Plantationocene: A Framework For Understanding the Links Between Ecological Destruction and Social Inequalities

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 37 (1):1-18 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The Anthropocene, as one of the core concepts currently used to understand and reflect on the relationships among humans, species, and planet, has received widespread attention and discussion in the global academic community. As one of the important alternative concepts to the Anthropocene, the term Plantationocene was first proposed by Haraway et al. in October 2014. Compared to the former, it reveals the fundamental characteristics of the modern era, and continues to enrich its theoretical connotations amidst rapid shifts in social concepts and practices. Tracing and sorting out the genealogy of this concept over less than a decade since its inception allows for a microhistorical study of conceptual history, revealing three key dimensions of its meaning: (i) a critique of the history of (post)colonialism and extractivism, (ii) although plantations are known worldwide for monocrop agriculture and have so-called keystone species, they are essentially a multispecies symbiotic system. From its inception, the concept of the Plantationocene inherently encompasses the idea of “multispecies entanglement and multispecies politics,“ and (iii) a metaphor for structural power relations from real word to digital world. Research indicates that the Plantationocene has become a framework for understanding the connection between ecological destruction and social inequality. In the game of global ecological politics and academic power relationships in the post-humanist era, it requires us to pay attention not only to the relationships among humans but also those among multispecies to build a more just and sustainable society in the future.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,150

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

T.b. Mepham, G.A. Tucker, J. Wiseman, issues in agricultural bioethics.Richard Bawden - 1998 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 11 (2):145-150.
Hub Zwart, understanding nature: Case studies in comparative epistemology. [REVIEW]Christopher C. Robinson - 2009 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (5):489-492.
Erratum.[author unknown] - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):105-105.
From the editors.[author unknown] - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (1):1-2.
From the Editor.[author unknown] - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (4):329-329.
From the editors.[author unknown] - 2003 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (4):315-316.
Corrigendum.[author unknown] - 2000 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 (3):231-231.
Editorial.[author unknown] - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (3):221-222.
From the Editors.[author unknown] - 2000 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3):177-180.
From the Editors.[author unknown] - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (1):1-2.
From the Editors.[author unknown] - 2003 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (1):1-2.
From the editor.[author unknown] - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (3):3-4.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-12-08

Downloads
9 (#1,256,605)

6 months
9 (#312,765)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?