Society and the Natural Environment

"Society and the Natural Environment" explores the intricate relationship between human societies and their natural surroundings, particularly through the lens of Gerhard Lenski’s ecological-evolutionary theory. This theory outlines how societies evolve from preindustrial forms—such as hunting and gathering—through horticultural and agrarian stages, ultimately leading to industrialization. The development of societies is heavily influenced by the natural environment in which they are situated and the technological advancements they achieve to navigate environmental limitations. Each societal stage is associated with distinct economic bases and social organizations, which evolve as humans adapt to their surroundings and utilize technology.

While technology has historically enabled societies to overcome environmental challenges, there is a growing awareness that its unchecked application, especially in industrial contexts, can lead to environmental degradation. This realization evokes a renewed focus on sustainability and the need to balance society's advancements with ecological preservation. Overall, the interplay between technology, societal development, and the natural environment underscores the complex and often reciprocal nature of this relationship, highlighting that the environment remains a foundational element influencing social evolution even in modern contexts. The ongoing dialogue on environmental responsibility illustrates the enduring significance of this dynamic across different societal stages.

Published in: 2021

By: Wienclaw, Ruth A.

Subject Terms

Society and the Natural Environment

Abstract

According to Gerhard Lenski's ecological-evolutionary theory of societal development, the main evolutionary sequence for most societies is to progress from preindustrial (e.g., hunting and gathering, horticultural, and agrarian) societies to become industrial societies. The advancement from one stage to the next is dependent on both the natural environment in which the society develops and the technology that the society develops in order to overcome the limitations set by the environment. At each of these levels, a society has a different economic base and social organization. Although technology may seem at first glance to overcome the limitations of environmental factors, many observers are coming to the realization that if indiscriminately applied, technology—particularly in industrial and postindustrial societies—can harm the environment and require society to further change in order to protect the very environment that its ancestors were so proud to conquer.

Overview

When given half a chance, I enjoy working in my garden. This is a long habit since my childhood and was instilled in me by a mother who was raised on a farm and a father who decided to tackle the challenge of growing roses. I have gardened in many of the agricultural zones in the United States and have learned through experience that I cannot grow everything that one sees attractively displayed in a nursery catalog. For example, a particular variety of blue poppy has always caught my eye, but it can only reliably be grown in the Pacific Northwest and is a reliable failure in the South. Likewise, as amusing as it might be to grow pineapples in my backyard, I know that they will never grow here, and that if I want them I can either move to Hawaii or buy my pineapples from the grocery store. Similarly, if I want to ski, I need to travel to the mountains, or if I want to swim in anything but a chlorinated, human-made hole in the ground, I need to travel in the opposite direction and go to the ocean. In short, no matter what my skills or inclinations, the natural physical environment places limits on what I can and cannot do. Humans, of course, have come up with various ways around this limitation ranging from greenhouses with controlled environments (in which to grow blue poppies or pineapples) and swimming pools as well as a host of other artifacts that allow humans control over their environment.

Historically, not every society has been advanced enough to have such things, however. Early societies, for example, needed to live in temperate climates or find ways to shelter themselves from the elements. They also needed to live in areas where they would be able to find food (e.g., by hunting or gathering) or—later in sociocultural evolution—to grow it. Early societies in particular were subject to the limits placed on them by the natural physical environment including temperature, air pressure, noise, vibration, atmosphere, and the availability of sustenance.

Ecological-Evolutionary Theory. Gerhard Lenski developed the ecological-evolutionary theory of human societies to not only describe but to predict the evolutionary patterns of social development along a number of independent variables. This theory looks at the influence and limitations placed on societal development by the natural environment and how humans respond by developing tools and other technology to overcome these limitations. The ecological-evolutionary theory examines the influence both of the society's natural environment and its technological attainment on its development patterns. Basic to this theory is a main sequence of sociocultural evolution in which societies progress from a primordial type based on hunting and gathering through simple horticultural societies that grow food using simple tools, such as digging sticks and hoes, through advanced horticultural societies that are also able to perform metallurgy of copper and bronze. Typically, horticultural societies then evolve to become simple agrarian societies that develop after the technological advance of the plow. Advanced horticultural societies add to these technological achievements the use of metallurgy. From agrarian societies, the natural progression is next to industrialization. Industrialized societies are characterized by the use of machines that are powered by inanimate forms of energy (e.g., wind, electricity).

However, not every environment lends itself easily or at all to cultivation using the plow. Therefore, in addition to the evolutionary dimension, Lenski also adds an ecological dimension. This dimension helps account for the fact that not all environments are conducive to all types of society. For example, it is unlikely that one will ever set up a sustainable farm in the natural environment of Antarctica. Similarly, societies finding themselves in arid desert conditions are also more likely to turn to herding rather than to farming. Lenski's ecological dimension includes three subsistence strategies: herding societies that arise in arid environments in which farming is not feasible, fishing societies that have easy access to suitable bodies of water, and maritime societies located next to large bodies of water that subsist through trading with others. Figure 1 shows the general progress of societies by type of environment and technological achievement level.

The type of environment in which a society develops influences more than its path to industrialization (or inability to industrialize). As shown in Table 1, the different general types of societies also differ both in economic base and social organization that result from the dual influences of technological level and type of environment. In particular, societies at different levels of development tend to differ in the ways in which they are organized and the complexity with which they divide their labor. For example, in foraging societies that tend to survive at the subsistence level (e.g., hunting and gathering societies), males and females alike tend to both gather food and hunt for it. At this level of societal development, it is important that everyone be involved in the hunting and gathering since such societies tend to be unable to accumulate little (e.g., because of food spoilage). However, as a society begins to develop past the foraging stage and become pastoral in nature, both the economic base and the social organization of the society become more complex. At this level of societal development, individuals within the society can begin to accumulate more wealth (e.g., the acquisition of larger herds). The social organization of the society typically becomes more complex due to the requirement for greater division of labor resulting from a greater number of tasks that need to be performed. No longer does the society merely need to go out and hunt game and collect nuts and berries, but it also needs to herd the flocks, tend the livestock, and maintain the various items and artifacts that it begins to accumulate.

As a society continues to develop and evolves from being nomadic in nature to be horticultural, more complex social organization develops. In such societies, the division of labor can, and often does, become more complex because cultivation of the land means that the population needs to stay in one place (at least for the growing season). As a result, the division of labor may include differentiations between farmers, traders, and craftspeople. With the invention of the plow, societies typically become agricultural in nature and a caste system that differentiates between the elite and the working classes often develops leading to social stratification and a system of differentiated socioeconomic status. With the development of more complex machines and technology—including the ability to use non-animal sources of power—society can move on into the industrial age.

As discussed above, the development of society is obviously very dependent on the technology that it creates. However, societal development is also dependent on the environment that it uses or abuses to meet its needs. Hunting-and-gathering societies live completely off the environment, subsisting only on what they can find and drag home. This means that if the environment is hostile (e.g., summers that are too hot or winters that are too cold to sustain life in terms of being able to take shelter and find food), the society either will have to find a more temperate place to live or become nomadic, moving with the changes in the weather. However, as technology advances, societies become less concerned with the environment because they have the tools and techniques necessary to build shelters, preserve and cook food, and otherwise overcome the environment rather than being totally dependent on it. Interestingly, however, this may not be a linear relationship. Increasingly, industrial and postindustrial societies are being reminded that they have a symbiotic relationship with the environment. For example, many observers are coming to the realization that the fossil fuels on which so much of modern industrial and postindustrial society depends are not only becoming more difficult to acquire but also that their use is having a negative impact on the environment through the relationship between fossil fuel use and climate disruption. As a result, most societies at this level of development are looking for alternative power sources and governments are attempting to rein in emissions in order to protect the environment.

Applications

Testing Lenski's Theory. Theories are fine in their place and give observers a starting point for reasoned discussion. However, for social scientists to truly understand how societies develop and what causes behavior in groups, theories need to be tested. A number of studies have been conducted to test the validity of Lenski's ecological-evolutionary theory of societal development. Lenski and Nolan (1984), for example, stress the distinction between industrializing agrarian and industrializing horticultural societies. From an industrial or postindustrial, urbanized perspective, this may seem like nit-picking. However, Lenski and Nolan argue that where a society comes from will influence where it will go. This is true in many cases. For example, a society that develops on the plains far from the coast is not likely to become a maritime society; both its environment and the types of technology it has developed make this difficult, if not impossible. Similarly, the invention of the plow (one of the definitive tools of the agrarian society) enables humans to harness animals to use to cultivate the soil, control the spread of weeds, and cultivate the soil. These capabilities enabled agrarian societies consequently to grow larger crops that, in turn, led to population growth and, under appropriate conditions, an expanding surplus. As a result, agrarian societies were more likely to engender permanent settlements than other more primitive types of societies. For example, both the Inca Empire and the West African state of Songhay—the largest known examples of horticultural societies—numbered only in the several millions. The agricultural society of ancient Rome, on the other hand, at one point numbered nearly 70 million, and preindustrial China at grew to a population numbering in the hundreds of millions.

Because of these factors as articulated in ecological-evolutionary theory, there should be substantial differences between industrializing horticultural societies and industrializing agricultural societies. Lenski and Nolan tested this aspect of ecological-evolutionary theory by examining contemporary levels of economic development, literacy and information resources, economic growth rates, and demographic patterns in developing societies in North America. The study found that industrializing agrarian societies differed significantly from industrializing horticultural societies both in terms of technological development and economic development. Specifically, the industrializing agrarian societies displayed greater population density and higher levels of urbanization, higher commercial energy consumption per capita, and higher proportions of the labor force employed in industrial activities. Agrarian societies also had higher literacy rates, larger enrollments in secondary schools, and more newspapers than did those societies studied that were industrializing from the horticultural level.

Haas investigated the influence of environment and technology on the development of social inequality as posited by Lenski's theory using the aboriginal societies of North America (1993). Haas examined a number of independent variables arising out of Lenski's theory:

Level of technology (ranging from nonagricultural with no cultivation of food crops through advanced horticultural with hoe cultivation),
Environmental abundance (ranging from barren tundra or desert through plentiful with deciduous or tropical forest),
Danger of external attack (ranging from rare to constant),
Economic surplus (ranging from no sustained surplus and frequent food shortages through large constant surplus),
Permanence of settlement (ranging from nomadic to perpetually settled)
Specialization in production (ranging from no specialists through having at least five full-time specialties)
Political inequality (ranging from no position with coercive powers through unlimited authority for the ruler)
Material inequality (ranging from no enduring wealth differences through full range from expendables through rich people)

The study used historical data on 277 native societies in Canada, Greenland, Mexico, and the United States. The data sources used in the study ranged from the sixteenth century through the twentieth century. As predicted by Lenski's theory of ecological-evolutionary of societal development, the data showed that economic surplus is a key factor in the development of political and material inequality in a society. However, the study also showed that although economic surplus is a key factor in social inequality, it does not make its development inevitable.

Criticism. Mann (2016) criticizes Lenski's theory, and social evolutionary views generally, for a number of reasons. For one, evolutionary sociologists like Lenski largely disregard the influences of ideologies, politics, religion, and military power on societal development. Another is that change among humans is not random, slow, and divergent as in Darwinian evolution, but rather intentional, rapid, and multidirectional. Indeed, Fuentes (2016) notes that neo-Darwinists have suggested that humans and their environments coevolve and that the interactions between the two are therefore dynamic.

Conclusion

The ecological-evolutionary theory of societal development posits that both the natural environment and the development of technology are important factors in the way that a society develops. Looking back from an industrial or postindustrial vantage point, it can be difficult to see how the natural environment is foundational for the way that a society develops. However, research shows that although technology is essential to the development of a society, the natural environment in which the development occurs is also an essential factor in determining how the society will evolve. Further, the natural environment and the technological reaction of society to it will affect societal development. This is true not only for preindustrial societies, but for industrial and postindustrial societies as well, as today's increasing emphasis on taking care of the environment demonstrates.

Terms & Concepts

Caste System: A hereditary stratification system with low social mobility and in which one's family of birth determines one's social status and the occupations that one can hold. Caste systems are frequently based on religious considerations.

Demographic Data: Statistical information about a given subset of the human population such as persons living in a particular area, shopping at an area mall, or subscribing to a local newspaper. Demographic data might include such information as age, gender, or income distribution.

Division of Labor: The way in which work in a group or organization is divided into separate jobs assigned to different people.

Economic Development: The increase in living standards for a nation, region, or society. More than mere economic growth (i.e., a rise in output), economic development impacts the well-being of all members of the group through such things as increased per-capita income, education, health, and environmental protection. Economic development is progressive in nature and may positively impact the socioeconomic structure of a society.

Environment: The external factors that influence how an organism functions. One of the major external factors is the physical surroundings (either human-made or natural) in which the individual lives. Important aspects of the physical environment include temperature, air pressure, noise, vibration, atmosphere, and the availability of sustenance.

Industrialization: The use of mechanization to produce the economic goods and services within a society. Historically, industrialization is a society's transition between farm production and manufacturing production. Industrialization is associated with factory production, division of labor, and the concentration of industries and populations within certain geographical areas and concomitant urbanization.

Postindustrial: The nature of a society whose economy is no longer dependent on the manufacture of goods (i.e., industrial), but is primarily based upon the processing and control of information and the provision of services.

Preindustrial: The nature of a society that has not yet been industrialized. Preindustrial societies tend to be small and family oriented. There are three types of preindustrial societies: hunting-and-gathering societies, horticultural societies, and agrarian societies.

Social Inequality: A situation characterized by different members or groups within a society having different amounts of prestige, power, or wealth.

Social Stratification: A relatively fixed hierarchical organization of a society in which entire subgroups are ranked according to social class. These divisions are marked by differences in economic rewards and power within the society and different access to resources, power, and perceived social worth. Social stratification is a system of structured social inequality.

Society: A distinct group of people who live within the same territory, share a common culture and way of life, and are relatively independent from people outside the group. Society includes systems of social interactions that govern both culture and social organization.

Sociocultural Evolution: The process by which a society develops through the growth of its stores of cultural information.

Socioeconomic Status (SES): The position of an individual or group on the two vectors of social and economic status and their combination. Factors contributing to socioeconomic status include (but are not limited to) income, type and prestige of occupation, place of residence, and educational attainment.

Technology: The application of scientific methods and knowledge to the attainment of industrial or commercial objectives. Technology includes products, processes, and knowledge.

Variable: An object in a research study that can have more than one value. Independent variables are stimuli that are manipulated in order to determine their effect on the dependent variables (response). Extraneous variables are variables that affect the response but that are not related to the question under investigation in the study.

Bibliography

Andersen, M. L. & Taylor, H. F. (2002). Sociology: Understanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Fuentes, A. (2016). The extended evolutionary synthesis, ethnography, and the human niche toward an integrated anthropology. Current Anthropology, 57, S13–S26. Retrieved October 22, 2018, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=116343450&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Haas, A. (1993). Social inequality in Aboriginal North America: A test of Lenski's theory. Social Forces, 72 (2), 295–313. Retrieved September 24, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9406222957&site=ehost-live.

Harden, C. (2012). Framing and reframing questions of human-environment interactions. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(4), 737–747. Retrieved November 5, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=77350445

Lenski, G. & Nolan, P. D. (1984). Trajectories of development: A test of ecological-evolutionary theory. Social Forces, 63 (1), 1–23. Retrieved September 24, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=5283322&site=ehost-live.

Mann, M. (2016). Have human societies evolved? Evidence from history and pre-history. Theory & Society, 45(3), 203–237. Retrieved October 22, 2018, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=116124832&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Nilsen, F. (2004). The ecological-evolutionary typology of human societies and the evolution of social inequalities. Sociological Theory, 22 (2), 292–314. Retrieved September 24, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13229415&site=ehost-live.

Ovie Ejumudo, K. (2013). Managing the development / environment dilemma: The global challenge. Journal of Development Alternatives & Area Studies, 32(1/2), 5–24. Retrieved November 5, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=88992520

VanDeveer, S. D. (2011). Consuming environments: Options and choices for 21st century citizens. Review of Policy Research, 28(5), 517–524.

Society and the Natural Environment

On this Page

Subject Terms

Society and the Natural Environment

Abstract

Overview

Applications

Conclusion

Terms & Concepts

Bibliography

Suggested Reading