Shallow Ecology

Shallow ecology meaning

Shallow ecology refers to the political or philosophical position within Ecologism that holds the idea that the protection and conservation of the environment should only be practised when beneficial to humans. The adherents and thinkers of shallow ecology are called 'light green' or 'shallow green' ecologists. In contrast, deep ecology adherents are called 'dark green' ecologists.

Shallow ecology practices pragmatic and anthropocentric forms of environmentalism such as focusing on issues such as pollution control and resource conservation. Environmentalism refers to the movement that advocates for the protection of the environment.

Fig. 1 - Shallow ecology suggests that humans are the master organism of the Earth.

Principles of shallow ecology

Often referred to as the humanist perspective of ecology, shallow ecology is an anthropocentric form of ecologism. That is, human needs are still at the centre of shallow ecology, unlike Deep Ecology. The primary principles of shallow ecology are weak sustainability, limits to growth and intergenerational equity.

Weak sustainability refers to the idea that instead of maximising the Earth's resources to make as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time, capitalism can be undertaken in a more environmentally friendly manner. Therefore, while the goal to increase one's wealth still remains, a slower and more sustainable path to getting richer should be undertaken. This also ties in with limited growth.

Limits to growth are about recognising that continuing to exhaust the Earth's finite resources at the current rate will have disastrous effects on the ability to achieve long-term prosperity due to the negative effects of climate change, pollution, and increasing populations. Therefore, growth should be limited in order to ensure the Earth's resources can keep up with its population.

Shallow ecology places emphasis on the importance of humans and this extends to humans that have not yet been born therefore intergenerational equity is of vital importance to shallow ecologists. Intergenerational equity refers to the duty that has been bestowed on humans to preserve and maintain the integrity of the earth's resources for generations to come.

Policy approaches in shallow ecologism

Shallow ecology has three fundamental policy approaches, these are green capitalism, managerialism and technological solutions.

These policy approaches cause friction between shallow ecologists and deep ecologists.

Shallow ecology movement

Shallow ecology is a term created by Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess in 1972. The term was established for comparison purposes, as Arne Naess also created deep ecology.

Deep ecology and shallow ecology are presented in opposition to one another. Shallow ecology is named as such because this branch of ecologism does not necessarily seek to gain a deeper understanding of the earth, the environment, or the ecosystem. On the contrary, it is quite superficial in its understanding of ecology, focusing solely on the environment's direct relationship or impact on humans.Shallow ecology commonly views nature in relation to its instrumental value instead of its intrinsic value. Shallow ecologists believe the value of nature is not what nature is in itself but what it can do for humans, which is its instrumental value.

Shallow ecology examples

Let us take a look at a couple of examples of shallow ecology.

One example of shallow ecology could be the implementation of recycling programs in a city.

Fig. 2 - Emphasis on recycling is an example of shallow ecology.

Another example includes implementing renewable energy. This may not be out of concern for the earth's climate system per se, but to reduce energy costs and ensure a more stable, long-term energy supply for human society.

Shallow ecology vs deep ecology

Shallow ecology and deep ecology are both ecological perspectives within ecologism. However, these two concepts are very different in their principles, so they are often at odds.

The primary difference between deep and shallow ecology lies in their respective philosophies:

• Shallow ecology is anthropocentric, meaning it centres on human needs and benefits; its main concern is maintaining the environment for the sake of human well-being.
• In contrast, deep ecology adopts an ecocentric perspective, asserting that all forms of life and natural processes have intrinsic value, irrespective of their utility to human needs. Deep ecology promotes the idea of radical changes in societal structures and human behaviour to coexist with nature, rather than dominating it.

Fig. 3 = Shallow ecology and anthropocentrism vs deep ecology and ecocentrism

The reasons why shallow ecology and deep ecology are perceived to have irreconcilable differences are listed in the following table.

Criticisms of shallow ecology

As mentioned earlier, Arne Naess created the term shallow ecology to distinguish its principles and beliefs from those of deep ecology. Being a deep ecologist himself, the intent behind introducing the concept of shallow ecology was not to present a viable second option within ecology but rather a partisan approach to highlight why deep ecology is the essential form of ecology. This intent has led to criticisms of shallow ecology as a selfish form of ecology, and there are negative associations with its anthropocentric stance.

American philosopher Anthony Weston supports and advocates the concept of shallow ecology. Weston explains shallow ecology in his 1992 work Enabling Environmental Practice.

Weston rejects this common criticism of shallow ecology by arguing that it is not selfish to claim that organisms should not have the same rights as humans, nor is it wrong to reject environmental ethics. Environmental ethics embraces a non-human-centred approach to morality and ethics. Weston argues that society is physically unable or unwilling to implement or envision an ethic that is not human-centred because the environment and humans have become distant from each other over time.

This is not to say that people should continue to disregard the imperatives to protect and preserve the environment, but rather take a pragmatic approach. Society should strive to create structures and mechanisms that promote interaction between humans and the environment so that in the future, we can transform our society to have a positive impact on the environment. This belief underscores the idea that shallow ecology and deep ecology are not as diametrically opposed as Arne Naess would have us believe.

The only significant difference between Naess' ideas of deep ecology and Weston's understanding and advocacy of shallow ecology is time. Deep ecology encourages total and immediate change in society consistent with environmental ethics, while shallow ecology proposes that humanity must first restore its precarious relationship with nature. Within shallow ecology, pragmatism must be embraced to reach a point where people truly understand the environment.

Shallow ecology arguably takes a more realistic approach to the environment and focuses on policy and technology to eventually reduce anthropocentrism. On the other hand, deep ecology calls for an ecocentric view of society but does not show how to establish this ecocentric view of society among people.