The social to the natural; coexistence or opposition

Document Type : Research Article

Author

Abstract

The present research, considering the issue of the relation of the social to the natural in general and the relation of the livelihood system with the environment in particular, seeks to understand the processes of their coexistence and opposition in the context of the daily life of local communities. In this context, by adopting a phenomenological approach and by conducting in-depth interviews and focused group discussions, the experience of local biologists has been questioned about human interaction with nature on the basis of the concept of "work."  Findings indicate that the relation between the social to the natural in the context of daily life has led to three approaches: "coexistence, exploitation and opposition". This process has occurred in a way that today livelihoods bring the greatest pressure on nature, and this contrast is more pronounced than ever before. Therefore, sustainable livelihood pattern is considered as the most important determinant of environmental sustainability; Therefore, it is recommended that with the awareness and social community of social activists, the use and care of nature be transformed into a desire and collective will according to the indicators of the sustainable livelihood pattern; So that collective and responsible action by all individuals and institutions is considered an environmental protection factor; Because the unilateral action of the government and the relevant institutions is not very efficient or, in the worst case, will have a negative and negative result.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

افراخته، حسن (1384). «خشکسالی و تحول معیشت نیمه­کوچ­نشینان تفتان»، نشریه علوم جغرافیایی، شماره 5: 122-103
بزم­آرابلشتی، مژگان؛ توکلی، مرتضی و جعفرزاده، کاوه (1395). «ارزیابی اقتصادی، اجتماعی و زیست‌محیطی جنگل­های بلوط بر جوامع محلی با روش ماتریس لئوپولد»، فصلنامه علمی - پژوهشی جنگل و مرتع، شماره 109. 63-56.
جوادی­یگانه، محمدرضا و زادقناد، سعیده (1394). ایرانیان در زمانه پادشاهی، کتاب دوم، گزیده خلقیات مثبت، خلقیات ایرانیان را در نگاه بیگانگان به جامعه ایران، از اولین نوشته­ها 1357. نشر شورای اجتماعی وزارت کشور؛ پژوهشکده مطالعات فرهنگی و اجتماعی.
درئو، ماکس (1374). جغرافیای انسانی، ترجمه سیروس سهامی، تهران: انتشارات رایزن.
رفیع­فر، جلال­الدین و قربانی، حمیدرضا (1387). «جغرافیا و معیشت: بررسی روند تغییرات معیشتی کوچندگان بختیاری (نمونه­های موردی: طوایف ملک محمودی و تات خیری)»، فصلنامه پژوهش­های جغرافیایی، 63: 47-65.
مدنی، شایسته و غزنویان، منیژه (1395). فرهنگ و محیط زیست، گروه فرهنگی البرز، دانشگاه خوارزمی.
هانیگان، جان (1392). جامعه‌شناسی محیط‌زیست، ترجمه موسی عنبری و همکاران، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
یوسفوند، سامان، مرادی­نژاد، زینب (1397). میراث جامعه­شناسی الریش بک (طبیعت بحرانی و جامعه در معرض تهدید)، تهران: انتشارات گل­آذین.
Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London.
Beck, U. (1998). World Risk Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Beck, U. (2009 [2007]). World at Risk. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Benton, T. (1991). “Biology and social science: why the return of the repressed should be given a (caution) welcome”, sociology, 25 (1): 1 29.
CHF, (2005). Sustainable Livelihoods Approach Guidelines, Partners in Rural Development, Delhi, Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Winter 190, 8057 Zurich,Switzerland.
Dickens, P. (1992). Society and Nature: toward a Green social theory. Hemel Hempstead: Harrvester-Wheatsheaf.
Everyman. R. and Jamison, A. (1991). Social Movement: A Cognitive Approach, Cahmbridge: Polity Press.
Foster, J. (2002). “Environmental Sociology and the Environmental Revolution”, Organization and environment, 15(1): 55-58.
Giddens, A. (2011). The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Haraway, D. J. (2003). The Companion Species Manifesto: Dogs, People and Significant Otherness, Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.
Jacobsen. K., Fratzka, S. (2016). Bulding livelihood opportunities for refugee populations, lessons from past practice. Transatnantic council on migration.
Jamison, A. (2001). The Making of Green Knowledge: Environmental Politics and Cultural Transformation, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Newby, H. (1991). “One world, two cultures: sociology and the Environment”, Network (British Sociological Association), 50: 1-8.
Quandt, A.; Neufeldt., H. and McCabe, J. T. (2017). “The role of agroforestry in building livelihood resilience to floods and drought in semiarid Kenya”, Ecology and Society, 22(3):10. 1-13, https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09461-220310
Soini, E. (2006). Livelihood, land use and environment interactions in the highlands of East Africa. Department of Geography Faculty of Science University of Helsinki. Academic dissertation
Sustainable Development Commission. (2006). I will if you will: towards sustainable consumption Report by the Sustainable Development Round Table, I May 2006, from: http://www.sd-commssion.org.uk/publications-php?id=367 Accessed 24 Aug 2006.
Swyngedouw, E. (1999). “Modernity and Hybridity: Nature, Regenracionismo, and the Production of the Spanish waterscape”, 1890 1930 in Annals of the Association of Amereican Geographers, 89(3): 443-465.
Thieme, S. (2006). Social Networks and Migration, Far West Nepalese Labour Migrants in Delhi: NCCR North-. South dialogue, NCCR North-South. Berne. DOI: 10.5167/uzh-4034 · Source: OAI.
Touraine, A. (1985). “An Introduction to social movements”, Social Research, 4: 749-87.
Urry, J. (2008), “Climate change travel and complex futures”, British Journal of Sociology, 59(2): 261-279.
Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. London, Ontario, Canada: the university of western Ontario.
West, C. (2013). “Documenting livelihood trajectories in the context of development interventions in northern Burkina Faso”. Journal of Political Ecology, Vol. 20, No. 1: 342-360.
Yearly, S. (2005), Cultures of Environmentalism. London, Palgrive –Macmillan.
Two Quarterly Journal of Contemporary Sociological Research
Volume 7, Issue 12
September 2018
Pages 161-194

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics