BOOK REVIEWS

Humanity and Nature: Ecology, Science and Society by Y. Haila & R. Levins. London:
Pluto Press, 1992,270 pp.

Reviewed by Iver Mysterud, Department of Biology, University of Oslo, PO Box 1050,

Do you feel secure that ecology holds the answers to how the future society should be
organized? Are you convinced that every species has a unique role in the ecosystems upon
which the system itself is dependent? Do you believe there exists a balance between living
organisms in nature? Does nature always know best?
If you answer yes to some of these questions, this book about humanity and nature
will probably “open” your eyes. If you are more hesitant or even choose to answer
negatively to the questions, your suspicions will probably be confiied.
Haila and Levins begin by stating that the concept of “ecology” exists in several ways.
“Ecology the nature’? nature’s economy as a material fact, and as a material basis for
human existence; “ecology the science”: the biological discipline investigating nature’s
economy; “ecology the idea”: prescriptive views of human existence, derived from what
is known or believed about nature’s economy; and “ecology the movement”: political
activities trying to transform society in accordance with ecological ideals (p. ix). These
dimensions of ecology are claimed to have arisen from relatively independent backgrounds,
and are widely disparate in content. “Humanity and nature”is concerned with the interfaces
between these different aspects of “ecology.” (Interested readers are referred to Mysterud
& Mysterud, 1994, for an alternative analysis of the ecology concept that is beyond the
scope of this review.)
The Finnish Haila and the American Levins are both recognized ecologists. In the
Preface we are told that they are “committed to radical transformation of society in
accordance with the interests of the oppressed, the aim is to establish a connection between
ecological knowledge and radical politics” (p. x). The authors find some of their inspiration
in Marxism (see Maynard Smith, 1988, for a report of Levins’ Marxist background). Levins
is also known for his critical involvement in the “sociobiology-debate,” as well as a book
where he combines a Marxist and an ecological/ biological world view (Levins & Lewontin,
1985).
Humanity and Nature is a textbook, for a wide spectrum of readers. The theme is
more easily accessible than scientific papers, since only main references are incorporated.
Some parts are easy to read, while others are more advanced and pursue more complex

Joumol of Social and hiwiurionary Systems 17(3):355-341 Copyi& 0 1994 by JAI Rms, Inc.
ISSN: 0161-7361 All IiKhts of rcDroduction in an” form reaemd.

355
356 - BOOK RJN’IEWS

matters. Chapter 1 disputes some myths about ecology within the environmental
movement, Chapters 2 and 3 show the constraints of ecological knowledge, Chapters 4
and 5 explore how ecological knowkdge can be integrated into social practice in questions
about agriculture and health respectively, Chapter 6 outlines a broad historical framework
by viewing human cultures in connection with their “natural” environment, and Chapter
7 suggests political consequences of the ecological crisis. The intention of the authors is
to show that science/knowledge alone is not enough to solve the ecological crisis. The
seven chapters of the book are coherent and lead toward the last chapter. Let’s look a
bit closer into each.
Chapter 1 (What Program Can Ecology Set for Society”) is concerned with slogans
that have become established as a kind of “ecological folklore” in modem environmental
movements. Several “ingenious” metaphors that are in use “are surprisingly often
misleading or false.” This is claimed to be the case because ecology is unable to prescribe
rules/norms for how society should be. “Principles” derived from ecology probably will
also turn out to be passe because the ecology evolves rapidly itself. The authors claim
that all rules derived from insight into nature in principle are ideological and political.
Such rules “should stand on their own without claiming endorsement from nature.” Even
though the reader may find such statements provoking or directly wrong in some contexts,
the chapter gives a useful corrective to some of today’s “neo-religious” environmental
movements.
Chapter 2 (“Ecological Patterns”) offers an excellent introduction into traditional
animal-and-plant ecology, as it is presented by most Western universities today. It can
as well be read as a summary of modem textbooks in ecology.
Chapter 3 (“Practicing Ecology”) should be of interest to anyone who still believes
that “science” is concerned only with finding out the secrets of nature in a purely “objective”
way. The focus of this chapter is ecological research, but this reviewer assumes the
principles as more generally valid. Science must always be viewed in context: “Ecological
research is embedded in a set of social connections, and the actual work is done by a
diffuse collective often called scientific community rather than isolated individuals.
Research problems are constituted by previous research and social challenges, not found
waiting out there. Options of research are restricted by constraints partly internal to
intellectual work, partly forced by the society. The image of ‘penetration’ has nothing in
common with this complex process” (p. 65). We are introduced to how data are collected,
the connection between data and theory, how the research community influences these
processes, how important language is for communication, how historical processes and
paradigms are at work, and how science is a social activity. This is actually an introduction
to the sociology of science written by natural scientists-a rare occurrence. I found the
chapter interesting (though not all parts were equally persuasive), and recommend it for
reflection.
Chapter 4 (“Health as a Part of the Ecosystem”) focuses upon human impact upon
various factors in the biotic (other people, plants, and animals) and abiotic (physical-
chemical) environment. The definition of health and disease is presented as the result of
social processes determined by the economic development, different interests, ideological
change as well as the technical development in medicine. To understand infectious diseases,
the authors take a step back in the first part of the chapter and explore parasitism as
a general phenomenon in nature. The authors here draw upon the new synthesis of
 BookReviews-

Darwinian medicine (Williams & Nesse, 1991) that views infections as competition between
host and parasite. The reasoning is mainly good and the arguments logical. The discussion
could, however, have become much better and broader if the authors had had insight into
new central works in this field. This is especially visible in their view of the subtle defense
mechanisms of the body, e.g. fever: “the body’s defense system becomes activated [when
it becomes infected by a parasite], sometimes in ways that themselves produce harmful
effects such as fevers” (p. 119). The body’s defense system is indeed activated by infections,
but fever is in many instances now supposed to be an adaptation to kill the parasite and
not in itself a harmful effect. The second part of the chapter reviews the phenomenon
of self-regulation, and the third ends in an interesting bio-social model of health that links
behavior and physiology. Here, the authors are clearly not fully updated with respect to
some more recent links between ecology and medicine; the “medical ecology” of
anthropology (McElroy & Townsend, 1989), for example, is not mentioned. Even though
there were some statements that this reviewer cannot accept, e.g. that nerves regenerate
when they are cut (p. 139), the chapter as a whole is worth examination.
Chapter 5 about agricultural ecology first reviews the impacts agriculture has had
the last 10,000 years. Thereafter modem agriculture is criticized through ten well
formulated, but not especially original, points (e.g that “modem, technical high-input
agriculture is quite inefficient in terms of energy and resources,” p. 157). This is blamed
by the authors on their main explanation of environmental problems (greed from the
capitalistic system, poverty and ignorance). “Progress” and “modernization” of society is
criticized both from Marxist and ecological perspectives. The chapter also outlines
constructive ways out of this quagmire. I think a Marxist perspective still can be useful
in a such analysis, for example to show us that different interests exist between different
groups of people in different cultures and different parts of the world.
The analysis of the widely used concept of sustainability was clarifying. For those
who are satisfied with existing economic and power relations, sustainability is the
maintenance of productivity, i.e., keeping society as it is. For others the concept means
the removal of the most obvious abuses and a democratization of access to opportunity
for production and consumption (while leaving both production systems and consumption
patterns intact). For a third group “sustainability is economically productive, ecologically
rational and socially justn (p. 167). Sustainability can be applied on an individual farm,
in a region, a nation and globally, and on time scales from years to centuries.
Chapter 6 (“Social History of Nature”) discusses the nature concept, describes how
nature is changed on different time scales, and outlines the main contours of humanity’s
relationship to its environment. This also encompasses how humans have organized to
survive from prehistorical time and up until now. Also here the Marxist perspective offers
straightforward insight into who has benefited from what, who has been exploited and
power relations.
In the last chapter of the book (“Political Ecology?“) the authors discuss which social
and political implications the ecological crisis has for different environmental movements
and what it should have. Even though the authors desire a socialistic society, they do not
state concretely how such a society should be (it is claimed to depend upon-among other
things-local conditions and scale). They instead outline six constructive criteria
(strategies) for how future society should be organized to meet the ecological crisis and
at the same time develop a more just society. One cannot easily in principle disagree with
358-BOOKREVIEWS

these criteria based upon the idea of equality, but to believe that they are able to be fully
realized is perhaps naive. The authors do not consider the consequence that in reality there
are different interests between people (as they write earlier in the book) even though certain
conditions are also in our common interest in the long run.
I do not believe that Haila and Levins will be able to motivate everyone towards
a common goal they outline. Even though the authors discuss human prehistory in an
excellent way, they in certain ways do not assume the consequences of it. The book totally
lacks insight into “human nature” that has come from modem behavior ecology
(sociobiology) during the last few years. Where different interests are present, there will
always be competition for resources. Such insight needs to be incorporated into any total
analysis of modem environmental problems. If not, much of the possibility for infhrence
will become much like that of the environmental movement during the 1970s and 1980s:
We have a world championship in grand rhetoric with which most people can agree, but
that never can be realized in practice because everything is stopped by short term interests
among people and organizations. Only after a behavioral ecological perspective is
integrated into pending environmental problems (see Heinen & Low, 1992; Low & Heinen,
1993a,b for a beginning), will we have more realistic possibilities for defining strategies
(and tactics) for meeting the ecological crisis in the years to come.
Despite these objections, however, Humanity and Nature is recommended for
everybody who has an interest in the environmental problems of tomorrow.

References

Heinen, J. T. & Low, R. S. (1992) “Human Behavioural Ecology and Environmental Conservation.”
Environmental Conservation, 19, 105-l 16.
Levins R. & Lewontin, R. (1985) The DiaZectical Biologist. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Low, B. S. & Heinen, J. T. (1993a) “Population, Resources, and Environment: Implications of
Human Behavioral Ecology for Conservation.” Population and Environment, 15,741.
Low, B. S. & Heinen, J. T. (1993b) “The Environment: Everybody’s Talking About It But . . . u
Michigan Quarterly Review, 32, 138-149.
Maynard Smith, J. (1988) “Molecules Are Not Enough,* in Maynard Smith, J. Games, Sex and
Evolution. New York: Harvester-Wheatsheaf, pp. 30-38.
McElroy, A. & Townsend, P. K. (1989) Medical Anthropology in kkological Perspective, 2nd. ed.
Boulder: Westview Press.
Mysterud, I. & Mysterud, I. (1994) “Reviving the Ghost of Broad Ecology.” Journal of Social and
Evolutionary Systems, 17 (2), in press.
Williams, G. C. & Nesse, R. M. (1991) “The Dawn of Darwinian Medicine. Quartet+ Review of
Biology, 66, l-22.