What is the subject of scientific interest in social ecology. Subject of study of social ecology. Topic: Subject, tasks, history of social ecology

“The childhood of humanity is over, when Mother Nature walked around and cleaned up after us. The period of maturity has arrived. Now we need to clean up ourselves, or rather, learn to live in such a way as not to litter. From now on, full responsibility for preserving life on Earth falls on us” (Oldak, 1979).

Currently, humanity is experiencing perhaps the most critical moment in the entire history of its existence. Modern society is in a deep crisis, although this cannot be said if we limit ourselves to some external manifestations. We see that the economies of developed countries continue to grow, even if not at such a rapid pace as it was quite recently. Accordingly, mining volumes continue to increase, which is stimulated by growing consumer demand. This is again most noticeable in developed countries. At the same time, social contrasts in the modern world between economically developed and developing countries are becoming more and more pronounced and in some cases reach a 60-fold gap in the income of the population of these countries.

Rapid industrialization and urbanization, a sharp increase in the planet's population, intensive chemicalization of agriculture, and other types of anthropogenic pressure on nature have significantly disrupted the cycle of substances and natural energy processes in the biosphere, and damaged its self-healing mechanisms. This jeopardized the health and life of modern and future generations of people and, in general, the continued existence of civilization.

Analyzing the current situation, many experts come to the conclusion that humanity is currently facing two mortal dangers:

1) relatively quick death in the fire of a global nuclear missile war and

2) slow extinction due to deterioration in the quality of the living environment, which is caused by the destruction of the biosphere due to irrational economic activities.

The second danger is apparently more real and more formidable, since diplomatic efforts alone are not enough to prevent it. There is a need for a revision of all traditional principles of environmental management and a radical restructuring of the entire economic mechanism in most countries of the world.

Therefore, speaking about the current situation, everyone should understand that the modern crisis has affected not only the economy and nature. In crisis, it is, first of all, the person himself with his centuries-old way of thinking, needs, habits, way of life and behavior. The crisis situation of man lies in the fact that his entire way of life is opposed to nature. It is possible to get out of this crisis only if a person transforms into a being who is friendly with nature, understands it and knows how to be in harmony with it. But for this, people must learn to live in harmony with each other and take care of future generations. Every person must learn all this, no matter where he has to work and no matter what tasks he has to solve.

So, in the conditions of the progressive destruction of the Earth's biosphere, in order to resolve the contradictions between society and nature, it is necessary to transform human activity on new principles. These principles provide for achieving a reasonable compromise between the social and economic needs of society and the ability of the biosphere to satisfy them without threatening its normal functioning. Thus, the time has come for a critical review of all areas of human activity, as well as areas of knowledge and spiritual culture that shape a person’s worldview.

Humanity is now being tested for true intelligence. It will be able to pass this exam only if it fulfills the requirements that the biosphere places on it. These requirements are:

1) biosphere compatibility based on knowledge and use of the laws of conservation of the biosphere;

2) moderation in the consumption of natural resources, overcoming the wastefulness of the consumer structure of society;

3) mutual tolerance and peacefulness of the peoples of the planet in relations with each other;

4) adherence to generally significant, environmentally thoughtful and consciously set global goals of social development.

All these requirements presuppose the movement of humanity towards a single global integrity based on the joint formation and maintenance of a new planetary shell, which Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky called the noosphere.

The scientific basis for such activities should be a new branch of knowledge - social ecology.

Fortunately, there are currently quite a lot of textbooks and teaching aids both on general ecology and social ecology, and all of them are worthy of being carefully studied (Akimova, Khaskin, 1998; Baklanov, 2001; Voronkov, 1999; Girusov , 1998; Gorelov, 1968; Malofeev, 1998; Krasilov, 1995; future ..., 1989; Natural resource potential..., 1997; Reimers, 1994; Saint-Marc, 1977; ; Urusov, 2000; Urusov et al., 2002; Evolution..., 1999; Ecological essays..., 1988 and others). At the same time, it seems important to reflect existing socio-ecological problems in the light of regional characteristics, traditions and development prospects. In this regard, in this textbook, much attention is paid to factual material reflecting modern socio-ecological problems of the Russian Far East.

Currently, there are active scientific discussions on many aspects of the modern environmental situation, and on a number of issues, unified views on the problem and ways to solve it have not yet been developed. When describing such problems, we sought to bring different points of view. The future will show who is right. Our main goal was to show students that social ecology is not an abstract academic scientific discipline, but a vast area of interaction between different ideologies, cultures, and lifestyles; it is not only a global field of knowledge, but also a vital field of activity. Showing the necessity, attractiveness and prospects of this activity was one of the tasks of the authors of this textbook.

Subject of social ecology, environmental problems, ecological view of the world

Social ecology is the science of harmonizing interactions between society and nature. The subject of social ecology is the noosphere, that is, a system of socio-natural relations that is formed and functions as a result of conscious human activity. In other words, the subject of social ecology is the processes of formation and functioning of the noosphere.

Problems associated with the interaction of society and its environment are called environmental problems. Ecology was originally a branch of biology (the term was introduced by Ernst Haeckel in 1866). Biological ecologists study the relationships of animals, plants and entire communities with their environment. An ecological view of the world is a ranking of values and priorities of human activity, when the most important thing is to preserve a human-friendly living environment.

For social ecology, the term “ecology” means a special point of view, a special worldview, a special system of values and priorities of human activity, focused on harmonizing the relationship between society and nature. In other sciences, “ecology” means something different: in biology - a section of biological research on the relationships between organisms and the environment, in philosophy - the most general patterns of interaction between man, society and the Universe, in geography - the structure and functioning of natural complexes and natural-economic systems. Social ecology is also called human ecology or modern ecology. In recent years, a scientific direction called “globalistics” has begun to actively develop, developing models of a controlled, scientifically and spiritually organized world with the aim of preserving earthly civilization.

The prehistory of social ecology begins with the appearance of man on Earth. The English theologian Thomas Malthus is considered the herald of the new science. He was one of the first to point out that there are natural limits to economic growth and demanded that population growth be limited: “The law in question is the constant desire inherent in all living beings to multiply faster than is allowed by the quantity at their disposal.” food" (Malthus, 1868, p. 96); “... to improve the situation of the poor, a reduction in the relative number of births is necessary” (Malthus, 1868, p. 378). This idea is not new. In Plato's “ideal republic,” the number of families should be regulated by the government. Aristotle went further and proposed determining the number of children for each family.

Another predecessor of social ecology is the geographical school in sociology: adherents of this scientific school pointed out that the mental characteristics of people and their way of life are directly dependent on the natural conditions of a given area. Let us remember that C. Montesquieu argued that “the power of climate is the first power in the world.” Our compatriot L.I. Mechnikov pointed out that world civilizations developed in the basins of great rivers, on the shores of seas and oceans. K. Marx believed that a temperate climate is most suitable for the development of capitalism. K. Marx and F. Engels developed the concept of the unity of man and nature, the main idea of which was: to know the laws of nature and apply them correctly.

Social ecology was officially recognized at the state level in the first quarter of the twentieth century. In 1922, H. Burroughs addressed the American Association of Geographers with a presidential address entitled “Geography as Human Ecology.” The main idea of this appeal is to bring ecology closer to people. The Chicago school of human ecology has gained worldwide fame: the study of the mutual relations of man as an integral organism with his entire environment. It was then that ecology and sociology first came into close interaction. Ecological methods began to be used to analyze the social system.

Worldwide recognition and the first stages of development of social ecology

The worldwide recognition of social ecology as an independent science dates back to the 60s of the twentieth century. One of the most striking events of those years was the publication in 1962 of R. Carson’s book “Silent Spring” about the environmental consequences of using the pesticide DDT. Swiss chemist Müller synthesized DDT and received the Nobel Prize for this in 1947. It was later discovered that DDT accumulates in living tissues and has a detrimental effect on all living things, including the human body. Thanks to air and water transport, this substance has spread throughout the planet and has even been found in the liver of Antarctic penguins.

Like any other scientific discipline, social ecology developed gradually. Three main stages in the development of this science can be distinguished.

The initial stage is empirical, associated with the accumulation of various data on the negative environmental consequences of the scientific and technological revolution. The result of this direction of environmental research was the formation of a network of global environmental monitoring of all components of the biosphere.

The second stage is “model”. In 1972, the book by D. Meadows et al. “The Limits to Growth” was published. She was a huge success. For the first time, data on various aspects of human activity were included in a mathematical model and studied using a computer. For the first time, a complex dynamic model of interaction between society and nature was explored at the global level.

The criticism of The Limits to Growth was comprehensive and thorough. The results of criticism can be reduced to two points:

1) computer modeling of socio-economic systems at the global and regional levels is promising;

2) Meadows’ “models of the world” are still far from adequate to reality.

Currently, there is a significant variety of global models: the Meadows model is a lace of loops of direct and feedback connections, the Mesarovich and Pestel model is a pyramid dissected into many relatively independent parts, the J. Tinbergen model is a “tree” of organic growth, the V. Leontiev model – also a “tree”.

The beginning of the third – global-political – stage of social ecology is considered to be 1992, when the International Conference on Environment and Development took place in Rio de Janeiro. The heads of 179 states adopted a coordinated strategy based on the concept of sustainable development.

Main directions of development of social ecology

To date, three main directions have emerged in social ecology.

The first direction is the study of the relationship between society and the natural environment at the global level - global ecology. The scientific foundations of this direction were laid by V.I. Vernadsky in the fundamental work “Biosphere”, published in 1928. In 1977, a monograph by M.I. Budyko “Global Ecology”, but it mainly deals with climatic aspects. Topics such as resources, global pollution, global cycles of chemical elements, the influence of Space, the functioning of the Earth as a whole, etc. have not received adequate coverage.

The second direction is research into the relationship with the natural environment of various groups of the population and society as a whole from the point of view of understanding man as a social being. Human relations to the social and natural environment are interconnected. K. Marx and F. Engels pointed out that the limited attitude of people towards nature determines their limited attitude towards each other, and their limited attitude towards each other determines their limited attitude towards nature. This is social ecology in the narrow sense of the word.

The third direction is human ecology. Its subject is the system of relationships with the natural environment of man as a biological being. The main problem is the targeted management of the preservation and development of human health, the population, and the improvement of Man as a biological species. Here are forecasts of changes in health under the influence of changes in the environment, and the development of standards in life support systems.

Western researchers also distinguish between the ecology of human society – social ecology and human ecology. Social ecology considers the impact on society as a dependent and controllable subsystem of the “nature-society” system. Human ecology – focuses on man himself as a biological unit.

Nature is studied by natural sciences, such as biology, chemistry, physics, geology, etc., using a natural science (nomological) approach. Society is studied by the humanities - sociology, demography, ethics, economics, etc. - and uses a humanitarian (ideographic) approach. Social ecology as an interdisciplinary science is based on three types of methods: 1) natural sciences, 2) humanities and 3) systems research, combining natural science and humanities research.

An important place in the methodology of social ecology is occupied by the methodology of global modeling.

The main stages of global modeling are as follows:

1) a list of causal relationships between variables is compiled and the structure of feedback connections is outlined;

2) after studying the literature and consulting specialist demographers, economists, ecologists, geologists, etc., a general structure is revealed that reflects the main connections between levels.

After a global model has been created in general form, work with this model is necessary, which includes the following stages: 1) quantitative assessment of each connection - global data are used, and if there is no global data, then characteristic local data are used; 2) using a computer, the effect of the simultaneous action of all these connections in time is determined; 3) the number of changes in the basic assumptions is checked to find the most critical determinants of the system's behavior.

The global model uses the most important relationships between population, food, investment, resources and output. The model contains dynamic statements about the physical aspects of human activity. It contains assumptions that the nature of social variables (income distribution, regulation of family size, etc.) will not change.

The main task is to understand the system in its elementary form. Only then can the model be improved based on other, more detailed data. A model, once it emerges, is usually constantly criticized and updated with data.

The value of the global model is that it allows you to show the point on the graph where growth is expected to stop and a global catastrophe is most likely to begin. To date, various particular techniques of the global modeling method have been developed. For example, Meadows' group uses the principle of system dynamics. The peculiarity of this technique is that: 1) the state of the system is completely described by a small set of quantities; 2) the evolution of the system over time is described by 1st order differential equations. It should be borne in mind that system dynamics deals only with exponential growth and equilibrium states.

The methodological potential of the theory of hierarchical systems applied by Mesarovic and Pestel is much wider than that of the Meadows group. It becomes possible to create multi-level systems.

Vasily Leontiev's input-output method is a matrix reflecting the structure of intersectoral flows, production, exchange and consumption. Leontiev himself explored the structural relationships in the economy in conditions where “many seemingly unrelated interdependent flows of production, distribution, consumption and investment constantly influence each other and are ultimately determined by a number of basic characteristics of the system” (Leontiev, 1958 , p. 8).

A real system can be used as a model. For example, agrocenosis is an experimental model of biocenosis.

All activities to transform nature are modeling, which accelerates the formation of theory. Since risk must be taken into account when organizing production, modeling allows one to calculate the probability and severity of the risk. Thus, modeling contributes to optimization, i.e. choosing the best ways to transform the natural environment.

The goal of social ecology is to create a theory of the evolution of the relationship between man and nature, a logic and methodology for transforming the natural environment.

Social ecology reveals the patterns of relationships between nature and society; it is designed to understand and help bridge the gap between humanitarian and natural science knowledge.

The laws of social ecology are as fundamental as the laws of physics. However, the subject of social ecology is very complex: three qualitatively different subsystems - inanimate nature, living nature, human society. Currently, social ecology is predominantly an empirical science, and its laws often look like extremely general aphoristic statements (“Commoner’s laws”*).

The concept of law is interpreted by most methodologists in the sense of an unambiguous cause-and-effect relationship. In cybernetics, a broader interpretation has been adopted: law is a limitation on diversity. It is this interpretation that is more suitable for social ecology.

Social ecology reveals the fundamental limitations of human activity. The adaptation capabilities of the biosphere are not limitless. Hence the “ecological imperative”: human activity should in no case exceed the adaptive capabilities of the biosphere.

The law of correspondence of productive forces and production relations to the state of the natural environment is recognized as the basic law of social ecology.

SOCIAL ECOLOGY is a branch of science that studies the relationship between human communities and the surrounding geographic-spatial, social and cultural environment, the direct and collateral influence of industrial activities on the composition and properties of the environment, the environmental impact of anthropogenic, especially urbanized, landscapes, and other environmental factors on physical and mental health of a person and the gene pool of human populations, etc. Already in the 19th century, the American scientist D. P. Marsh, having analyzed the diverse forms of human destruction of natural balance, formulated a program for nature conservation. French geographers of the 20th century (P. Vidal de la Blache, J. Brun, Z. Martonne) developed the concept of human geography, the subject of which is the study of a group of phenomena occurring on the planet and involved in human activity. The works of representatives of the Dutch and French geographical school of the 20th century (L. Febvre, M. Sor), constructive geography developed by Soviet scientists A. A. Grigoriev, I. P. Gerasimov, analyze the impact of man on the geographical landscape, the embodiment of his activities in the social space.

The development of geochemistry and biogeochemistry revealed the transformation of humankind's industrial activity into a powerful geochemical factor, which served as the basis for identifying a new geological era - anthropogenic (Russian geologist A.P. Pavlov) or psychozoic (American scientist C. Schuchert). The doctrine of V.I. Vernadsky about the biosphere and noosphere is associated with a new look at the geological consequences of the social activities of mankind.

A number of aspects of social ecology are also studied in historical geography, which studies the connections between ethnic groups and the natural environment. The formation of social ecology is associated with the activities of the Chicago school. The subject and status of social ecology are the subject of debate: it is defined either as a systemic understanding of the environment, or as a science about the social mechanisms of the relationship between human society and the environment, or as a science that focuses on humans as a biological species (Homo sapiens). Social ecology has significantly changed scientific thinking, developing new theoretical approaches and methodological orientations among representatives of various sciences, contributing to the formation of new ecological thinking. Social ecology analyzes the natural environment as a differentiated system, the various components of which are in dynamic equilibrium, considers the Earth's biosphere as an ecological niche of humanity, connecting the environment and human activity into a single system "nature - society", reveals the human impact on the balance of natural ecosystems, poses the question about the management and rationalization of the relationship between man and nature. Ecological thinking finds its expression in various proposed options for reorienting technology and production. Some of them are associated with sentiments of environmental pessimism and aparmism (from the French alarme - anxiety), with the revival of reactionary-romantic concepts of the Rousseauian type, from the point of view of which the root cause of the environmental crisis is scientific and technological progress itself, with the emergence of doctrines of “organic growth” ", "steady state", etc., who consider it necessary to sharply limit or even suspend technical and economic development. In other options, in contrast to this pessimistic assessment of the future of humanity and the prospects for environmental management, projects are put forward for a radical restructuring of technology, ridding it of miscalculations that led to environmental pollution (an alternative science and technology program, a model of closed production cycles), and the creation of new technical means and technological processes ( transport, energy, etc.), acceptable from an environmental point of view. The principles of social ecology are also expressed in ecological economics, which takes into account the costs not only for the development of nature, but also for the protection and restoration of the ecosphere, emphasizes the importance of criteria not only for profitability and productivity, but also for the environmental validity of technical innovations, environmental control over planning industry and environmental management. The ecological approach has led to the identification within social ecology of the ecology of culture, in which ways are sought to preserve and restore various elements of the cultural environment created by humanity throughout its history (architectural monuments, landscapes, etc.), and the ecology of science, which analyzes geographical location of research centers, personnel, imbalances in the regional and national network of research institutions, media, funding in the structure of scientific communities.

The development of social ecology has served as a powerful impetus for advancing new values to humanity - the preservation of ecosystems, treating the Earth as a unique ecosystem, prudent and caring attitude towards living things, the co-evolution of nature and humanity, etc. Tendencies towards an ecological reorientation of ethics are found in various ethical concepts: the teachings of A. Schweitzer about a reverent attitude towards life, the ethics of nature of the American ecologist O. Leopold, the space ethics of K. E. Tsiolkovsky, the ethics of love of life developed by the Soviet biologist D. P. Filatov, etc.

Problems of social ecology are usually considered to be among the most acute and urgent among the global problems of our time, the solution of which determines the possibility of survival of both humanity itself and all life on Earth. A necessary condition for their solution is the recognition of the priority of universal human values as the basis for broad international cooperation of various social, political, national, class and other forces in overcoming the environmental dangers that are fraught with the arms race, uncontrolled scientific and technological progress, and many anthropogenic impacts on the environment person.

At the same time, problems of social ecology are expressed in specific forms in regions of the planet that are different in their natural-geographical and socio-economic parameters, at the level of specific ecosystems. Taking into account the limited sustainability and self-healing ability of natural ecosystems, as well as their cultural value, is becoming an increasingly important factor in the design and implementation of industrial activities of humans and society. This often forces people to abandon previously adopted programs for the development of productive forces and the use of natural resources.

In general, historically developing human activity in modern conditions takes on a new dimension - it cannot be considered truly reasonable, meaningful and expedient if it ignores the requirements and imperatives dictated by ecology.

A. P. Ogurtsov, B. G. Yudin

New philosophical encyclopedia. In four volumes. / Institute of Philosophy RAS. Scientific ed. advice: V.S. Stepin, A.A. Guseinov, G.Yu. Semigin. M., Mysl, 2010, vol.IV, p. 423-424.

Literature:

Marsh D. P. Man and Nature, trans. from English St. Petersburg, 1866; Dorst J. Before nature dies, trans. from French M., 1908; Watt K. Ecology and management of natural resources, trans. from English M., 1971; Ehrenfeld D. Nature and People, trans. from English M., 1973; Interaction between nature and society. Philosophical, geographical, environmental aspects of the problem. Sat. Art. M., 1973; Man and his habitat. - “VF”, 1973, No. 1-4; Commoner B. Closing Circle, trans. from English L., 1974; It's him. Technology of profit, trans. from English M., 1970; Ward B., Dubos R. There is only one Earth, trans. from English M., 1975; Budyka M.I. Global ecology. M., 1977; Dynamic balance between man and nature. Minsk, 1977; Odum G., Odum E. Energy basis of man and nature, trans. from English M., 1978; Moiseev N. N., Alexandrov V. V., Tarko A. M. Man and the biosphere. M., 1985; Problems of human ecology. M., 1986; Odum Yu. Ecology, trans. from English, vol. 1-2. M„ 1986; Gorelov A. A. Social ecology. M., 1998; Park R. E. Human Communities. The City and Human Ecology. Glencoe, 1952; Perspectives en Ecologie Humaine. P., 1972; Ehrlich P. R., Ehrllch A. H., Holdren J. P. Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions. S.F., 1973; Lexikon der Umweltethik. Gott.- Dusseldorf, 1985.

Social ecology

Social ecology is one of the oldest sciences. Such thinkers as the ancient Greek philosopher, mathematician and astronomer Anaxagoras (500-428 BC), the ancient Greek philosopher and physician Empedocles (487-424 BC), the greatest philosopher and encyclopedist, showed interest in it Aristotle (384-322 BC). The main problem that worried them was the problem of the relationship between nature and man.

Also, the ancient Greek historian Herodotus (484-425 BC), the ancient Greek physician Hippocrates (460-377 BC), and the famous scientist in the field of geography Eratosthenes (276- 194 BC) and the idealist philosopher Plato (428-348 BC). It is worth noting that the works and thoughts of these ancient thinkers formed the basis of the modern understanding of social ecology.

Definition 1

Social ecology is a complex scientific discipline that examines interactions in the “society-nature” system. In addition, a complex subject for the study of social ecology is the relationship between human society and the natural environment.

Being a science about the interests of various social groups in the field of environmental management, social ecology is structured into several main types:

Economic social ecology – explores the relationship between nature and society from the point of view of the economic use of available resources;
Demographic social ecology - studies the various segments of the population and settlements that simultaneously live throughout the globe;
Futurological social ecology – its area of interest is environmental forecasting in the social sphere.

Functions and key tasks of social ecology

As a scientific field, social ecology performs a number of key functions.

Firstly, this is a theoretical function. It aims to develop the most important and relevant conceptual paradigms that explain the development of society from the point of view of environmental processes and phenomena.

Secondly, the pragmatic function in which social ecology implements the dissemination of multiple environmental knowledge, as well as information about the environmental situation and the state of society. Within the framework of this function, some concern about the state of the environment is shown, its main problems are highlighted.

Thirdly, the prognostic function - it means that within the framework of social ecology, both immediate and long-term prospects for the development of society and the ecological sphere are determined, and it also seems possible to control changes in the biological sphere.

Fourthly, the environmental protection function. It involves research into the influence of environmental factors on the environment and its elements.

Environmental factors can be of several types:

Abiotic environmental factors are factors related to impacts from inanimate nature;
Biotic environmental factors are the influence of one species of living organisms on other species. Such influence may occur within a single species or between several different species;
Anthropogenic environmental factors - their essence lies in the impact of human economic activity on the environment. Such impacts often lead to negative problems, such as excessive depletion of natural resources and pollution of the natural environment.

Note 1

The main task of social ecology is to study the current and key mechanisms of human impact on the environment. It is also very important to take into account those transformations that act as a result of such influence and, in general, human activity in the natural environment.

Problems of social ecology and safety

The problems of social ecology are quite extensive. Today, the problems come down to three key groups.

Firstly, these are social environmental problems on a planetary scale. Their meaning lies in the need for a global forecast in relation to the population, as well as to resources in conditions of intensively developing production. Thus, natural reserves are depleted, which calls into question the further development of civilization.

Secondly, social environmental problems on a regional scale. They consist in studying the state of individual parts of the ecosystem at the regional and district level. The so-called “regional ecology” plays an important role here. Thus, by collecting information about local ecosystems and their condition, it is possible to get a general idea of the state of the modern ecological sphere.

Thirdly, social problems of micro-scale ecology. Here, important importance is given to the study of the main characteristics and various parameters of urban human living conditions. For example, this is urban ecology or urban sociology. Thus, the human condition in a rapidly developing city, and his direct personal impact on this development, is explored.

Note 2

As we see, the most basic problem lies in the active development of industrial practices in human activity. This led to an increase in his intervention in the natural environment, as well as an increase in his influence on it. This led to the growth of cities and industrial enterprises. But the downside is the consequences in the form of soil, water and air pollution. All this directly affects a person’s condition and his health. Life expectancy in many countries has also decreased, which is a fairly pressing social problem.

Prevention of these problems can only be done by prohibiting the increase in technical power. Or a person needs to abandon certain types of activities that are associated with uncontrolled and harmful use of resources (deforestation, draining of lakes). Such decisions need to be made at the global level, because only through joint efforts is it possible to eliminate the negative consequences.

SOCIAL ECOLOGY IN THE GLOBAL WORLD

Rapid industrialization and urbanization, a sharp increase in the planet's population, intensive chemicalization of agriculture, and other types of anthropogenic pressure on nature significantly disrupted the cycle of substances and natural energy processes in the biosphere, damaged its mechanisms self-healing . This jeopardized the health and life of modern and future generations of people and, in general, the continued existence of civilization.

Analyzing the current situation, many experts come to the conclusion that humanity is currently threatened two mortal dangers:

1) comparatively fast death in the fire of a global nuclear missile war and

2) slow extinction due to deterioration in the quality of the living environment, which is caused by the destruction of the biosphere due to irrational economic activities.

Therefore, speaking about the current situation, everyone should understand that the modern crisis has affected not only the economy and nature. In crisis, it is, first of all, the person himself with his centuries-old way of thinking, needs, habits, way of life and behavior. The crisis situation of man lies in the fact that his entire way of life opposes nature. We can get out of this crisis only if man is transformed into a being friendly with nature who understands it and knows how to be in agreement with it. But for this, people must learn to live in harmony with each other and take care of future generations. Every person must learn all this, no matter where he has to work and no matter what tasks he has to solve.

So, in the conditions of the progressive destruction of the Earth's biosphere, in order to resolve the contradictions between society and nature, it is necessary to transform human activity on new principles. These principles provide achieving a reasonable compromise between the social and economic needs of society and the ability of the biosphere to satisfy them without threatening its normal functioning. Thus, the time has come for a critical review of all areas of human activity, as well as areas of knowledge and spiritual culture that shape a person’s worldview.

Humanity is now being tested for authenticity reasonableness . It will be able to pass this exam only if it fulfills the requirements that the biosphere places on it. These requirements are:

1) biosphere compatibility based on knowledge and use of the laws of conservation of the biosphere;

2) moderation in the consumption of natural resources, overcoming the wastefulness of the consumer structure of society;

3) mutual tolerance and peacefulness of the peoples of the planet in relations with each other;

4) adherence to generally significant, environmentally thoughtful and consciously set global goals of social development.

The scientific basis of such activities should be a new branch of knowledge - social ecology .

Prehistory of social ecology. Reasons for the emergence of social ecology as an independent scientific discipline

Problems associated with the interaction of society and its environment are called ecological problems. Ecology was originally a branch of biology (the term was introduced by Ernst Haeckel in 1866). Biological ecologists study the relationships of animals, plants and entire communities with their environment. Ecological view of the world– such a ranking of values and priorities of human activity, when the most important thing is the preservation of a human-friendly living environment.

Another precursor to social ecology is geographical school in sociology: adherents of this scientific school pointed out that the mental characteristics of people and their way of life are directly dependent on the natural conditions of a given area. Let us remember that C. Montesquieu argued that “the power of climate is the first power in the world.” Our compatriot L.I. Mechnikov pointed out that world civilizations developed in the basins of great rivers, on the shores of seas and oceans. K. Marx believed that a temperate climate is most suitable for the development of capitalism. K. Marx and F. Engels developed the concept of the unity of man and nature, the main idea of which was: to know the laws of nature and apply them correctly.

The emergence and subsequent development of social ecology was a natural consequence of the growing interest of representatives of various humanitarian disciplines (such as sociology, economics, political science, psychology, etc.) in the problem of harmonizing the relationship between society and nature, man and the environment. And this is possible only when the basis for the socio-economic development of society becomes rational environmental management .

Initially, many existing sciences tried to develop scientific principles of rational environmental management - biology, geography, medicine, economics. Recently, ecology has become increasingly involved in these issues. Medical-biological and medical-demographic aspects of the relationship between society and nature were considered in medical geography, environmental hygiene and later in the new field of ecology - human ecology. In general, many new sections have arisen in traditional sciences. For example, engineering geology began to deal with the protection and rational use of the geological environment. Socio-ecological law began to take shape in jurisprudence. In economic science, such a section as environmental economics has emerged.

Representatives of various scientific disciplines began to argue that the problem of rational environmental management was theirs alone. But it turned out that each science, when studying the problem of rational environmental management, focused attention on those points that were closer to it. Chemists, for example, were not concerned with studying a problem from a social or economic point of view and vice versa.

It has become obvious that an isolated study of all aspects of this problem - medical, biological, social, economic, etc., does not allow creating a general theory of balanced interaction between society and nature and effectively solving practical problems of rational environmental management. For this we needed a new one interdisciplinary science .

Such science began to take shape almost simultaneously in many countries of the world. In our country, different names were used to designate it - natural sociology, sozology, environmental science, applied ecology, global ecology, socio-economic ecology, modern ecology, big ecology, etc. However, these terms are not widely used.

1.2. Stages of development of social ecology.
Subject of social ecology

The term “social ecology” itself appeared thanks to social psychologists - American researchers R. Park and E. Burgess. They first used this term in 1921 in their work on the theory of population behavior in an urban environment. Using the concept of “social ecology”, they wanted to emphasize that in this context we are not talking about a biological, but about a social phenomenon, which, however, also has biological characteristics. Thus, in America, social ecology was originally more of a sociology of the city or urban sociology.

In 1922 H. Burroughs addressed the American Association of Geographers with the presidential address, which was called "Geography as Human Ecology" » . The main idea of this appeal is to bring ecology closer to people. The Chicago school of human ecology has gained worldwide fame: the study of the mutual relations of man as an integral organism with his entire environment. It was then that ecology and sociology first came into close interaction. Ecological methods began to be used to analyze the social system.

One of the first definitions of social ecology was given in his work in 1927. R. McKenziel, who characterized it as the science of the territorial and temporal relations of people, which are influenced by selective (elective), distributive (distribution) and accommodative (adaptive) forces of the environment. This definition of the subject of social ecology was intended to become the basis for the study of the territorial division of the population within urban agglomerations.

It should be noted, however, that the term “social ecology”, which seems best suited to designate a specific area of research into the relationship of man as a social being with the environment of his existence, has not taken root in Western science, within which preference from the very beginning began to be given to the concept of “human ecology”. This created certain difficulties for the establishment of social ecology as an independent discipline, humanitarian in its main focus. The fact is that, in parallel with the development of socio-ecological issues proper within the framework of human ecology, bioecological aspects of human life were developed. Human biological ecology, which had by this time undergone a long period of formation and therefore had greater weight in science and had a more developed categorical and methodological apparatus, “overshadowed” humanitarian social ecology from the eyes of the advanced scientific community for a long time. And yet, social ecology existed for some time and developed relatively independently as the ecology (sociology) of the city.

Despite the obvious desire of representatives of the humanitarian branches of knowledge to liberate social ecology from the “yoke” of bioecology, it continued to be significantly influenced by the latter for many decades. As a result, social ecology borrowed most of the concepts and its categorical apparatus from the ecology of plants and animals, as well as from general ecology. At the same time, as D. Z. Markovich notes, social ecology gradually improved its methodological apparatus with the development of the spatio-temporal approach of social geography, the economic theory of distribution, etc.

Significant progress in the development of social ecology and the process of its separation from bioecology occurred in the 60s of the current century. The World Congress of Sociologists that took place in 1966 played a special role in this. The rapid development of social ecology in subsequent years led to the fact that at the next congress of sociologists, held in Varna in 1970, it was decided to create the Research Committee of the World Association of Sociologists on Problems of Social Ecology. Thus, as D. Z. Markovich notes, the existence of social ecology as an independent scientific branch was, in fact, recognized and an impetus was given to its more rapid development and more precise definition of its subject.

During the period under review, the list of tasks that this branch of scientific knowledge was gradually gaining independence expanded significantly. If at the dawn of the formation of social ecology, the efforts of researchers were mainly limited to searching in the behavior of a territorially localized human population for analogues of the laws and ecological relations characteristic of biological communities, then from the second half of the 60s, the range of issues under consideration was supplemented by the problems of determining the place and role of man in the biosphere , developing ways to determine the optimal conditions for its life and development, harmonizing relationships with other components of the biosphere. The process of social ecology that has embraced social ecology in the last two decades has led to the fact that in addition to the above-mentioned tasks, the range of issues developed by it included the problems of identifying general laws of functioning and development of social systems, studying the influence of natural factors on the processes of socio-economic development and finding ways to control action these factors.

In our country, by the end of the 70s, conditions had also developed for the separation of socio-ecological issues into an independent area of interdisciplinary research. A significant contribution to the development of domestic social ecology was made by E.V. Girusov, A. N. Kochergin, Yu. G. Markov, N. F. Reimers, S. N. Solomina and others.

One of the most important problems facing researchers at the present stage of development of social ecology is the development of a unified approach to understanding its subject. Despite the obvious progress achieved in studying various aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature, as well as a significant number of publications on socio-ecological issues that have appeared in the last two or three decades in our country and abroad, on the issue of There are still different opinions about what exactly this branch of scientific knowledge studies. In the school reference book “Ecology” by A.P. Oshmarin and V.I. Oshmarina, two options for defining social ecology are given: in a narrow sense, it is understood as the science “about the interaction of human society with the natural environment,” and in a broad sense, the science “about the interaction the individual and human society with natural, social and cultural environments.” It is quite obvious that in each of the presented cases of interpretation we are talking about different sciences that claim the right to be called “social ecology”. No less revealing is a comparison of the definitions of social ecology and human ecology. According to the same source, the latter is defined as: “I) the science of the interaction of human society with nature; 2) ecology of the human personality; 3) ecology of human populations, including the doctrine of ethnic groups.” The almost complete identity of the definition of social ecology, understood “in the narrow sense,” and the first version of the interpretation of human ecology is clearly visible. The desire for actual identification of these two branches of scientific knowledge is, indeed, still characteristic of foreign science, but it is quite often subject to reasoned criticism by domestic scientists. S.N. Solomina, in particular, pointing out the advisability of dividing social ecology and human ecology, limits the subject of the latter to consideration of the social-hygienic and medical-genetic aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature. V.A. Bukhvalov, L.V. Bogdanova and some other researchers agree with this interpretation of the subject of human ecology, but N.A. Agadzhanyan, V.P. Kaznacheev and N.F. Reimers strongly disagree, according to whom, this The discipline covers a much wider range of issues of interaction between the anthroposystem (considered at all levels of its organization - from the individual to humanity as a whole) with the biosphere, as well as with the internal biosocial organization of human society. It is easy to see that such an interpretation of the subject of human ecology actually equates it to social ecology, understood in a broad sense. This situation is largely due to the fact that at present there has been a steady trend of convergence of these two disciplines, when there is an interpenetration of the subjects of the two sciences and their mutual enrichment through the joint use of empirical material accumulated in each of them, as well as methods and technologies of socio-ecological and anthropoecological research.

Today, an increasing number of researchers are inclined to an expanded interpretation of the subject of social ecology. Thus, according to D.Zh. Markovich, the subject of study of modern social ecology, which he understands as private sociology, are specific connections between a person and his environment. Based on this, the main tasks of social ecology can be defined as follows: the study of the influence of the habitat as a set of natural and social factors on a person, as well as the influence of a person on the environment, perceived as the framework of human life.

A slightly different, but not contradictory, interpretation of the subject of social ecology is given by T.A. Akimova and V.V. Khaskin. From their point of view, social ecology as part of human ecology is a complex of scientific branches that study the connection of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the connection of humans with the natural and social environment of their habitat. This approach seems to us more correct, because it does not limit the subject of social ecology to the framework of sociology or any other separate humanitarian discipline, but especially emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.

Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to especially note the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of humanity with its environment. According to E.V.Girusova, social ecology must study, first of all, the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, realized by man in his life.

Like any other scientific discipline, social ecology developed gradually. Three main stages in the development of this science can be distinguished.

The criticism of The Limits to Growth was comprehensive and thorough. The results of criticism can be reduced to two points:

1) modeling on computers of socio-economic systems at the global and regional levels promising;

2) "models of the world" Meadows is still far from adequate to reality.

The beginning of the third - global-political - stage of social ecology is considered to be 1992, when the International Conference on Environment and Development took place in Rio de Janeiro. Heads of 179 states adopted a coordinated strategy based on the concept of sustainable development.

1.3. The place of social ecology in the system of sciences.
Social ecology is a complex scientific discipline

Social ecology arose at the intersection of sociology, ecology, philosophy and other branches of science, with each of which it closely interacts. In order to determine the position of social ecology in the system of sciences, it is necessary to keep in mind that the word “ecology” means in some cases one of the environmental scientific disciplines, in others – all scientific environmental disciplines. Environmental sciences should be approached in a differentiated manner (Fig. 1).

Social ecology is a link between technical sciences (hydraulic engineering, etc.) and social sciences (history, jurisprudence, etc.).

The following arguments are given in favor of the proposed system. There is an urgent need for the idea of a circle of sciences to replace the idea of a hierarchy of sciences. The classification of sciences is usually based on the principle of hierarchy (subordination of some sciences to others) and sequential fragmentation (division, not combination of sciences). It is better to build the classification according to the type of circle (Fig. 1).

Rice. 1. The place of environmental disciplines in the holistic system of sciences (Gorelov, 2002)

This diagram does not claim to be complete. It does not include transitional sciences (geochemistry, geophysics, biophysics, biochemistry, etc.), whose role in solving the environmental problem is extremely important. These sciences contribute to the differentiation of knowledge, cement the entire system, embodying the contradictory processes of “differentiation - integration” of knowledge. The diagram shows the importance of “connecting” sciences, including social ecology. Unlike sciences of the centrifugal type (physics, etc.), they can be called centripetal. These sciences have not yet reached the appropriate level of development, because in the past not enough attention was paid to the connections between the sciences, and it is very difficult to study them.

When a knowledge system is built on the principle of hierarchy, there is a danger that some sciences will hinder the development of others, and this is dangerous from an environmental point of view. It is important that the prestige of the sciences about the natural environment is not lower than the prestige of the sciences of the physical, chemical and technical cycle. Biologists and ecologists have accumulated a lot of data that indicate the need for a much more careful, caring attitude towards the biosphere than is currently the case. But such an argument has weight only from the standpoint of a separate consideration of branches of knowledge. Science is a connected mechanism; the use of data from some sciences depends on others. If the data of sciences conflict with each other, preference is given to sciences that enjoy greater prestige, i.e. currently the sciences of the physicochemical cycle.

Science must approach the degree of a harmonious system. Such science will help create a harmonious system of relationships between man and nature and ensure the harmonious development of man himself. Science contributes to the progress of society not in isolation, but together with other branches of culture. Such a synthesis is no less important than the greening of science. Value reorientation is an integral part of the reorientation of the entire society. The attitude towards the natural environment as an integrity presupposes the integrity of culture, a harmonious connection between science and art, philosophy, etc. Moving in this direction, science will move away from focusing solely on technical progress, responding to the deep needs of society - ethical, aesthetic, as well as those that affect the definition of the meaning of life and the goals of social development (Gorelov, 2000).

The place of social ecology among the sciences of the ecological cycle is shown in Fig. 2.

Rice. 2. The relationship of social ecology with other sciences (Gorelov, 2002)

1 The concept of social ecology

2 Social-ecological interaction

3 Social and environmental education

4 Ecological aspects in Hughes' sociology

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

Social ecology is the science of harmonizing relations between society and nature.

Social ecology analyzes the attitude of man in its inherent humanistic horizon from the point of view of its compliance with the historical needs of human development, from the perspective of cultural justification and perspective, through the theoretical comprehension of the world in its general definitions, which express the measure of the historical unity of man and nature. Any scientist thinks about the main concepts of the problem of interaction between society and nature through the prism of his science. The conceptual and categorical apparatus of socioecology is being formed, developed and improved. This process is diverse and covers all aspects of socioecology not only objectively, but also subjectively, uniquely reflecting scientific creativity and influencing the evolution of scientific interests and searches of both individual scientists and entire teams.

The approach to society and nature that social ecology offers may seem more intellectually demanding, but it avoids the simplistic dualism and immaturity of reductionism. Social ecology tries to show how nature slowly, in phases, transformed into society, without ignoring the differences between them, on the one hand, and the degree of their interpenetration, on the other. The daily socialization of youth by family is no less based on biology than the constant care of medicine for the elderly is based on established social factors. We will never cease to be mammals with our primal instincts, but we have institutionalized them and followed them through a variety of social forms. So, the social and the natural constantly penetrate each other without losing their specificity in this process of interaction.

The purpose of the test is to consider the environmental aspect in social work.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve a number of the following tasks:

Define social ecology;

Explore socio-ecological interactions;

Identify socio-ecological education;

Consider environmental aspects in Hughes's sociology.

1 The concept of social ecology

One of the most important problems facing researchers at the present stage of development of social ecology is the development of a unified approach to understanding its subject. Despite the obvious progress achieved in studying various aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature, as well as a significant number of publications on socio-ecological issues that have appeared in the last two or three decades in our country and abroad, on the issue of There are still different opinions about what exactly this branch of scientific knowledge studies. In the school reference book “Ecology” A.P. Oshmarin and V.I. Oshmarina gives two options for defining social ecology: in a narrow sense, it is understood as the science “about the interaction of human society with the natural environment,” and in a broad sense, the science “about the interaction of an individual and human society with the natural, social and cultural environments.” It is quite obvious that in each of the presented cases of interpretation we are talking about different sciences that claim the right to be called “social ecology”. No less revealing is a comparison of the definitions of social ecology and human ecology. According to the same source, the latter is defined as: “1) the science of the interaction of human society with nature; 2) ecology of the human personality; 3) ecology of human populations, including the doctrine of ethnic groups.” The almost complete identity of the definition of social ecology, understood “in the narrow sense,” and the first version of the interpretation of human ecology is clearly visible. The desire for actual identification of these two branches of scientific knowledge is, indeed, still characteristic of foreign science, but it is quite often subject to reasoned criticism by domestic scientists. S. N. Solomina, in particular, pointing out the advisability of dividing social ecology and human ecology, limits the subject of the latter to consideration of the socio-hygienic and medical-genetic aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature. V.A. agrees with this interpretation of the subject of human ecology. Bukhvalov, L.V. Bogdanova and some other researchers, but N.A. categorically disagree. Agadzhanyan, V.P. Kaznacheev and N.F. Reimers, according to whom, this discipline covers a much wider range of issues of interaction of the anthroposystem (considered at all levels of its organization from the individual to humanity as a whole) with the biosphere, as well as with the internal biosocial organization of human society. It is easy to see that such an interpretation of the subject of human ecology actually equates it to social ecology, understood in a broad sense. This situation is largely due to the fact that at present there has been a steady trend of convergence of these two disciplines, when there is an interpenetration of the subjects of the two sciences and their mutual enrichment through the joint use of empirical material accumulated in each of them, as well as methods and technologies of socio-ecological and anthropoecological studies.

Today, an increasing number of researchers are inclined to an expanded interpretation of the subject of social ecology. So, according to D.Zh. Markovich, the subject of study of modern social ecology, which he understands as a private sociology, is the specific connections between man and his environment. Based on this, the main tasks of social ecology can be defined as follows: the study of the influence of the habitat as a set of natural and social factors on a person, as well as the influence of a person on the environment, perceived as the framework of human life.

A slightly different, but not contradictory, interpretation of the subject of social ecology is given by T.A. Akimov and V.V. Haskin. From their point of view, social ecology, as part of human ecology, is a complex of scientific branches that study the connection of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the connection of humans with the natural and social environment of their habitat. This approach seems to us more correct, because it does not limit the subject of social ecology to the framework of sociology or any other separate humanitarian discipline, but especially emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.

Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to especially note the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of humanity with its environment. According to E.V. Girusov, social ecology should study, first of all, the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, implemented by man in his life.

2 Social-ecological interaction

L.V. Maksimova identifies two main aspects when studying human relations with the environment. Firstly, the entire set of influences exerted on a person by the environment and various environmental factors is studied.

In modern anthropoecology and social ecology, environmental factors to which a person is forced to adapt are usually referred to as adaptive factors. These factors are usually divided into three large groups - biotic, abiotic and anthropogenic environmental factors. Biotic factors are direct or indirect influences from other organisms inhabiting the human environment (animals, plants, microorganisms). Abiotic factors are factors of inorganic nature (light, temperature, humidity, pressure, physical fields - gravitational, electromagnetic, ionizing and penetrating radiation, etc.). A special group consists of anthropogenic factors generated by the activities of man himself, the human community (pollution of the atmosphere and hydrosphere, plowing of fields, deforestation, replacement of natural complexes with artificial structures, etc.).

The second aspect of the study of the relationship between man and the environment is the study of the problem of human adaptation to the environment and its changes.

The concept of human adaptation is one of the fundamental concepts of modern social ecology, reflecting the process of human connection with the environment and its changes. Initially appearing within the framework of physiology, the term “adaptation” soon penetrated into other areas of knowledge and began to be used to describe a wide range of phenomena and processes in the natural, technical and human sciences, giving rise to the formation of an extensive group of concepts and terms reflecting various aspects and properties of adaptation processes man to the conditions of his environment and his result.

The term “human adaptation” is used not only to denote the process of adaptation, but also to comprehend the property acquired by a person as a result of this process - adaptability to the conditions of existence. L.V. Maksimova, however, believes that in this case it is more appropriate to talk about adaptation.

However, even with an unambiguous interpretation of the concept of adaptation, it is felt to be insufficient to describe the process it denotes. This is reflected in the emergence of such clarifying concepts as deadaptation and readaptation, which characterize the direction of the process (deadaptation is the gradual loss of adaptive properties and, as a consequence, a decrease in fitness; readaptation is the reverse process), and the term disadaptation (disorder of the body’s adaptation to changing conditions of existence) , reflecting the nature (quality) of this process.