Subject, tasks, history of social ecology. Sociological approach to the study of environmental problems Difficulties in creating methods of social ecology

The subject of social ecology. Social ecology was first defined by McKenzie (1925). In his interpretation, it is easy to notice traces of the ecology of animals and plants, which later disappear, especially after the Second World War.

After that, more and more often, studies of types of human communities and their development are included in the subject of social ecology. Thus, some believe (Weigman) that social ecology studies the primary connections and structure of settlements from an anthropo-geographical point of view. With such a definition, the role of human influence on the nature of ecosystems falls out, so we can say that it is incomplete. More complete is the definition of social ecology, according to which its subject is the spatio-temporal specific relationships of living beings as a condition for the joint life of people, as well as the reverse influence of already existing social structures on the development and formation of the natural environment. The definition of social ecology is close to it, according to which the subject of research is the explanation of the place and human interaction in terms of the influence of the place of residence on political behavior and political statements.

In Russian philosophical and sociological literature, numerous attempts are made to define the subject of social ecology. In accordance with one fairly common approach, the subject of social ecology is the noosphere, i.e. a system of socio-natural relations that is formed and functions as a result of the conscious activity of people, i.e. the subject of social ecology is the processes of formation and functioning of the noosphere.

In the 80s. in Russia there was a lot of discussion about the subject of social ecology and its relation to other sciences in order to determine its place and significance in the process of optimizing the relationship between society and nature 13 . At the same time, it was most often noted that social ecology should study complex and multi-valued relationships in the system "society - man - technology - natural environment", discover general laws of interaction and ways to optimize and harmonize relations in the system "society - nature" 14 . It was pointed out that social ecology cannot have the nature of the traditional sciences (physics, chemistry, biology, etc.). Social ecology is specific, because it studies the regular connections between the social sphere and all other spheres, taken systemically. Komarov V.D., for example, denotes the essence of social ecology as follows: it is “subjective only in the sense that it studies a special sphere (nature management), but the very nature of this sphere is such that it presents both material and spiritual phenomena” 15 .

The definition of the subject of social ecology reflects, first of all, the philosophical and theoretical approach of the authors to the relations in the system "man - society - nature", their understanding of the environment and the position that ecology is not only a natural, but also a social science. From this follows a more complete definition of its subject matter. At the same time, it should be taken into account that social ecology arises when environmental problems begin to be studied from a sociological point of view and when it becomes obvious that they are the result of a mismatch between human, natural and industrial systems, i.e. mismatches of the biosphere, technosphere and sociosphere. In the context of this approach, social ecology acts as a sectoral sociology, the subject of which should be the interaction between man and the environment, and the latter is understood as the unity of the natural and social spheres (which follows from the definition of man as a natural and social being), which cannot be strictly separated from each other. friend. Based on this, social ecology can be defined as a branch of sociology, the subject of which is the specific relationship between man and the environment; the influence of the latter as a combination of natural and social factors on a person, as well as its impact on the environment from the standpoint of its preservation for his life as a natural social being.

Social ecology should investigate the influence of individual factors in the totality of elements that make up the environment and their significance for the whole, which, together with a certain structure, represents the framework of human life as a natural-social being. At the same time, social ecology is determined from the general conceptualization of the universe and specific forms of life, takes into account the specifics of human life, although it is a biological being, but nevertheless provides the conditions for its existence differently than other living beings. With this interpretation, social ecology should explore the influence not only of the environment on a person, but also of the person himself on it, and not only from the position of appropriation, but also the preservation (and improvement) of it, since without this a person could not exist. But since social ecology is a sectoral sociology, it also studies the attitude of society (as a whole and in part) to the living, natural and social environment of a person. Social ecology, understood in this context, studies the relationship "nature - industrial system - society".

Social ecology, investigating the influence of man through his labor activity on the natural environment, must also investigate the influence of the industrial system not only on the complex system of relations in which man lives, but also on the natural conditions necessary for the development of the industrial system, not only as a technical, acting mediator between the relationship of man and nature, but also as a public. In addition, it is important to take into account the fact that a person lives in conditions of irremovable dependence on nature, since he cannot exist otherwise than in a situation of continuous exchange of substances with the environment in the course of his life (as a biological being) and material production (as a being). social)

The reduction of ecological approaches to social issues caused by the industrial system shifts the criticism of the industrial society into the plane of criticism of the industrial system, as a result of which the social basis of the industrial society is removed from criticism. Social ecology, along with criticism of the industrial system, should also analyze industrial society, based on the fact that the social community is a natural medium between society and natural systems. In fact, although the industrial system is a link between man and nature, its main characteristic features and relations in it have developed and are developing a certain type of society. It is the social community that should be the focus of criticism and analysis in the process of studying the relationship between industrial and natural systems and the basis for finding a way out of the crisis. The essence of the future must be derived from its essence.

The subject of the study of social ecology is not only the influence of the environment on a person in a society with undeveloped technology, but also social relations in an industrialized, urbanized society that affects a person through family, neighborhood and local relations. From this position, the specific territorial environment is important in social ecology. Therefore, it is advisable that, within the framework of social ecology, a relatively independent (territorial) level of research be singled out: settlements, urbanized zones, individual regions, regions, and the global level of the Earth. Social ecology at all levels of research should strive to maintain ecological balance.

Although social ecology should and does contribute to the solution of complex environmental problems (i.e., environmental problems), it cannot be reduced to only an applied discipline. Moreover, one should make theoretical generalizations and, on this basis, propose solutions to environmental problems. This means that social ecology must retain its theoretical claims in terms of the socio-ecological goals of industrial activity, but at the same time it must not abandon the practical social role 16 .

Regularities of social ecology. The problems of social ecology cannot be studied with the help of the mere collection and description of phenomena and factors. It is necessary to give their explanation through the establishment of links between elements in separate phenomena and through the interconnection of phenomena. In other words, social ecology as a science should establish scientific laws, evidence of objectively existing, necessary and essential connections between phenomena, the features of which are the general nature, constancy and the possibility of their foresight. Also, when analyzing attempts to establish the laws of social ecology, it should be indicated that they need to be determined, focusing on the understanding of society as an ecological subsystem. This will take into account the following points: firstly, since social ecology uses the categories of ecology in its formation and development, the formulation of its laws is based on the laws of ecology, with an expressed desire to emphasize the specificity of the manifestation of these laws in the relations "society - nature"; secondly, in the process of development of social ecology, as it becomes more and more independent (with the clarification of the subject of its study as a science), while formulating its laws as laws of a separate, private science, it is more and more freed from biological approach in establishing patterns in the field of "society - nature" with the expression of the attitude of society or individual social groups to the need to protect and preserve the environment surrounding a person; thirdly, the formulated laws of social ecology to a greater extent establish in which direction one should look for and identify its patterns, and to a lesser extent, they represent ideas about the relationships between phenomena that have become the subject of social ecology in the sense of scientific laws and their conceptual definition.

Altogether, it is possible to formulate ten basic laws of social ecology 17 . These laws are:

Man as a natural-social being lives in nature, created in such a way that could not be the result of human consciousness. In nature, all forms of the organic and inorganic world constitute an indestructible unity, and man is a part of this unity.

The living environment of a person consists of previously set natural conditions and circumstances that have arisen in addition to human activity, as well as conditions and circumstances created by human activity.

The possibilities for the development of socio-technical systems, which arise as a result of the human ability to comprehend and create, are not limited, while natural resources are limited, and some of them are irreplaceable.

The use of nature by man is limited by the need to maintain ecological balance in a given space and time, and environmental problems arise due to the lack of harmony between the biosphere, technosphere and sociosphere.

Rapid and comprehensive technological development is accompanied by an increase in the possibility of disturbing the ecological balance, and nature itself cannot be freed from its negative impact through self-regulation; this requires society's actions to preserve and protect the natural environment.

There is a relationship between the state of the human ecosystem, the concept and goals of social development and the quality of life of human communities and humans.

Environmental problems are global in nature, all societies that are components of humanity as a whole, existing on Earth, face the danger caused by the violation of the ecological balance, therefore, the conquest and development of nature by man, both locally and globally, must correspond to environmental opportunities. .

To overcome the unreasonable development of nature (which is becoming stronger with the development of human productive forces), it is necessary to develop ecological consciousness and understanding that neglect of the ecological laws of nature leads to the destruction of the biological system on which human life on Earth depends.

There is a connection between the human natural environment of life and his working environment, which manifests itself through the possibility of disturbing the ecological balance and which should be supported by the development of the concept of a system for protecting both the natural and working environment.

There is a connection between the concept of protecting the human living environment in individual societies and their socio-economic systems, and not only them, but also value systems and cultural and spiritual development.

We characterized the listed laws of social ecology as the main ones, which means that they can be further comprehended and critically revised on the basis of new research.

Method of social ecology. In order for social ecology to really become a special, independent science in the system of sciences, it is not enough for scientists to formulate more precisely the subject of its study (although there is no common opinion about the latter). It is necessary to derive and designate our own method of studying social ecology, since, as you know, individual sciences can be considered fully formed only after not only the subject of their study is determined, but also the method used in the study of the subject. However, the existing difficulties in the formation of the method of other sciences, most clearly manifested in the definition of the method of social ecology.

Social ecology, regardless of the differences in the definition of its subject, is a science that includes descriptive (descriptive) and explanatory (explicative) research, so scientists explore not only the phenomena that are identified and described, but also the connections between them and their explanation.

Features of individual sciences are manifested in their subject and method. In essence, individual sciences adapt to the subject of their study a general scientific method, the basic rules of which are common to all sciences and which are studied by methodology. Regardless of the definition, any scientific method has three main elements: prior knowledge about the subject of research, the technology for obtaining (new) knowledge, and the means used to know the subject. Existing knowledge about the subject of study helps scientists to adapt the procedures of cognition to it. This knowledge about the subject is already contained within the framework of some other science, but they are insufficient, so a new science appears.

But at the same time, for a more complete (and accurate) formulation of the subject of study of individual sciences, it is required and assumed to determine the specifics of their methods; this specificity is often defined as a normatively condensed theory. In essence, the method as a procedure for cognizing the subject of a given science can initially clearly differ from its theoretical fund, which contains, to a greater or lesser extent, its generalized knowledge expressed in concepts, laws, hypotheses and theories 18 . But the method of any science (in the most general logical form) is associated with the main theoretical provisions that prevail in this science, just as the theoretical foundation of science influences its orientation in the choice of method not only at the general level, but also in the choice of procedures and methods. research. In fact, each science, based on data about its subject, which are constantly replenished, opens up new problems, checks and refines previously acquired knowledge and, thus, thanks to its method, continuously expands and deepens its knowledge, develops its method. In this process of enriching scientific knowledge and method, scientists with their philosophical outlook and methodological approach play an important role. The role of philosophy is especially emphasized by researchers. As G.A. Bachinsky notes, domestic philosophers, in essence, gave social ecology a serious theoretical basis 19 .

All sciences, as already noted above, basically adhere to the methodological provisions common to all sciences, which they adapt to the subject of their research. But at the same time, just as one can group related sciences according to the proximity of their subjects, one can also speak of the general method of these groups of sciences. In this sense, in accordance with the division of the sciences into two main groups: natural and social, the methods of the natural and social sciences are also distinguished.

Separate sciences in the scientific knowledge of their subject of study use various methods, which, as a rule, are classified according to the degree of generality and structure: universal and special. The universal methods at the empirical level (the level of data collection) include observation and experiment, and at the theoretical level - induction, deduction, analysis, synthesis and analogy. At the same time, the methods of individual sciences, general or special, have different content and different areas of application.

Knowledge of certain regularities of the subject of science, on the basis of which the desire for its further study develops, is not in itself a method of this science. Based on these patterns, it is necessary to develop procedures for obtaining new knowledge (using existing ones) about the subject of science, but it includes the actions (methods) of the researcher's behavior in the process of cognition, in practical activities.

In this context, scientific research can be divided into five main phases: defining the subject of research and formulating the initial provisions, drawing up a research plan, collecting data, processing the information received, scientific analysis and verification 20 .

The first stage of scientific knowledge can be defined as the definition of the subject of research. Accordingly, the subject of research will be those individual phenomena in which it is necessary to emphasize their specificity in comparison with other phenomena, as well as related (or similar) phenomena or relationships, primarily causal between already known ones, i.e. scientifically verified, and even insufficiently scientifically verified phenomena.

When studying the subject of social ecology, there are certain difficulties both in defining the subject and in formulating the initial provisions, i.e. hypotheses. These difficulties stem from the complexity of the subject of study itself, since phenomena often lie on the border between natural and social, and also because of the insufficient level of scientific knowledge. And as already noted, such knowledge is necessary to determine the subject of research. In the same way, the absence or lack of knowledge makes it impossible to formulate hypotheses in accordance with scientific requirements.

The second stage of scientific work implies that on the basis of a certain subject and formulated hypotheses, a research plan is drawn up, including the organizational order of research and the organization of research groups. When drawing up a research plan for studying the subject of social ecology, it is necessary to proceed from the specifics of the subject, this determines the selection of members of the research group, as well as the choice of data collection method. Naturally, one will have to face difficulties both at the stage of data collection and in the processing and analysis of relationships between the studied phenomena due to the ambiguity of relations in the “nature-society” system.

The third (essential) stage of the process of scientific knowledge is the collection of data, including in the scientific study of the complex relationship between society and nature, when it is studied in social ecology from a sociological point of view. At this stage, data are collected about the studied phenomena, their essence and relationships.

However, the use of these methods for data collection, the scope and the way they are applied are not always the same. How they will be used and to what extent depends on the specific phenomenon for which data are collected and on the purpose of the study. Therefore, the question arises whether all these methods can be used in social ecology, i.e. when studying the complex relationship of the "society - nature" system, what are their segments, if it is understood as sectoral sociology. In answering this question, one should also take into account the fact that in modern science (both in natural and social) the field is expanding, within which one or a group of phenomena is studied. The interaction of many factors becomes the central problem of research, and this has led to the emergence of new theoretical concepts, such as: integrity, totality, interaction, organization. Instead of considering two isolated phenomena, their cause of connection shifts the center of gravity towards the “whole - system” analysis. Based on this fact, i.e. From such an orientation in science, and taking into account the specific difficulties of the "society - nature" system, one should choose separate methods for collecting data in social ecology.

The fourth stage of the study includes the classification of the obtained data on the studied phenomena on the basis of their already known features. The purpose of data classification is the ordering of the collected data in the sense of determining the place of the phenomenon that has become the subject of research within the framework of other phenomena and their classification. To achieve the goal of classifying data, certain logical and theoretical requirements must be adhered to. In science, there are four such requirements: first, the classification must be carried out on the basis of a specific criterion; secondly, it must be consistent (based on one criterion); thirdly, it should be complete, revealing, as far as possible, the essence of the data about the phenomenon under study; fourthly, it should reveal the differences between the groups into which the data are grouped. Such a classification is preceded by the systematization of data in accordance with their nature. However, these general rules about the ordering and classification of data in social ecology, given its subject matter, must be adapted to the phenomena studied and the data obtained about them. Social ecology, although it is a social (sociological) science, but it studies not only social relations, but also phenomena that are at the intersection of natural and social phenomena (or have features of one and the other), using data on natural phenomena when they are needed. With this approach to the data used in social ecology, it should be remembered that they are dominated by natural laws, but it should be borne in mind: the more humanized nature is, the more phenomena occur in it, in which, as it were, social rules dominate.

After the implementation of this kind of ordering and classification of data, the fifth stage follows - the stage of scientific explanation and verification. The scientific explanation of a phenomenon, in short, consists in proving that it necessarily arose from a prior factual state. In cognition, it includes: the content, structures and functions, as well as the causes and methods of the emergence, development and disappearance of the phenomenon under study. In a broad sense, scientific explanation includes the establishment of connections between phenomena, as well as the establishment of the laws of development without their connections. In a narrower sense, scientific explanation consists in establishing causal relationships between phenomena.

The identification of connections and their nature between phenomena in the study of the relationship between society and nature in social ecology faces certain difficulties that can be overcome if the prevailing ideas about the gap between the descriptive laws that prevail in nature and the normative laws that take place in society are destroyed.

Scientific knowledge obtained by social ecology is subject to verification (verification). Verification in the narrow sense is carried out when, immediately after a scientific conclusion, new data are collected and their theoretical development is carried out. In a broader sense, it is the verification of a scientific conclusion (scientific law) over a long process of development of science and human society, filled with scientific knowledge. The question arises: which of these methods of verification is more appropriate for the subject of social ecology and verification of the scientific conclusions obtained in it? It seems that in social ecology, verification in a narrower sense is more in line with the process of scientific knowledge, since it provides the possibility of faster verification of scientific conclusions about relations in the "society - nature" system, which should be the scientific basis for solving problems of protecting and improving the environment. . Validation in a broader sense has its advantages. It is more reliable, but cannot provide the possibility of quick action to protect the environment. It is appropriate for global monitoring of environmental problems, but not for their quick, much less local solution. But this does not mean that verification in a narrow sense should be contrasted with a broader one.

The identified difficulties that are associated with the development of the method of social ecology do not mean a denial of its necessity. The situation seems to be the opposite - there is a major need to develop this method, and then social ecology will soon take shape as a science, its specificity will be emphasized.

Since social ecology is a relatively young science, its method has not yet been developed and worked out. Basically, we can talk about the main direction of its development. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that we can talk about the specifics of the method of social ecology, due to the fact that the subject of social ecology borders between nature and society, i.e. it as a special sociology as a subject of study has a system of "society - nature" from a sociological point of view.

When developing a method of social ecology, the definition of its main parts (preliminary knowledge about the subject of its study; the approach to acquiring new knowledge and the means that are used in this case) should be based on the specifics of its subject of study. In the scientific study of the subject of social ecology, one should proceed from certain previous data and knowledge contained in some system of knowledge that is not directly related to and not related to the subject of social ecology. It is enough if these data and knowledge are indirectly related to it. In fact, social ecology in this sense can (and should) use existing theories from other sciences that are in contact with it, related to the elements of its subject matter 21 .

The most important starting point in determining not only the subject, but also the method of social ecology is the ecological worldview. This worldview, distinguished by its theoretical principles, is of particular importance in the development of that element of the method of social ecology, which represents (and should represent) the initial knowledge about its subject. When different ecological approaches are used in the development of the method of social ecology, it should be based on the fact that its subject matter, theory of knowledge and method are only somewhat similar, but not necessarily identical in content and goals. In the same way, it should be taken into account that some ecological approaches to a greater extent, others to a lesser extent, approach theory in its narrower sense (as relatively genuine knowledge), and social ecology should be based on the latter. Of particular importance for the development of the method of social ecology are a systematic understanding of the world, the ecological crisis, the crisis of human existence in the modern world, profit-oriented industrialism (the cause of the ecological crisis), the solution of the ecological crisis as a prerequisite for humanistic development, the global nature of environmental problems and the universal responsibility for them. solution.

The basis of the modern scientific worldview is the biology of systems, according to which the world is characterized by organic, complex and dynamic relationships. Therefore, only with this nature of relations is it possible to achieve a balance between self-sufficient (independent) and integrative (dependent) tendencies. The human race, human society and nature are closely interconnected, so we can agree with the thesis: what is useful for social stability, cultural development, supports economic relations, is useful for the existence of the entire planet and the happiness of the individual.

In no way can one agree with a point of view that one way or another casts doubt on the existence of an ecological crisis. In the modern world, this crisis exists as a global problem, manifested in the crisis of human existence, human communication with the world, and its solution requires and involves an understanding of the world and the formation of such an idea of ​​a person’s place in it, which would make it possible for a person to permanently stay in the world. Therefore, we can conclude that the ecological crisis leads a person to alienation from what he draws his strength from.

It turns out that the ecological crisis is both a cause and a consequence, and therefore, it cannot be prevented only by the development of technology and technology, but only by rethinking and changing people's attitude to nature as an environment from which not only the origins of human existence originate, but which and is the condition of the very existence of man.

In this sense, it has already been concluded, however belatedly, that the ecological crisis is the result of profit-seeking industrialization. It is the result of the expansion of productive power, the purpose of which is not the satisfaction of genuine human needs, but the achievement of profit or state accumulation. Its most important principle is profitable profitability, achieved in a competitive struggle in such a way that the available natural raw materials are unceremoniously used, while they do not care about its restoration, they do not care about the side effects of the impact of technologies that destroy nature. Therefore, the principle of profitability should be replaced by the principle of environmental profitability, i.e. the desire to preserve the ecological balance that ensures the existence of the human race on Earth.

In the context of this approach to the consideration of environmental problems, it is necessary to abandon the ill-conceived (or insufficiently thought-out) orientation towards development along the path of quantitative growth. Genuine progress should not be understood as an accelerated and endless accumulation of material wealth and services, but as the improvement of people's lives by satisfying reasonable and true needs.

With linear (quantitative) progress, people come into confrontation with the natural environment. This progress presupposes unlimited sources of material wealth, and we know that they are limited, small and mostly irreplaceable. A qualitative way of life and activity is less dependent on the availability of limited sources of material wealth. However, the desire to limit the quantitative approach does not mean the desire to abandon the industrial civilization. Moreover, the principle of eco-development implies the development of technology, which should contribute to the strengthening of human and natural society, which is in the interests of the individual. For modern economic and social development, complex (integral) human development is also necessary.

The responsibility of people for the ecological balance in nature and the solution of environmental problems caused by its violation becomes a matter of survival for both man and mankind, i.e. human race on earth. That is why education should contribute both to the development of environmental awareness and a sense of responsibility for the freedom that people experience in the use of natural resources due to the development of productive forces and, first of all, the development associated with the scientific and technological revolution.

Social ecology also proceeds from certain categories and concepts used in the study and analysis of such environmental categories as a system, a complex, a system "society - man - technology - natural environment". In this regard, there is a need for a more rigorous explanation of their use in the development of the method of social ecology.

The concept of "system" is used most often in two meanings: as a set of elements connected into some complex or unified whole; as a coherent and methodologically adjusted (according to logical criteria) set or enumeration of facts, data, laws, knowledge or science. In modern methodological literature, primarily related to the study of environmental issues, the concept of a system is specified. In particular, the possibility of including homogeneous objects into the system, which are assigned different functions, is noted, various properties are revealed that make them heterogeneous 22 . In this sense, it is emphasized that in a system there can only be elements and subsystems of the same type, which in a broad sense means: there cannot be systemic links between the material and the spiritual, that which is objective and that which is ideal.

The term "complex" (in a broad sense) means a certain integrity of elements (parts). In essence, the concept of "complex" means the interconnection of various parts in a single whole, in which there is a central carrier of communication. In modern methodological literature, in comparison with the concept of "system", the integrity of the complex is ensured by functional connections common to all its parts, and direct connections between them are not necessary.

Recently, another new concept has been used - "socioecosystem" 23 . Many experts consider it more successful because it better fits the main subject of social ecology research. It contains the designation of the themes "society", "nature", "nature conservation", "interaction between nature and society as a single integral complex", etc. And since, without a systematic approach, social ecology cannot solve the problems that contributed to its emergence and development, the term “socioecosystem” is more consistent with the name of the main subject, and therefore helps to develop the method of social ecology in a better way.

This allows the study of the subject of social ecology not to abandon either a systematic or an integrated approach. On the contrary, for scientific research and knowledge of the subject of social ecology, the ratio of these approaches is very important. Therefore, the use of a systematic and integrated approach will make it possible to discover the patterns of the complex relationship "man - society - nature".

After all, the environment - natural, material - with all the variety of elements as a complex represents a mass that cannot be united into a whole without a general relationship to a person as a factor of existence, it is distinguished by functional integrity only in this aspect 24 . But society and nature are two poles of the system that contradict each other, since society belongs to the highest social form of the movement of matter, and nature - to the pre-social, where there are chemical, geological, biological forms of the movement of matter. To a certain extent, society is precisely (in relation to man) a product of the development of nature, a specific part of the material world. In fact, society and nature are dialectical systems penetrating and excluding each other (but their elements can form complexes), which, in particular, is also manifested in how the natural environment, being a dynamic supersystem, from the inside is an ordered whole; therefore, it acts in relation to society as a partner system.

The subject of social ecology is socio-ecosystems or relations in the system "society - man - technology - natural environment". In these structures, all elements and subsystems are homogeneous, and the connections between them determine its immutability and structure.

It can be distinguished as special elements due to its social and natural specificity of the relationship between man and technology. A person stands out not only because he belongs to both nature and society, but also because his protection as a biological (and not only biological) being, the protection of his health is the main criterion for optimizing the relationship (historically developed and conditioned) between nature and society. Technique, understood as the sum of artificially created material means in order to enhance the effectiveness of human activity, primarily in relation to nature, and also has its own social and natural specifics. Its specificity is expressed in the fact that technology, influencing nature, only changes the form of matter, while relying on the power of nature. Although technology owes its origin to nature, it was created by human labor, therefore it functions expediently, according to the plan of people and with social consequences.

When formulating the first element of its scientific method - preliminary knowledge about the subject of research - social ecology must proceed (and proceeds) not only from the ecological worldview, but also from theories about the protection of the environment, which, one way or another, also contain some ecological worldview. The most famous theories are: the theory of benthamists; the theory of Malthusianism; the "silent spring" theory; theory of the cost of economic growth; theory of growth boundaries (global equilibrium of scientific growth); theory of transformation of the international order; constant state theory; the theory of the standard of living; theory of economic optimism; vicious circle theory; theory of the post-industrial period; theory of geographical space; theory of decentralization of the social system 25 .

At the stage of scientific interpretation, social ecology (as, indeed, any science) must explain the phenomena related to its subject, showing that they necessarily arise from the previous factual situation. Any explanation offered by it must contain not only a description of the phenomenon being explained, but also one or more facts that precede it, and in the context of such an analysis, formulate a strong and necessary connection between two phenomena or their group.

The stage of verification (verification) of the truth of scientific conclusions in social ecology has its own specifics. With these features in mind, one should decide which method of scientific verification to use: verification in a narrower sense (collection of new data and their theoretical understanding immediately after obtaining scientific conclusions) or in a broader sense (verification of the truth of scientific conclusions by the development of science). Which type of verification of the truth of scientific conclusions will be used depends on the specific subject of research. In any case, verification should determine the reliability and truth of scientific conclusions and contribute to the identification of key relationships in the socio-ecosystem (through the “society-nature” relationship) in such a way that a critical explanation and understanding of the existing and the study of rational forms of social life, the desired and possible future becomes decisive. a factor in the great transformations of civilization put on the agenda by history.

A more complicated situation occurs with the definition of the method of social ecology. Since social ecology is a transitional science between the natural and the humanities, insofar as in its methodology it should use the methods of both the natural and human sciences, as well as those methodologies that represent the unity of the natural science and humanitarian approaches (the first is called nomological, the second - ideographic) .

As for general scientific methods, familiarization with the history of social ecology shows that at the first stage, the method of observation (monitoring) was used mainly, and the modeling method came to the fore in the second place. Modeling is a way of long-term and complex vision of the world. In its modern understanding, this is a universal procedure for comprehending and transforming the world. Generally speaking, each person, on the basis of his life experience and knowledge, builds certain models of reality. Subsequent experience and knowledge confirm this model or contribute to its change and refinement. A model is simply an ordered set of assumptions about a complex system. It is an attempt to understand some complex aspect of an infinitely varied world by choosing from accumulated ideas and experience a set of observations applicable to the problem under consideration.

The authors of The Limits to Growth describe the global modeling methodology as follows. First, we made a list of important causal relationships between variables and outlined the feedback structure. We then consulted the literature and consulted experts in many areas related to these studies - demographers, economists, agronomists, nutritionists, geologists, environmentalists, etc. Our goal at this stage was to find the most common a structure that would reflect the main relationships between the five levels.

Further development of this basic structure on the basis of other more detailed data can be carried out after the system itself is understood in its elementary form. We then quantified each relationship as accurately as possible, using global data if available, and representative local data if no global measurements were made. With the help of a computer, we determined the dependence of the simultaneous action of all these connections in time. We then tested the effects of quantitative changes in our underlying assumptions to find the most critical determinants of the system's behavior. There is no one "hard" world model. The model, as soon as it emerges, is constantly criticized and updated with data as we begin to understand it better. This model uses the most important relationships between population, food, capital investment, depreciation, resources, and output. These dependencies are the same all over the world. Our technique is to make several assumptions about the relationships between the parameters, and then check them on the computer. The model contains dynamic statements only about the physical aspects of human activity. It assumes that the nature of social variables—the distribution of income, the regulation of family size, the choice between industrial goods, services, and food—will remain in the future the same as it has been throughout the modern history of world development. Since it is difficult to guess what new forms of human behavior should be expected, we did not try to account for these changes in the model. The value of our model is determined only by the point on each of the graphs, which corresponds to the cessation of growth and the beginning of the catastrophe.

Within the framework of the general method of global modeling, various particular methods were used. Thus, the Meadows group applied the principles of system dynamics, which assume that the state of systems is completely described by a small set of quantities characterizing different levels of consideration, and its evolution in time is described by first-order differential equations containing the rates of change of these quantities, called fluxes, which depend only on on time and the level values ​​themselves, but not on the rate of their changes. System dynamics deals only with exponential growth and equilibrium.

The methodological potential of the theory of hierarchical systems applied by Mesarovich and Pestel is much broader; it allows creating multilevel models. The input-output method, developed and used in global modeling by V. Leontiev, involves the study of structural relationships in the economy in conditions where “a multitude of seemingly unrelated, in fact interdependent flows of production, distribution, consumption and investment constantly influence each other , and ultimately are determined by a number of basic characteristics of the system” (V. Leontiev. Research into the structure of the American economy. M., 1958, p. 80). The input-output method represents reality in the form of a chessboard (matrix) that reflects the structure of intersectoral flows, the field of production, exchange and consumption. The method itself is already a kind of representation of reality, and thus the chosen methodology turns out to be essentially connected with the content aspect.

A real system can also be used as a model. Thus, agrocenoses can be considered as an experimental model of biocenosis. More generally, all human nature-transforming activity is a simulation that accelerates the formation of a theory, but it should be treated as a model, given the risk that this activity entails. In the transformative aspect, modeling contributes to optimization, i.e., the choice of the best ways to transform the natural environment.

Since social ecology is a transitional science between the natural and the humanities, insofar as in its methodology it must use the methods of both the natural and human sciences, as well as those methodologies that represent the unity of the natural sciences and the humanities.

As for general scientific methods, familiarization with the history of social ecology shows that initially it was used mainly method of observation (monitoring), later came to the fore modeling method. Modeling is a way of long-term and complex vision of the world. In its modern understanding, this is a universal procedure for comprehending and transforming the world. Generally speaking, each person, on the basis of his life experience and knowledge, builds certain models of reality. Subsequent experience and knowledge confirm this model or contribute to its change and refinement. A model is simply an ordered set of assumptions about a complex system. It is an attempt to understand some complex aspect of an infinitely varied world by choosing from accumulated ideas and experience a set of observations applicable to the problem under consideration.

The authors of one of the well-known models of the future - "Limits to Growth" (which we will talk about later) - describe the methodology of global modeling as follows. First, a list of important causal relationships between variables is compiled and a feedback structure is outlined. This is followed by a review of the literature and consultations with specialists in many fields related to these studies - demographers, economists, agronomists, nutritionists, geologists, environmentalists, etc. The goal at this stage is to find the most general structure that would reflect the main relationships between the five levels. Further development of this basic structure on the basis of other more detailed data can be carried out after the system itself is understood in its elementary form. Each relationship should then be quantified as accurately as possible, using global data, if available, and representative local data, if no global measurements have been made. With the help of a computer, the dependence of the simultaneous action of all these connections in time is determined. The impact of quantitative changes in the underlying assumptions is then tested to find the most critical determinants of the system's behavior. There is no one "hard" world model. The model, as soon as it emerges, is constantly criticized and supplemented with data as it is better understood.

The global model uses the most important relationships between population, food, capital investment, depreciation, resources, and output. First, several working hypotheses about the relationships between the parameters are put forward, and then they are tested on a computer (now on a computer). The model contains dynamic statements only about the physical aspects of human activity. It assumes that the nature of social variables - the distribution of income, the regulation of family size, the choice between industrial goods, services and food - will remain the same in the future as it has been throughout the modern history of world development. Since it is difficult to predict what new forms of human behavior should be expected, these changes cannot be taken into account in the model. The value of the model is determined only by the point on each of the graphs, which corresponds to the cessation of growth and the beginning of the catastrophe.

Social ecology is a branch of science that studies the interaction between the human community and nature. At the moment, this science is being formed into an independent discipline, has its own field of research, subject and object of study. It should be said that social ecology studies various groups of the population that are engaged in activities that directly affect the state of nature, using the resources of the planet. In addition, various measures are being studied to solve environmental problems. A significant place is occupied by environmental protection methods that are used by different segments of the population.

In turn, social ecology has the following subspecies and sections:

• — economic;
• — legal;
• - urban;
• - demographic ecology.

Main problems of social ecology

This discipline primarily considers what mechanisms people use to influence the environment and the world around them. The main problems include the following:

• — global forecasting of the use of natural resources by people;
• – study of certain ecosystems at the level of small locations;
• — study of urban ecology and the life of people in various settlements;
• - Ways of development of human civilization.

Subject of social ecology

Today, social ecology is only gaining momentum in popularity. The work of Vernadsky "Biosphere", which the world saw in 1928, has a significant influence on the development and formation of this scientific field. This monograph outlines the problems of social ecology. Further research by scientists is considering such problems as the cycle of chemical elements and human use of the planet's natural resources.

Human ecology occupies a special place in this scientific specialization. In this context, the direct relationship between people and the environment is studied. This scientific direction considers man as a biological species.

Development of social ecology

Thus, social ecology is developing, becoming the most important field of knowledge that studies a person against the background of the environment. This helps to understand not only the development of nature, but also of man in general. By conveying the values ​​of this discipline to the general public, people will be able to understand what place they occupy on earth, what harm they cause to nature and what needs to be done to preserve it.

Social ecology is in its infancy as a science. It experiences certain difficulties with the development of its own categories, laws. When studying its objects, social ecology uses not only its own categories, but also bioecology, ecology, sociology, etc.

Used in social ecology, first of all, the system method. What is its essence? It is known that a system is understood as a set of elements that are in relationships and connections with each other, forming a certain integrity, unity. From the point of view of modern science, consistency is an integral property of all matter, its attribute. The system reflects the predominance of organization in the world over chaotic changes. Consistency, organization - universal in all spatio-temporal scales. Using the system method as the leading one, social ecology considers the natural environment as a single systemic entity. Moreover, it analyzes the natural environment as a differentiated system, the various components of which are in dynamic equilibrium. The biosphere of the Earth is considered as an ecological niche of mankind, linking the environment and human activities into a single system: nature - society. On this basis, social ecology reveals the human impact on the balance of natural ecosystems and substantiates the issue of managing and rationalizing the relationship between society and nature.

Social ecology also makes extensive use of dialectical ideas about the relationship, interaction of system components. In scientific programs and the generalization of empirical material, it is based on the doctrine of development, and not only society, but also nature is considered developing. In the arsenal of social ecology, there are also such methods of research as historical and logical, analysis and synthesis, analogy, hypothesis, etc. Synergetic methodology is also successfully used in the analysis of systemic socioecological objects and their interaction. Synergetics is a science that studies the processes of self-organization in open systems. The reliability of the methodology of social ecology makes it possible to formulate and convincingly argue recommendations to power structures that find high public recognition. These are, first of all, options for reorienting technology and production, creating new environmentally friendly technical means and technological processes, creating an ecological economy, modern processes of urbanization of society, etc.

Representatives of social ecology sharply raise issues of human ecology, ecology of culture, in which ways of preserving and restoring the cultural environment, ecology of science, etc. are justified. the natural environment, the National Ecological Center has been established, measures have been taken to develop environmental research, environmental education and enlightenment, and social ecology. The successes of social ecology made it possible to put forward new values ​​for mankind - the preservation of ecosystems, the attitude to the Earth as a unique phenomenon, ecosystem, life as a value in itself.

In the process of evolution of society, the interaction of man and the natural environment was contradictory. In the early stages of the development of society, there is a tendency for man to depend on nature. So, in the Paleolithic era, although man produced tools, but only for gathering and hunting (appropriation of readily available food), and in this sense he was not much different from animals. The hunting-gathering economy was placed in a strong dependence on nature and the human distribution zone was limited to warm climate zones and an abundance of food.

As the productive forces of society developed, man increased his relative independence from the forces of nature. The improvement of labor tools, which made it possible to create quickly and in greater quantities the benefits necessary for human life, the construction of irrigation facilities provided a stable harvest, and the creation of dams protected from floods - all this created favorable conditions for a person, for his life and involvement in his economic activity. circulation of new territories of the Earth. Simultaneously with the process of weakening the dependence of man on the natural environment, a tendency is being formed to expand the ties and relations of society with nature. This is manifested in the ever-expanding possibilities of using various natural resources and raw materials. So, for a long time oil was used only to produce heat. Modern petrochemistry produces more than 8 thousand types of products for various purposes. Having developed production for the processing and use of diverse types of natural raw materials, man found himself in an even greater dependence on nature than in the early stages of social evolution. Dependence is manifested in the exhaustion of many minerals necessary for humanity, primarily ores, ferrous and many non-ferrous metals, oil, water, timber, coal, etc.

In the process of interaction between society and nature, as a result of a powerful anthropogenic, that is, human, impact on the environment, the threat to the very existence of mankind increases for two reasons: environmental pollution and the depletion of natural resources. Actively using natural resources on the basis of ever-improving technology and production, society has achieved tremendous success and qualitatively changed the way of life. Over the past 100 years, for example, mankind has increased its energy reserves by a thousand times; worldwide energy consumption per inhabitant is more than 10 kW. In developed countries, the total volume of goods and services doubles every 15 years. At the same time, humanity is already beginning to pay heavily for the technical and other achievements of civilization. During the 90s of the XX century, 3/4 of the forests covering the Earth were destroyed, and the amount of harmful emissions into the environment is growing every year. The composition of the biosphere has changed. Experts note that the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, dustiness, compared with the state at the beginning of the century, increased by 20 percent by the end of the 20th century. Under new conditions for mankind, the interaction of society and nature should be built in such a way that the development of society and all its components does not harm nature, but, on the contrary, contributes to its development, it is necessary to create such conditions under which the natural factor would be more fully taken into account and included in the structure of production. In modern social ecology, this approach to solving urgent problems of interaction between society and nature is called co-evolution.

Co-evolution is understood as a set of socio-ecological views, according to which society and nature represent a socio-natural system, where the harmonious development of society is impossible without a comprehensive consideration of the natural and vice versa. In other words, the further development of society, of all its cultural and material factors, is impossible without coordination with the development of nature.

The society-environment system is a rather rigid system, the elements of which mutually determine each other. Apparently, an analogy with the principle of anthropicity, which is quite popular in modern science, is appropriate here. In accordance with it, all world constants - the speed of light, the gravitational constant and others - are coordinated with each other so precisely that even an insignificant change, let's say by a fraction of a percent, in their values ​​would turn the Universe into a completely different world. The deep relations between society and nature are built in such a way that certain changes in nature are reflected in society and vice versa. Co-evolution therefore teaches the need to study the interrelationships and interdependencies of society and nature and to take into account their nature in the practical activity of man. From the standpoint of co-evolution, society, while improving technique and technology, involving all new objects of nature in the process of material production, at the same time must strictly observe its laws and balances, and comply with the requirements of environmental standards. This is not about transforming nature, but about adapting to it, preserving and developing ecosystems, creating an artificial environment there and in such a form that it does not deform the natural human habitat.

The ideas of co-evolution did not arise from scratch. They were first theoretically stated and substantiated by Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky. In his work "The chemical structure of the Earth's biosphere and its environment" and others, he developed the theory of the biosphere and noosphere, showed the relationship between them and the changing nature of human activity. The noosphere is understood as the sphere of interaction between nature and society, in which human activity becomes the determining factor in development. The noosphere is formed, according to Vladimir Vernadsky, only as a natural reproduction at a qualitatively new level of the characteristics of the organization of the biosphere. This is the only way that human activity can shape its own path of development. The logic of human activity in the society-nature system must be built in unison with the way the biosphere is organized. The noosphere, as Vladimir, Vernadsky imagined, is the biosphere transformed by people in accordance with the known and practically mastered laws of its structure, development and functioning. “Man in all his manifestations,” he wrote, “is a certain natural part of the structure of the biosphere.” And further, developing the idea of ​​humanity as a new geological force in the history of the planet, he continued: “... this is a great natural phenomenon that corresponds to the historically, or rather, geologically established organization of the biosphere. Forming the "noosphere", it is connected by all roots with this earthly shell, which was not to any comparable extent earlier in the history of mankind.

The general concept of the need to know the laws of nature, taking them into account in practical activities, the organic relationship between society and nature remains true. The ideas of co-evolution, therefore, substantiate the need for a restructuring of human priorities, their close coordination with the possibilities of nature. Academician Nikolai Moiseev rightly noted that the delicate, jeweled consistency of human behavior with the requirements of environmental stability is a characteristic feature of the coming era. It requires a new understanding of the world, a new morality and, ultimately, a new spiritual world. The understanding of the co-evolutionary path of development of society is only just getting fixed in the mass consciousness. There is much to be done theoretically and more practically in order to implement them. One of the main problems here is the transfer of production to ecological principles of development, because the powerful productive forces developed by man pose the main threat to the natural environment in modern conditions.

In the early 1990s, the UN General Assembly, as well as the Global Forum of Modern Manufacturing and religious leaders, parliamentarians and scientists on environmental protection and development, noted that the nuclear threat was being relegated to the background. In the strategy of survival of mankind, the environmental problem is becoming more and more a priority. In creating such a situation, of course, the leading role belongs to the productive forces of society.

Having developed powerful productive forces, man already in the middle of the 20th century turned out to be, in a certain sense, their hostage. Experts note that the ecological crisis in Ukraine in modern conditions has affected all its spheres of the environment.

According to some foreign scientists, Ukraine's annual losses from inefficient, irrational nature management and environmental pollution range from 15 to 20% of its national income and are perhaps the largest in the world.

The document "Environment and Development", submitted by Ukraine to the UN, notes that for decades the economic policy in the country was formed without taking into account the capabilities of individual regions. As a result, one of the most difficult ecological economies has developed: oversaturated with chemical, metallurgical, mining industries with outdated technologies. A tragedy in the fate of the Ukrainian people was the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant - the first global environmental disaster in world history. As a result of the accident, 50 million curies of various radionuclides were released into the environment. The catastrophe affected not only the human environment of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, but also Sweden, Germany, Italy, Austria, Belgium, etc. Huge economic damage was caused to Ukraine and other countries. The people of Ukraine suffered enormous moral and psychological damage: the unique culture of those areas from which people were resettled is under threat, after all, 200 thousand people moved from two thousand settlements. 2.4 million people continue to live in the contaminated zone, including 500,000 children under 14 years of age. An unfavorable ecological situation has developed not only in countries with a low technological level and technological discipline, unreliable technology, but also in technically developed countries. Modern production, taking from nature 100 units of a substance, uses only 3-4, and throws 96 units into the environment in the form of toxic substances and technical waste.

How to be in such a difficult environmental situation? Ban production, return to nature, as some of the green movement call? Social ecology provides the answer. Modern humanity can significantly remove the technogenic impact on nature if it creates environmentally friendly production. There has been much debate about the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. There was a problem of the future fate of the power plant, nuclear energy. There were not lonely voices about the closure of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant - an important source of energy resources for Ukraine! After all, in the future, in the development of the world economy, oil will be replaced by coal, and in a number of countries by nuclear energy and natural gas.

In modern conditions in Ukraine, specialists of various profiles are actively studying the impact of specific technologies on nature, have formulated a number of environmental restrictions in various industries, justify new strategic environmentally friendly areas of production: changing technologies to those that do not affect nature; creation of low-waste and waste-free production; use of solar energy, etc.; individual or even complex environmental measures are carried out and the concepts of comprehensive greening of social production are developed and implemented; a scientific, technical and investment policy is being developed aimed at solving environmental problems, creating an effective system of state and public control to regulate the interaction between production and nature; development of a reliable market-type economic mechanism in nature management and environmental protection. The most important direction in the greening of social production is structural restructuring. We are talking about ecological optimization and rationalization of social production and individual industries. The problem is relevant for the production of Ukraine. However, the direction of greening production can be successfully implemented in practice only under the condition of the processes of greening science and technology.