Oldal 118 [118]
116 JUDIT FARKAS
Another important development to be considered is the variety of responses to
the environmental crisis by civil society, activists, policy-makers, etc. Similarly to
the nature concepts of both jungle and city dwellers’ and their communities, the
above-mentioned movements and social phenomena are also important fields of
study for anthropology. As a result, new trends have evolved in anthropology, such
as environmentalist anthropology, activist ecology, political ecology, etc.
Ecological anthropology, environmental anthropology
The differences between ecological and environmental anthropology are not
unanimously agreed upon in the environmental literature. Some authors treat
them as one; others separate them; others still view environmental anthropology
as a subdiscipline of ecological anthropology (Borsos 2002; Little 1999).
Those in favor of differentiation hold that ecological anthropology continues
to make attempts to bring into a single explanatory system, building on the
methodology and results of related disciplines (archaeology, biology, linguistics,
historical science) and integrating new themes (globalization and neo-colonialism,
eco-colonialism, environmental racism and human rights, biodiversity and cultural
diversity, ecological awareness, distribution of energy resources, etc.) (Borsos 2004:
67-68).
This approach views environmental anthropology as an applied science which
uses ecological anthropological knowledge in practice: "it tries to help the solution
of local and global environmental problems, using the theories and methods of
anthropology” (Townsend 2000: 106; Borsos 2004: 71). Conrad Kottak calls
environmental anthropology “new ecological anthropology” and claims that
anthropology must re-interpret itself because — owing to population growth and
the transnational flow of people, trade, organizations and information — there are
no longer territorial groups in contact with a single given ecosystem. By the same
token, anthropologists must pay attention to the external organizations and forces
(such as governments, NGOs and businesses) which lay claim to local and regional
ecosystems throughout the world. Therefore, environmental anthropology must
blend theory and analysis with political awareness and policy concerns (Kottak
1999: 25-26). Carole Crumley argues in the same vein, stating that the
Anthropology and Environment Section of the American Anthropological
Association (AAA) was not founded by chance in 1996. By then, the environmental
problems had become obvious through instances such as El Nino and their
multiplication made it evident that there was serious trouble. The section was
founded by researchers motivated by anxiety for the environment, many of them
also participants in diverse kinds of environmental activism. The aim was to
Works in cognitive anthropology also deem important the study of the nature-related cultural
model of those living in static societies, because although they don’t live ,,in the lap of nature” ,
they still perceive and interpret their environment, including the natural environment (see Kempton
2001). This is particularly intriguing for those involved in environmental movements, activities,
and environmental development policies, who may — with good intentions — impose their models
and ideas on other groups. There is usually a great difference in power between the above-mentioned
policy makers and smaller local groups and in this process local knowledge and interest may get
lost. We shall return to this topic in discussing the role of anthropology.