(Illustration by Helena Pallarés)
In the context of market economies and the fragmented societies they often yield, well-being can seem like an individual pursuit. Yet as the articles in this series, “Centered Self: The Connection Between Inner Well-being and Social Change” have articulated, we are coming to understand this is not the case. Supporting the inner well-being of change makers can boost capacity for innovation and collaboration. Encouraging organizational well-being can enhance staff resilience and lead to more effective solutions to social and environmental challenges. Recognizing and processing intergenerational trauma can foster individual and community health. And expanding our definition of economic growth to include collective well-being and environmental sustainability can support widespread, systems-level change. Indeed, we cannot conveniently compartmentalize ourselves in an interlinked world, nor can we bifurcate our social, political, and economic systems from the larger environments in which they exist.
The teachings of peacemakers such as Martin Luther King Jr., who famously said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,” encapsulate this understanding. Taking this insight a step further, we can see that it expresses an ecological sensibility, as writer and speaker Drew Dellinger discerns in King’s philosophy. “Is it possible,” Dellinger asks, “that recovering the ecological and cosmological dimensions of King’s vision could help inspire our present work to link issues, connect ecology and social justice, and build a culture with a viable future?”
Here, the idea of “integral ecology” can be useful. As mathematics professor Dave Pruett observes, we face profound social problems that are inherently correlated:
Integral ecology begins with the recognition that humanity now faces existential crises on multiple fronts: extreme economic disparity, increased competition for resources including land and water, a severely degraded natural world, failing nation states, and a climate on the verge of spinning out of control. … The fates of all peoples are linked, and they are linked ultimately to the fate of the earth. What befalls the earth befalls us all.
This observation reflects the growing recognition that we need a structure for interweaving personal, societal, and ecological perspectives as we imagine and implement social change strategies. If everything is connected, then so too are efforts to address conditions in any part of the system.
At its broadest and perhaps most-poignant level, integral ecology portends a world in which we recognize our own well-being as intricately connected to the well-being of others, to the structures and systems that bind together our cultures and societies, and to the sustainability and overall health of the ecosystems we rely on (and are part of) on both the local and global scales. In short, integral ecology means what it sounds like it means; it is the deep integration of human pursuits with environmental systems at all levels.
For those working for social change, integral ecology provides a way to think and act systemically rather than symptomatically. It can help focus social change efforts on root causes and structural conditions. Integral ecology can help align the essential work of addressing acute social conditions with the larger project of alleviating and transforming the underlying drivers of those conditions. For instance, helping a neighborhood combat high rates of asthma requires that we provide immediate relief (such as health care support) and redress the sources of the condition (such as the disproportionate presence of pollutants).
Rooting and Sprouting: Foundations and Extensions of Integral Ecology
Integral ecology has its roots in traditional values and world views. The connection between individual and environmental well-being is also central to many faith traditions, and environmental theories and practices. These include the writings of historian and priest Thomas Berry in the mid-1990s that sought to integrate science and spirituality; the core ideas of philosopher Ken Wilber’s “integral theory”; and the work of theologian Leonardo Boff, as detailed in a 2013 article tracing the origins and evolution of the concept. Scholar Sean Esbjörn-Hargens and environmental philosopher Michael E. Zimmerman built on these roots and formulated a working overview of integral ecology, describing it as “a way of integrating multiple approaches to ecology and environmental studies into a complex, multidimensional metadisciplinary approach to the natural world and our embeddedness within it.” Esbjörn-Hargens and Zimmerman expanded on this methodology in their 2009 book Integral Ecology: Uniting Multiple Perspectives on the Natural World, which argued for an expansive orientation that “contextualizes and includes the partial truths of all traditions” as a mechanism for addressing environmental issues.
More recently, Pope Francis’s landmark encyclical Laudato Si’ (“Praise Be”) amplified these notions of inherent interconnectedness. The letter calls on us to embrace a “broader vision,” in which we see ourselves as deeply connected to one another and to our “common home” while focusing on concrete challenges related to health care, housing, technology, and climate change. Recalling King’s quotation above, the encyclical urges the cultivation of an integral ecology framework while reminding us, “Nature cannot be regarded as something separate from ourselves,” and “what takes place in any one area can have a direct or indirect influence on other areas.”
Building on these concepts, change leaders across the sector are applying theory to practice and taking action to address the ways human engagement has disturbed and impacted environments. Issues like climate change may be global in scope, but the leverage points to address them often reside in how we feed, house, transport, educate, and govern ourselves daily. We can confront a generalized concern for the loss of fresh water for farming, for instance, by tailoring strategies like rainwater catchment and drip irrigation to particular regions.
The overarching aim of integral ecology is the integration of not only people with nature and local with global, but also crisis with possibility. The 2021 United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report underscores how human activity continues to accelerate climate change, and how drought, flooding, and wildfires threaten people and entire ecosystems. Since 2010, weather emergencies have forced approximately 21.5 million people per year to relocate, and data from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees documents how disasters linked to climate change exacerbate poverty, hunger, and access to natural resources, as well as increase instability and violence. Connecting social and environmental impacts helps elicit a more-nuanced analysis and policies to optimize effective social action.
Branching and Flowering: From Comprehension to Action
Grasping the convergence of poverty and preservation, equity and sustainability, and consumption and climate change, international bodies such as the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016 and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals of 2015, are grounding their strategies and actions directly within the framework of integral ecology. Indeed, the emergence of new fields highlights these connections, as ideas that have taken root begin to branch out into other domains.
“Climate justice,” for instance, focuses on solving the overarching problem of carbon emissions (and associated environmental impacts) while remedying its inequitable impacts on communities of color and low-income communities. Likewise, the field of environmental justice has long recognized that opportunities and outcomes related to education, work, and health in a community are directly linked to factors such as the presence of toxins and pollutants, access to green spaces, and availability of resources. It is becoming increasingly apparent that sociopolitical policies and practices are inextricably linked to environmental sustainability.
In this sense, infrastructure and economic development can challenge ecological well-being unless we consciously and sustainably cultivate it. And for development to be sustainable, it must consider equitable distribution rather than just aggregate amounts. Indeed, critics like Jove S. Aguas have observed that unchecked, inequitable development can “lead to the total collapse of our natural environment and the essential ecosystems.” Just as human choices as diverse as roadside littering or warfare impact ecological systems, tangible policies and operations (such as the lack of regulation of toxins and the prioritization of short-term profits) impact equity, both in the present and intergenerationally. We must therefore situate any steps we take toward connecting individual practices to ecological outcomes within a world we have harmed. Addressing this requires pragmatic action at all scales.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature’s cooperative approach to restoring environmental health uses nature-based solutions (such as ecological restoration, integrated water resources management, and ecosystem-based adaptation) to address food and water security, climate change, and poverty reduction. Its sustainable, cost-effective approach to farming enhances human connectivity and ecological resilience. Ecological literacy is an important component of these efforts, and we can look to programs like the Planet Protector Academy for guidance. The academy uses story, music, interactive media, and theater to teach environmental literacy in the classroom, remind people of our connection and dependency on the natural world, and help families revisit their energy and transportation habits.
As we create strategies and take action, “reinhabitatation” may be a useful concept to consider. It emerged as a response to classical forms of environmentalism from the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which idealized pristine landscapes and oftentimes pitted people against nature in the name of “preservation.” While experiences of pristine nature can invite us to reflect and reconnect, we are also keenly aware of the historical and contemporary impact of what researcher Irma Allen describes as “the troubling link between nature conservation and colonial attempts to control populations.” Reinhabitation can serve as a mechanism for resisting displacement and dislocation, as Alexa Scully observes, bolstering efforts to redress the ongoing impacts of colonialism by fostering “healthier people and land in a way that honors and respects interrelationship.” These perspectives are especially important given that many indigenous societies embody values and practices consistent with integral ecology, providing opportunities for “building bridges” between faith communities, science, and wisdom accrued through deep connections to place, or traditional ecological knowledge.
The essence of reinhabitation is reconnecting with the whole of creation by unconditionally embracing its constituent parts, not simply those that appear iconic or pristine. In the early days of the modern environmental movement (circa 1970s), poet, essayist, and activist Gary Snyder wrote about the practical and spiritual lessons we learn from spending time in nature, and how it can help us reconnect to a sense of place—and to all places. This process of reconnecting to nature can promote psychological, physiological, and spiritual well-being, helping people cultivate ways of being that are relevant and appropriate to local ecosystems.
Becoming steeped in a place can help foster values of collaboration and connection as a precursor to taking constructive action. A robust nexus between patterns of thinking and practices of being is a cornerstone of integral ecology, from its earliest roots seeking to connect science and spirituality and to bridge disparate fields of inquiry. Grounded in common concerns and shared origins, the multiplicity of perspectives (historical and contemporary) that constitute a “diversity of integral ecologies” becomes a foundation for well-being and acting well in a complex, interconnected world, as described by the editors’ introduction of the book The Variety of Integral Ecologies.
Harvesting and Healing: Connecting Values and Visions
From these deep roots and their manifold flowers, we can glean several observations to guide our efforts to foster well-being for individuals and the environment. These points of reflection are merely one attempt to synthesize the lessons of integral ecology in a manner that can help facilitate their implementation in the practices of everyday life.
- Wellness exists on a continuum that incorporates illness and crisis.
- We cannot separate human flourishing (achieving the best version of ourselves within the context of a healthy society) from environmental sustainability.
- Social and economic justice are inherently connected to environmental justice.
- Healing at the individual and ecological levels is mutually constitutive.
- Integral ecology provides a framework to address the root causes of ecological damage and social justice.
These values-based statements can help bridge theory and practice. They reflect the essence of “ecological belonging,” which emphasizes how the values and norms inscribed in a community or space (such as a classroom or workplace) can implicitly or explicitly impact access to those spaces and the outcomes that individuals attain within them. Like their natural counterparts, built environments (environments constructed by humans for living, working, and other activities) can also address social inequities and contribute to community well-being, resilience, and experiences of belonging. Designing Justice + Designing Spaces, for instance, uses a trauma-informed architectural design process to help communities develop pilot projects that can shift justice systems from punitive to restorative.
Principles and practices focused on connection and belonging can become the basis for equity and sustainability alike. The Deccan Development Society, for instance, has created a successful working model of cooperative community development by integrating biodiversity conservation with agricultural livelihood—a model that provides farmers with food sovereignty and economic security as it works to reverse environmental degradation. These efforts explore alternative economies as viable and necessary instruments for building peaceful community and fostering a just and sustainable world.
These and similar efforts illustrate the importance of addressing the roots of societal conditions rather than merely treating the symptoms; through an integral ecology lens, communities think and act holistically, giving equal regard to sociopolitical issues and ecological ones. A social problem like homelessness presents an opportunity for a community to demonstrate empathy and cultivate inclusive, accessible public spaces that balance the rights of all users, as urged by organizations such as the National Coalition for the Homeless.
Planting Seeds: Lessons and Continuations
The global pandemic and ongoing disruption caused by climate change remind us that the work of social change, and collective healing, frequently involves a response to crises. Integral ecology provides a framework for envisioning and implementing effective, collaborative actions to enhance human well-being and ecological resilience. It encourages us to work together to create a constructive vision of a world where we see ourselves as connected to one another and collectively to the biosphere, and where individual and societal pursuits are robustly connected to ecological ones.
Considering well-being at the ecological scale may call to mind degraded places and endemic ecological challenges that impact human and environmental health. Environmental crises provide opportunities to address the root causes of ongoing and acute environmental injustices, such as the contamination of municipal water in Flint, Michigan, and to proactively cultivate policies that promote wellness. In areas such as urban planning and international policymaking, we can find promising developments along these lines across a wide range of perspectives, practices, and organizations.
Moving forward, Georgetown University and The Wellbeing Project—in conjunction with a global, multidisciplinary panel of experts—will continue to research the ways in which we are connected to one another and the larger environment. This is the integral and integrative sense of ecology, where every component of a system is fundamental to the well-being of any part of it. Integral ecology is not a prescription but a recognition that opens up possibilities for healing at all levels, reminding us that in an interconnected world, our individual well-being is bound up with that of the whole.
Support SSIR’s coverage of cross-sector solutions to global challenges.
Help us further the reach of innovative ideas. Donate today.
Read more stories by Randall Amster & Linda Bell Grdina.