Viewpoint: Neglected Interiors- A Critique of Political Ecology, with Reference to the Work of Ken Wilber

Abstract

Both Political Ecology and Environmental Education correctly assert the importance of ideology critique and the reappropriation of knowledge/knowledge production in working for socio-ecological change (see Hattingh, et al., 2002:3–4; Lotz-Sisitka, 2002:117). Similarly, both disciplines confront the need to rethink our understanding of how social change comes about, and the limitations of current reflexive practises in enabling such change (Lotz-Sisitka, 2002:117). This viewpoint paper flags the importance – and partiality – of the post-structural sciences of complexity, political activism and discourse analysis in Political Ecology, and demonstrates both an irreducible interiority to our ecological problems, as well as how this interior domain may be approached and argued for. In this sense, Wilber’s critique of Political Ecology may be instructive to Environmental Education practitioners who wish to foster and embody greater awareness of these concerns in their own field. Wilber’s Integral Theory has been applied in the education field, in which Integral Pedagogy has been explored by Esbjörn-Hargens (2006) and Murray (2009), among others.