Allan Schnaiberg

Interrogating the treadmill of production: Everything you wanted to know about the treadmill but were afraid to ask

This article is structured to answer a number of questions that have been raised over the years about the origin, structure, and application of the treadmill of production theory. The following questions are addressed: What was the theoretical structure of the treadmill of production? Why does the theory focus on production rather than consumption? Was the treadmill a dialectical or a linear change theory? How has the treadmill theory changed under the growing globalization of production since 1980? Has the treadmill been evaluated empirically? What forces have limited the diffusion of the treadmill in environmental sociology? Is the treadmill more/still useful today for ecological analyses? For social analyses?

The Environmental Justice Movement: Equitable Allocation of the Costs and Benefits of Environmental Management Outcomes

We present a review of theoretical and methodological advances in the social scientific literature on environmental inequality/racism and argue for new directions in research efforts that pay more attention to (1) the historical forces driving environmental justice conflicts; (2) the complex role of stakeholders in these struggles; (3) the role of social inequality, particularly the trade-offs between environmental protection and social equity; and (4) the impact of social movement activity on the state of environmental protection. Drawing on a case study of an environmental justice conflict in the United States, we find that environmental inequality impacts many actors with often contradictory and cross-cutting allegiances. These struggles therefore become a moving drama—a process—rather than a cross-sectional outcome. We conclude with an analysis of environmental inequality on a global scale and argue that the role of transnational capital remains largely untheorized in the literature. We suggest new models for explaining environmental inequalitys causes and consequences.

Measuring Individual Modernity: A Near Myth

A variety of scales of individual modernity have been developed to measure a universal set of attitudes and behaviors which presumably better fit men for life in modern society. The present study attempts to assess empirically the equivalence reliability and validity of four such scales constructed by Smith and Inkeles Kahl Schnaiberg and Armer. Data were collected from multiple-wave interviews of a sample of lower-to-middle class ethnically heterogeneous married males in the Uptown area of Chicago. The results indicate that the scales (a) are moderately equivalent (intercorrelations range from .40 to .64) despite differences in dimensions items and scale construction procedures (b) have moderately high internal consistency (r alpha = .56\quadto .76) and test-retest (r tt = .66\quadto .81) reliabilities and (c) have low discriminant validity with respect to anomia alienation and to a less extent socioeconomic status. Low construct validity persists when corrections or tests are made for attenuation due to unreliability acquiescent response and other possible interpretations. In short the modernity scales tend to predict scores on anomia alienation and socioeconomic status about as well as they predict other measures of modernity. Conversely measures of anomia and alienation appear to predict modernity scores almost as well as do the modernity scales. The findings call into serious question the meaningfulness of the construct and/or measurement of modernity. (authors)

Legitimating Impotence: Pyrrhic Victories of the Modern Environmental Movement

The strengths and limitations of the modern environmental movement are assessed, using a contextual analysis, with a framework drawn from pragmatic analysis. Empirical summaries from recent policy-making supported by the movement: in community-based recycling, local toxic waste movements, and water pollution control document the fact that the movement has indeed developed some “sustainable resistance” in policy-making in the U.S. and at the Rio Conference. But it has also ignored those consequences of “environmental protection” which degrade the living conditions for many people of color and other low-income groups. The movements failure to form enduring coalitions for linking environmental protection to social justice limits the movements power, by permitting disempowered groups to be mobilized in opposition to environmental protection. We outline an alternative strategy, built around “sustainable legitimacy”, which will require changes in the composition and program of environmental movement organizations.

Obstacles to Environmental Research by Scientists and Technologists: A Social Structural Analysis

A key element in the social movement for environmental protection has been the “impact analysis” role of scientists and technologists. Because of the structural positions of scientific and technological institutions relative to monopoly capital interests, serious constraints exist on extensions of these roles. For scientists, the constraints include: (1) the division of scientific labor and power; (2) the control of scientific “missions”; (3) the control of publication/communication access; and (4) direct social and economic coercion of scientists. For technologists, there are at least four additional constraints: (1) control over access to data; (2) the control of consultantships; (3) the ideology of “feasibility;” and (4) the non-transferability of specialized engineering skills. While the development of new organizational forms may encourage more impact analysis, it is difficult to judge how much transformation these will utlimately promote.

Social Impact Assessment as Evaluation Research Claimants and Claims

The emerging practice of social impact assessment (SIA) faces a number of difficult methodological and operational questions. One way of addressing them is to look to the experience of the more developed field of evaluation research (ER). The convergences with and extensions of ER by SIA pose the questions addressed by this article. It argues among other things: (1) until the existing problems of essentially ex post ER are more adequately understood and resolved it may be untenable to continue some of the ex ante pretensions current in SIA; (2) because of a larger private sector role and agency mission orientations, SIA may be even more plagued with one-sided research the ER These and other issues are critically examined, and a number of possible responses suggested.

American Studies: Environment

American environmental studies, such as ‘human ecology,’ somewhat predate the rise of modern concern about ‘environmental problems.’ However, most of the pre-1960s work emphasized the influence of the natural environment upon human communities. In contrast, the more recent work has stressed the impact of societies upon their natural habitats, and has followed policy construction of different kinds of environmental problems. Two streams of work are outlined. The first refers largely to social surveys of the concerns of individual Americans about environmental hazards, and their preference for various policies of environmental protection. A basic distinction is drawn between perceptions of natural resources, on the one hand, and environmental systems, on the other. These include analyses of environmental risk tolerance, risk aversion, anxiety, and protection support through additional tax and market surcharges. A second stream of work focuses on social institutions and their orientations towards ecological systems and environmental protection. Especially important are the technological and economic mechanisms of major economic organizations in their use of natural resources. Related are the studies of the social and political influences by regional, national, and transnational economic organizations that influence both the political protection of the environment, and the consciousness of major publics about this protection. In general, modern American environmental studies have been strongly influenced by policy conflicts in American society. The agenda for research has successively incorporated the analysis of (a) the causes of air and water pollution, (b) the social uses of energy, and (c) control over sources of global warming and ozone depletion. To a lesser extent, the agenda for research has also emerged from other social concerns, such as the impact of economic globalization of the economy.

Will population slowdowns yield resource conservation? Some social demurrers

Recent movements and social programs for American population limitation are premised on the expectation that reduced fertility will lower consumption, and hence conserve resources. This premise suffers from the fallacy ofceteris paribus: that, at the familial level, fertility reductions occur with no other familial change. In fact, recent history suggests that reduced childrearing has permitted greater income attainment and consumption by families foregoing childbearing. Moreover, even if families attempted to maintain lower consumption, the aggregate impacts on the economy would be defined as depressive, and lead to macrostructural counteractive strategies by the private and public sectors. This points to the automaticmutatis mutandis fallacy of the populationist movement: the notion that fertility reduction alone will cause economic and environment changes. Resource conservation efforts must deal with both these facts and social scientists have an obligation to present this realistic picture rather than accepting the assumptions of Zero Population Growth.

Book Reviews : Growth of the Black Population: A Study of Demographic Trends. Reynolds Farley. Chicago: Markham, 19 70

without a doubt one of the most elegant works of American social demography, and unfortunate in that its contents are too important to be wasted on a purely demographic audience. On the point of demographic elegance, Farley skillfully incorporates virtually every major demographic technique to untangle the issues and warped data, demonstrating a utility for many of these approaches that this reviewer never believed possible. Few nondemographers will recognize the weeks