most contested ideas in ecologism.
Why sustainability is necessary
Ecologists argue that human political and economic systems operate within ecological systems.
Economic activity cannot therefore expand without regard to the environment on which it depends.
This connects sustainability to the ecological idea of limits to growth.
The fundamental argument is:
A finite ecological system places limits on unlimited economic expansion.
All ecologists therefore reject the assumption that exponential economic growth can continue indefinitely without ecological consequences.
Sustainability and the state, society and economy
The specification requires students to understand that different forms of sustainability have implications for all three.
The state
The question is whether the existing state can manage the transition towards sustainability or whether political structures themselves need radical transformation.
Shallow greens are more willing to use existing institutions.
Deep greens and social ecologists are more sceptical about the ability of existing political structures to create genuinely sustainable societies.
Society
Sustainability may require changes to:
values
lifestyles
consumption
humanity's relationship with nature
The disagreement is over the depth of that transformation.
The economy
The fundamental division is over whether a sustainable economy can continue to operate through modified capitalism and limited growth, or whether the growth-centred economic model must be replaced much more fundamentally.
Weak sustainability
Weak sustainability is associated with shallow-green ecologism.
It accepts the need for ecological sustainability but adopts a comparatively reformist approach.
Official Edexcel mark schemes associate weak sustainability with:
smarter growth
greener growth
slower growth
management of natural resources
reform of existing economic structures
Shallow greens therefore do not necessarily believe that all economic growth or capitalism must end.
Instead, existing systems can be adjusted so that growth operates within ecological constraints.
Weak sustainability and green capitalism
Weak sustainability connects naturally to green capitalism.
The market can respond to environmental problems through:
technological innovation
changes in consumer demand
greener products and production
ecologically aware consumers
This reflects shallow greens' wider reformist outlook.
Their key question is:
How can existing society and the economy become environmentally sustainable?
rather than:
How can the existing political and economic order be replaced?
Strong sustainability
Strong sustainability is associated with deep-green ecologism, while official Edexcel materials also connect social ecology with radical forms of sustainability.
Strong sustainability takes a more radical view of ecological limits.
Official Edexcel mark schemes contrast it with weak sustainability by associating strong sustainability with:
rejection of the conventional growth-centred economic model
much greater protection of natural resources
movement away from continuous growth
a steady-state approach rather than endless expansion
This reflects the belief that environmental limits cannot simply be accommodated by making the existing model slightly greener.
Weak versus strong sustainability
Weak sustainability | Strong sustainability |
Associated with shallow greens | Associated particularly with deep greens |
Reformist | Radical |
Existing economic structures can be adapted | Existing growth-centred assumptions require fundamental change |
Allows slower, smarter and greener growth | Rejects continual growth as the organising principle |
Compatible with green capitalism | Deep greens and social ecology are much more critical of capitalism |
Greater faith in technology and markets | Less confidence that technology and markets alone can solve ecological problems |
Manage natural resources sustainably | Preserve ecological health by accepting much stricter ecological limits |
The disagreement is therefore not about whether sustainability matters.
All ecologists support sustainability.
The disagreement concerns what sustainability actually requires.
Social ecology and sustainability
Social ecology provides a third important position.
The specification states that environmental degradation can be linked to existing social structures and that sustainability is linked to radical social change.
For social ecologists, environmental degradation cannot be understood separately from the organisation of human society.
Sustainability therefore requires more than:
changing individual attitudes
creating greener products
managing resources more efficiently
The social relationships that generate environmental degradation must themselves change.
This helps distinguish social ecology from both:
shallow-green reformism
the deep-green emphasis on environmental consciousness and ecocentrism
Comparing the three approaches to sustainability
Issue | Shallow green | Deep green | Social ecology |
Type of sustainability | Weak | Strong | Linked to radical social change |
Approach | Reformist | Radical | Radical |
Capitalism | Can potentially be made greener | Much more fundamentally critical | Environmental problems linked to existing social and economic structures |
Growth | Slower, smarter, greener growth may be possible | Continual growth is incompatible with ecological limits | Existing growth-centred structures require radical transformation |
Primary route to change | Reform existing institutions, markets and behaviour | Transform values and humanity's relationship with nature | Transform social structures |
Environmental consciousness | More limited | Central | Not sufficient on its own |
📝 Exam application: A sustainability essay should not become a simple list of things that governments could do to help the environment. Edexcel is testing the ideological disagreement over what sustainability means and how it should be achieved.
Why sustainability creates both unity and division
This is a particularly useful evaluative distinction.
Fundamental unity
All ecologists broadly agree that:
current patterns of unrestricted production and consumption are unsustainable
there are ecological limits to economic activity
materialist and consumerist values must change
environmental sustainability should become a central political and economic goal
Fundamental division
They disagree over:
weak versus strong sustainability
reform versus radical change
whether capitalism can be sustainable
whether markets and technology are part of the solution
whether transformation should centre on human consciousness or social structures
A sophisticated judgement can therefore argue:
Ecologism is highly united over the need for sustainability, but significantly divided over its meaning and delivery.
That distinction has appeared directly in official Edexcel assessment material.
Connecting the three ideas
Environmental consciousness, post-materialism and sustainability form a logical sequence within ecologism.
Environmental consciousness challenges humanity to rethink its relationship with the non-human world.
This questions social values based upon material acquisition.
Post-materialism seeks definitions of human fulfilment that move beyond ever-greater material wealth.
Anti-consumerism challenges continual consumption as the purpose of personal and economic life.
These changes are necessary because unlimited production and consumption conflict with ecological limits.
Sustainability therefore becomes the central requirement for the future.
Ecologists then divide over whether sustainability can be achieved through reform or requires radical political, social and economic transformation.
This is a strong AO2 chain because it shows relationships between concepts rather than treating each term as an isolated definition.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Environmental consciousness | A state in which a person's sense of self is fully realised through deep identification with the non-human world. | Use it to explain why deep greens believe environmental change requires transformation in human values and society. |
Consumerism | A cultural and psychological outlook that links consuming goods and services with personal satisfaction and economic growth. | Use it when explaining why all ecological strands criticise existing patterns of consumption. |
Post-materialism | Moving beyond the belief that increasing material possessions and consumption are the main measures of happiness and progress. | Use it to compare ecological visions of a less consumption-centred society and economy. |
Sustainability | The capacity of an ecological system to maintain its health over time. | Use it to establish an area of agreement before comparing weak and strong interpretations. |
Green capitalism | The belief that markets, technology and environmentally conscious consumers can produce environmental solutions. | Use it when explaining shallow-green reformism and weak sustainability. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Define post-materialism and anti-consumerism precisely. The 2025 examiner report identified a clear understanding of these two core principles as vital to stronger responses.
Examiner hint: Separate agreement about the problem from disagreement about the solution. Stronger 2025 responses recognised fundamental agreement that current materialism and consumerism are environmentally unsustainable, then analysed the division between shallow-green reformism and the more radical approaches of deep greens and social ecology.
Examiner hint: When discussing post-materialism, compare what the different strands think a future society or economy would actually look like and how it would be achieved. The strongest 2025 answers went beyond simply saying that all ecologists oppose consumerism.
Examiner hint: Sustainability questions require all three major strands. In the 2022 examiner report, stronger answers compared shallow ecologism, deep ecologism and social ecology and made substantiated judgements about the depth of their agreement. Answers that omitted one strand limited their comparative analysis.
Examiner hint: Use thinkers to support a debate between strands. The 2022 report specifically warned against making the essay a comparison between individual thinkers or simply labelling a thinker as belonging to a strand. Use the thinker's idea as evidence for an ideological argument.
Examiner hint: A thematic structure can work very well. The 2024 report praised answers organised around themes such as industrialism, capitalism, consumerism and materialism, and sustainability, with agreement and disagreement compared inside each theme.
Examiner hint: Keep judging extent throughout. Both the 2024 and 2025 reports emphasised that stronger political-ideas answers had a clear direction from the introduction and pursued that judgement throughout rather than saving evaluation for the final paragraph.
Examiner hint: Use the specialist vocabulary of ecologism. Examiner reports note that accurate terminology allows students to express more knowledge, analysis and evaluation in shorter, more focused answers.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Treating environmental consciousness as simply knowing about environmental problems
Why this is incorrect: Environmental consciousness is a much deeper concept. It involves fully realising the self through identification with the non-human world.
How to improve: Remember the distinction:
awareness recognises the problem, consciousness changes the individual's understanding of their relationship with nature.
Mistake: Defining anti-consumerism as simply "buying fewer things"
Why this is incorrect: Ecologists criticise consumerism as a cultural and psychological outlook that connects personal fulfilment and economic progress to continual consumption.
How to improve: Explain the underlying values, not just the behaviour.
Mistake: Saying post-materialism means rejecting all material possessions
Why this is incorrect: Post-materialism challenges the assumption that ever-increasing material wealth and consumption should be the principal measures of happiness and progress.
How to improve: Use the contrast quality of life versus quantity of goods.
Mistake: Saying all ecologists oppose capitalism in exactly the same way
Why this is incorrect: Shallow greens can accept green capitalism, while deep greens and social ecology take much more radical positions towards existing economic structures.
How to improve: Compare reformist shallow greens with radical deep-green and social-ecological approaches.
Mistake: Assuming sustainability has one agreed meaning
Why this is incorrect: All ecologists support sustainability, but Edexcel explicitly describes it as a contested concept. Shallow greens favour weak sustainability, deep greens strong sustainability, while social ecology links sustainability to radical social change.
How to improve: Write:
agreement over the principle, disagreement over the type and delivery.
Mistake: Writing separate paragraphs describing shallow, deep and social ecology
Why this is incorrect: This often produces description rather than AO2 comparison.
How to improve:
Organise paragraphs thematically, for example:
consumerism
post-materialism
economic growth
sustainability
Then compare all relevant strands within each paragraph.
Mistake: Name-dropping key thinkers
Why this is incorrect: Writing "Schumacher is a deep-green thinker" does not itself analyse post-materialism or sustainability.
How to improve: Deploy the idea. For example, Schumacher's criticism of judging progress through ever-increasing material output supports the ecological move towards a post-materialist conception of human fulfilment.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
The Edexcel Non-core Political Ideas section assesses ecologism through a 24-mark essay requiring appropriate specified thinkers. The shorter questions below are revision scaffolds designed to build the knowledge, analysis and comparison needed for that essay.
Question 1
Which ecological term describes the capacity of an ecological system to maintain its health over time? (1 mark)
Answer: Sustainability. (1)
Question 2
Explain what ecologists mean by environmental consciousness. (4 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
Award credit for explaining that:
it is a state of being
the individual's sense of self becomes deeply identified with the non-human world
it challenges conventional separation between humanity and nature
it can provide the basis for new ethics and social organisation
deep-green ecologism associates it with more radical transformation of human nature and society
Question 3
Explain two criticisms ecologists make of consumerism. (6 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
Possible points include:
Consumerism links personal fulfilment to the continual acquisition of goods and services.
It encourages increasing production and economic expansion.
Continual expansion places pressure on finite ecological systems.
It supports materialist values that ecologists believe need to be replaced by more post-materialist values.
Ecologists argue that happiness and progress should not simply be measured through increasing material consumption.
Credit any two accurately developed points.
Question 4
A political movement argues that capitalism should continue but that businesses should respond to environmentally conscious consumers, develop greener technology and produce more sustainable goods.
Explain which ecological position this most closely represents. (6 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
The position most closely represents shallow-green ecologism.
A developed response should explain that:
the movement is reformist rather than seeking to abolish existing economic structures
it reflects green capitalism
it places faith in markets responding to environmentally conscious consumers
it places faith in technological solutions
it is compatible with weak sustainability
this differs from the more radical positions associated with deep greens and social ecology
Question 5
Analyse why post-materialism is connected to sustainability in ecologism. (8 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
A strong response should establish that:
materialism encourages individuals to define progress or fulfilment through increasing material wealth
consumerism translates these values into greater consumption
greater consumption stimulates increased production and economic growth
ecological systems have limits
continual increases in production and consumption therefore threaten sustainability
post-materialism seeks to move society away from defining happiness and progress according to an ever-growing quantity of material goods
this can reduce the pressure for continual production and consumption
post-materialism therefore supports the ecological objective of maintaining the health of ecological systems over time
Higher-level analysis should show a clear logical chain rather than treating post-materialism and sustainability as separate concepts.
Question 6
Assess the view that ecologists agree about sustainability. (12 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
Arguments suggesting agreement:
All ecologists support the principle of sustainability.
All recognise that ecological systems must be capable of maintaining their health over time.
All criticise unrestricted industrialism and exponential economic growth.
All recognise the environmental problems associated with current materialism and consumerism.
All seek changes to society and the economy.
Arguments suggesting disagreement:
Shallow greens favour weak sustainability.
Deep greens favour strong sustainability.
Social ecology links sustainability to radical change in social structures.
Shallow greens are willing to use markets and green capitalism.
Deep greens and social ecology are much more critical of existing growth-centred economic structures.
They disagree over whether change should be reformist or radical.
Judgement:
There is substantial agreement about the need for sustainability but considerably less agreement about its meaning and delivery. The principle is therefore a source of unity, while its practical ideological implications create significant division.
Question 7
To what extent is there more agreement than disagreement within ecologism over post-materialism and anti-consumerism? You must use appropriate thinkers you have studied to support your answer and consider differing views in a balanced way. (24 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
AO1: Knowledge and understanding, 8 marks
Relevant knowledge could include:
consumerism
materialism
post-materialism
anti-consumerism
industrialism
sustainability
green capitalism
shallow-green reformism
deep-green radicalism
social ecology
Schumacher's criticism of conventional measures of material progress
Bookchin's emphasis on radical social change
AO2: Analysis, 8 marks
Areas of agreement:
All ecologists oppose existing levels of materialism and consumerism.
All identify links between consumerism, industrialism and unsustainable growth.
All believe changes to society and lifestyles are necessary.
All support movement towards a society in which happiness and progress are not measured simply through increasing material goods.
Schumacher can be used to develop the distinction between quantity of goods and quality of life.
Areas of disagreement:
Shallow greens may support green consumerism and green capitalism.
Deep greens seek a deeper change in values associated with environmental consciousness and ecocentrism.
Social ecologists seek radical changes in social structures.
Shallow greens therefore favour reform while deep greens and social ecology favour more radical transformation.
Bookchin can be used to support the idea of production orientated around needs rather than continually expanding wants.
AO3: Evaluation, 8 marks
A strong judgement might argue that agreement is strongest in the critique of the existing consumerist world. All strands believe present levels of materialism and consumerism are ecologically unsustainable. However, disagreement becomes much deeper when deciding what a post-materialist society should look like and how it should be achieved. Shallow-green willingness to retain markets and green consumerism is fundamentally different from the more radical changes demanded by deep-green and social-ecological approaches.
Question 8
To what extent is ecologism divided over sustainability? You must use appropriate thinkers you have studied to support your answer and consider differing views in a balanced way. (24 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
AO1: Knowledge and understanding, 8 marks
Relevant knowledge includes:
sustainability as the capacity of ecological systems to maintain their health over time
limits to growth
weak sustainability
strong sustainability
shallow-green ecologism
deep-green ecologism
social ecology
green capitalism
environmental consciousness
radical versus reformist change
relevant specified thinker ideas, including Carson, Schumacher and Bookchin
AO2: Analysis, 8 marks
Areas of agreement:
All ecologists accept the principle of sustainability.
All recognise that unlimited economic expansion creates ecological problems.
All criticise current economic arrangements based upon industrialism, materialism and consumerism.
All believe future societies and economies must operate within ecological limits.
Areas of disagreement:
Shallow greens favour weak sustainability and a reformist approach.
Weak sustainability allows slower, greener and smarter forms of economic growth.
Green capitalism allows shallow greens to retain markets and existing economic structures.
Deep greens favour strong sustainability and much more radical restrictions on growth.
Social ecology argues that sustainability requires radical transformation of existing social structures.
The strands therefore disagree over capitalism, economic growth, the state and the route towards an ecologically sustainable society.
AO3: Evaluation, 8 marks
A convincing conclusion could argue that ecologism is more united over the objective than the method. Sustainability is a core commitment shared throughout ecologism, so there is little disagreement that ecological systems must be protected over time. However, strong and weak sustainability imply substantially different political, social and economic futures. The disagreement over what sustainability requires is therefore deep, even though the principle itself provides significant ideological unity.
Comments