Contained in:
Book Chapter

L’innovazione degli approcci sociologici per una prospettiva eco-territorialista

  • Giovanni Carrosio

Eco-territorialism focuses its proposal on the relationship between environmental issues and the territory. For sociology, this is a partly unprecedented challenge. Indeed, environmental sociology has never taken an explicit territorial posture, while territorial sociology has always considered the environment a physical extension that frames human actions. An eco-territorialist sociology, on the other hand, must focus on the logic of ecosystems interacting with society, looking at environmental crises place by place. In the chapter, three sociological perspectives are identified in order to recompose them in an eco-territorial key: Latour and Callon's Actor Network Theory, which reincorporates biophysical worlds and artefacts into agency; Ploeg's rural sociology, which looks at the co-evolution between social and ecological systems; Gough's eco-welfare, which points to a new welfare paradigm capable of sustaining itself outside of growth.

  • Keywords:
  • Eco-territorialist sociology,
  • Actor Network Theory,
  • repeasantization,
  • co-evolution,
  • eco-welfare.,
+ Show More

Giovanni Carrosio

University of Trieste, Italy - ORCID: 0000-0003-2402-2645

  1. Bontempi M. (2017), “Reti di attanti. La concettualizzazione dell’agency e degli attori come effetti dei networks nell’Actor-Network Theory” Politica & Società, vol. 6, n. 1, pp. 7-30.
  2. Callon M. (2006), “Sociologie de l’acteur réseau”, in Akrich M., Callon M., Latour B., Sociologie de la traduction. Textes fondateurs, Les Presses MINES, Paris, pp. 267-276.
  3. Carrosio G. (2019), I margini al centro. L’Italia delle aree interne tra fragilità e innovazione, Donzelli, Roma.
  4. Corrado A. (2010), Il paradigma dei semi: crisi agro-alimentare e reti per un’altra agricoltura, Aracne, Roma.
  5. Goodman D., Redclift M.R. (1991 - a cura di), Environment and development in Latin America: the politics of sustainability, Manchester University Press, Manchester.
  6. Gough I. (2010), “Economic crisis, climate change and the future of welfare states”, Twenty-First Century Society, vol. 5, n. 1, pp. 51-64.
  7. Gough I. (2017), Heat, greed and human need. Climate change, capitalism and sustainable wellbeing, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
  8. Landowski E., Marrone G. (2002 - a cura di), La società degli oggetti: problemi di interoggettività (Vol. 10), Meltemi Editore, Milano.
  9. Latour B. (1994), “Une sociologie sans objet? Note théorique sur l’interobjectivité”, Sociologie du Travail, vol. 36, n. 4, pp. 587-607.
  10. Magnaghi A. (2020), Il principio territoriale, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino.
  11. Magnani N., Carrosio G. (2021), Understanding the Energy Transition. Civil society, territory and inequality in Italy, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
  12. Marletti C.A. (2015), Razionalità e valori: introduzione alle teorie dell’azione sociale, Laterza, Bari-Roma.
  13. Moore J.W. (2017), “The Capitalocene, Part I: on the nature and origins of our ecological crisis”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, vol. 44, n. 3, pp. 594-630.
  14. O’Connor J. (1991), “On the two contradictions of capitalism”, Capitalism Nature Socialism, vol. 2, n. 3, pp. 107-109.
  15. O’Neill M. (2020), “Power, predistribution, and social justice”, Philosophy, vol. 95, n. 1, pp. 63-91.
  16. Osti G. (2010), Sociologia del territorio, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  17. Osti G. (2013), “Scarsità del lavoro e crisi ecologica. L’urgenza di formulare i nostri scenari”, Aggiornamenti Sociali, vol. 64, n. 5, pp. 374-383.
  18. Pellizzoni L. (2011), Conflitti ambientali. Esperti, politica, istituzioni nelle controversie ecologiche, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  19. Pellizzoni L., Osti G. (2008). Sociologia dell’ambiente, Il Mulino, Bologna.
  20. Ploeg (van der) J.D. (2006), “Esiste un nuovo paradigma di sviluppo rurale?”, in Cavazzani A., Gaudio G., Sivini S. (a cura di), Politiche, governance e innovazione per le aree rurali, INEA - Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, Napoli, pp. 343-353.
  21. Ploeg (van der) J.D. (2010), “The peasantries of the twenty-first century: the commoditisation debate revisited”, The Journal of Peasant Studies, vol. 37, n. 1, pp. 1-30.
  22. Sassen S. (2016), “A massive loss of habitat: new drivers for migration”, Sociology of Development, vol. 2, n. 2, pp. 204-233.
  23. Schnaiberg A. (1980), The environment. From surplus to scarcity, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  24. Schnaiberg A. (2012), “Sustainable development and the treadmill of production”, in Baker S., Kousis M., Richardson D., Young S. (a cura di), Politics of sustainable development, Routledge, London.
  25. Sloterdijk P. (2018), What happened in the twentieth century?: Towards a critique of extremist reason, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken.
  26. Struffi L. (2001), Lezioni di sociologia dell’ambiente, Università degli Studi di Trento, Trento.
PDF
  • Publication Year: 2023
  • Pages: 65-74
  • Content License: CC BY 4.0
  • © 2023 Author(s)

XML
  • Publication Year: 2023
  • Content License: CC BY 4.0
  • © 2023 Author(s)

Chapter Information

Chapter Title

L’innovazione degli approcci sociologici per una prospettiva eco-territorialista

Authors

Giovanni Carrosio

Language

Italian

DOI

10.36253/979-12-215-0116-2.09

Peer Reviewed

Publication Year

2023

Copyright Information

© 2023 Author(s)

Content License

CC BY 4.0

Metadata License

CC0 1.0

Bibliographic Information

Book Title

Ecoterritorialismo

Editors

Alberto Magnaghi, Ottavio Marzocca

Peer Reviewed

Number of Pages

242

Publication Year

2023

Copyright Information

© 2023 Author(s)

Content License

CC BY 4.0

Metadata License

CC0 1.0

Publisher Name

Firenze University Press

DOI

10.36253/979-12-215-0116-2

ISBN Print

979-12-215-0115-5

eISBN (pdf)

979-12-215-0116-2

eISBN (xml)

979-12-215-0117-9

Series Title

Territori

Series ISSN

2704-5978

Series E-ISSN

2704-579X

137

Fulltext
downloads

97

Views

Export Citation

1,339

Open Access Books

in the Catalogue

2,191

Book Chapters

3,709,757

Fulltext
downloads

4,396

Authors

from 923 Research Institutions

of 65 Nations

64

scientific boards

from 348 Research Institutions

of 43 Nations

1,246

Referees

from 379 Research Institutions

of 38 Nations