1 concept social ecology
2 Social and environmental interaction
3 Socio-ecological education
4 Environmental aspects in Hughes' sociology
Conclusion
List of used literature
Introduction
Social ecology is the science of harmonizing relations between society and nature.
Social ecology analyzes the attitude of man in its inherent humanistic horizon from the point of view of its correspondence to the historical needs of human development, from the perspective of cultural justification and perspective, through the theoretical understanding of the world in its general definitions, which express the measure of the historical unity of man and nature. Any scientist considers the main concepts of the problem of interaction between society and nature through the prism of his science. The conceptual and categorical apparatus of socioecology is being formed, developed and improved. This process is diverse and covers all aspects of socioecology, not only objectively, but also subjectively, reflecting scientific creativity in a peculiar way and influencing the evolution of scientific interests and searches of both individual scientists and entire teams.
Social ecology's approach to society and nature may seem more intellectually demanding, but it avoids the simplification of dualism and the immaturity of reductionism. Social ecology tries to show how nature slowly, in phases, transformed into society, without ignoring the differences between them, on the one hand, and the degree of their interpenetration, on the other. The everyday socialization of young people by the family is no less based on biology than the constant care of medicine for the elderly is based on established social factors. We will never stop being mammals with our primal instincts, but we institutionalized them and followed them through various social forms. Thus, the social and the natural constantly penetrate into each other, without losing their specificity in this process of interaction.
The purpose of the control work is to consider the environmental aspect in social work.
To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve a number of the following tasks:
Define social ecology;
To study socio-ecological interaction;
Designate socio-ecological education;
Consider environmental aspects in Hughes' sociology.
1 The concept of social ecology
One of the most important problems facing researchers in present stage formation of social ecology is the development of a unified approach to understanding its subject. Despite the obvious progress made in the study of various aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature, as well as a significant number of publications on social and environmental issues that have appeared in the last two or three decades in our country and abroad, on the issue of what exactly this branch of scientific knowledge studies, there are still different opinions. In the school reference book "Ecology" A.P. Oshmarin and V.I. Oshmarina gives two options for defining social ecology: in the narrow sense, it is understood as the science “on the interaction of human society with the natural environment”, and in the broad sense, the science “on the interaction of an individual and human society with natural, social and cultural environments” . It is quite obvious that in each of the presented cases of interpretation we are talking about different sciences that claim the right to be called “social ecology”. No less revealing is the comparison between the definitions of social ecology and human ecology. According to the same source, the latter is defined as: “1) the science of the interaction of human society with nature; 2) ecology of the human personality; 3) the ecology of human populations, including the doctrine of ethnic groups. One can clearly see the almost complete identity of the definition of social ecology, understood "in the narrow sense", and the first version of the interpretation of human ecology. The desire for the actual identification of these two branches of scientific knowledge, indeed, is still characteristic of foreign science, but it is quite often subjected to well-reasoned criticism by domestic scientists. S. N. Solomina, in particular, pointing out the expediency of breeding social ecology and human ecology, limits the subject of the latter to consideration of the socio-hygienic and medical-genetic aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature. With a similar interpretation of the subject of human ecology, V.A. Bukhvalov, L.V. Bogdanova and some other researchers, but strongly disagree with N.A. Agadzhanyan, V.P. Kaznacheev and N.F. Reimers, according to whom this discipline covers a much wider range of issues of the interaction of the anthroposystem (considered at all levels of its organization from the individual to humanity as a whole) with the biosphere, as well as with the internal biosocial organization of human society. It is easy to see that such an interpretation of the subject of human ecology actually equates it with social ecology, understood in a broad sense. This situation is largely due to the fact that at present there has been a steady trend of convergence of these two disciplines, when there is an interpenetration of the subjects of the two sciences and their mutual enrichment through the joint use of the empirical material accumulated in each of them, as well as methods and technologies of socio-ecological and anthropoecological research.
Today, an increasing number of researchers tend to broaden the interpretation of the subject of social ecology. So, according to D.Zh. Markovich, the subject of study of modern social ecology, understood by him as a particular sociology, is the specific relationship between a person and his environment. Based on this, the main tasks of social ecology can be defined as follows: the study of the influence of the environment as a combination of natural and social factors on a person, as well as the influence of a person on the environment, perceived as the framework of human life.
A somewhat different, but not contradictory, interpretation of the subject of social ecology is given by T.A. Akimov and V.V. Haskin. From their point of view, social ecology as part of human ecology is a complex of scientific branches that study the relationship of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the relationship of man with the natural and social environment of their habitat. This approach seems to us more correct, because it does not limit the subject of social ecology to the framework of sociology or any other separate humanitarian discipline, but emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.
Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to emphasize the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of mankind with its environment. According to E. V. Girusov, social ecology should first of all study the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, implemented by man in his life.
2 Social and environmental interaction
L.V. Maksimova identifies two main aspects in the study of human relations with the environment. First, the whole set of influences exerted on a person by the environment and various environmental factors is studied.
In modern anthropoecology and social ecology, environmental factors to which a person is forced to adapt are commonly referred to as adaptive factors. These factors are usually divided into three large groups - biotic, abiotic and anthropogenic environmental factors. Biotic factors are direct or indirect effects from other organisms inhabiting the human environment (animals, plants, microorganisms). Abiotic factors - factors of inorganic nature (light, temperature, humidity, pressure, physical fields - gravitational, electromagnetic, ionizing and penetrating radiation, etc.). A special group is made up of anthropogenic factors generated by the activities of man himself, the human community (pollution of the atmosphere and hydrosphere, plowing fields, deforestation, replacement of natural complexes with artificial structures, etc.).
The second aspect of the study of the relationship between man and the environment is the study of the problem of human adaptation to the environment and its changes.
The concept of human adaptation is one of the fundamental concepts of modern social ecology, reflecting the process of human connection with the environment and its changes. Initially appearing in the framework of physiology, the term "adaptation" soon penetrated other areas of knowledge and began to be used to describe a wide range of phenomena and processes in the natural, technical and human sciences, initiating the formation of an extensive group of concepts and terms that reflect various aspects and properties of adaptation processes. man to the conditions of his environment and its result.
The term "human adaptation" is used not only to refer to the process of adaptation, but also to comprehend the property acquired by a person as a result of this process - adaptability to the conditions of existence. L.V. Maksimova believes, however, that in this case it is more appropriate to speak of adaptability.
However, even under the condition of an unambiguous interpretation of the concept of adaptation, its insufficiency is felt to describe the process it denotes. This is reflected in the emergence of such clarifying concepts as deadaptation and readaptation, which characterize the direction of the process (deadaptation is the gradual loss of adaptive properties and, as a result, a decrease in fitness; readaptation is the reverse process), and the term disadaptation (disorder of the body's adaptation to changing conditions of existence) reflecting the nature (quality) of this process.
SOCIAL ECOLOGY IN THE GLOBAL WORLD
“The childhood of mankind is over, when mother nature walked and cleaned up after us. The period of maturity has come. Now we have to clean up ourselves, or rather learn to live in such a way as not to litter. From now on, the full responsibility for the preservation of life on Earth lies with us” (Oldak, 1979).
At present, humanity is experiencing perhaps the most critical moment in the entire history of its existence. Modern society is in a deep crisis, although this cannot be said if limited to some external manifestations. We see that the economies of developed countries continue to grow, even if not at such a rapid pace as it was quite recently. Accordingly, the volume of mining continues to increase, which is stimulated by the growth of consumer demand. This is most noticeable again in developed countries. At the same time, social contrasts in modern world between economically developed and developing countries are becoming more pronounced and in some cases reach a 60-fold gap in the income of the population of these countries.
Rapid industrialization and urbanization, a sharp increase in the population of the planet, intensive chemicalization Agriculture, other types of anthropogenic pressure on nature significantly disrupted the circulation and natural energy processes in the biosphere, damaged its mechanisms self-healing . This endangered the health and life of the present and future generations of people and, in general, the continued existence of civilization.
Analyzing the current situation, many experts come to the conclusion that humanity is currently threatened two deadly dangers:
1) relatively fast death in the fire of a global nuclear missile war and
2) slow extinction due to the deterioration of the quality of the living environment, which is caused by the destruction of the biosphere due to irrational economic activity.
The second danger, apparently, is more real and more formidable, since diplomatic efforts alone are not enough to prevent it. It is necessary to revise all the traditional principles of nature management and radically restructure the entire economic mechanism in most countries of the world.
Therefore, speaking about the current situation, everyone should understand that the current crisis has engulfed not only the economy and nature. First of all, the person himself is in crisis, with his centuries-old way of thinking, needs, habits, way of life and behavior. The crisis situation of a person lies in the fact that his whole way of life opposes nature. The only way out of this crisis is if man is transformed into a being friendly with nature who understands it and knows how to be in agreement with it. But for this, people must learn to live in harmony with each other and take care of future generations. Every person must learn all this, no matter where he has to work and no matter what tasks he has to solve.
So, in the conditions of the progressive destruction of the Earth's biosphere, in order to resolve the contradictions between society and nature, it is necessary to transform human activity on new principles. These principles provide achieving a reasonable compromise between the social and economic needs of society and the ability of the biosphere to satisfy them without threatening its normal functioning. Thus, the time has come for a critical review of all areas of human activity, as well as areas of knowledge and spiritual culture that form a person's worldview.
Mankind is now taking the test of genuine reasonableness . It will be able to pass this test only if it fulfills the requirements that the biosphere makes for it. These requirements are:
1) biosphere compatibility based on the knowledge and use of the laws of conservation of the biosphere;
2) moderation in the consumption of natural resources, overcoming the extravagance of the consumer structure of society;
3) mutual tolerance and peacefulness of the peoples of the planet in relations with each other;
4) adherence to generally significant, environmentally thoughtful and consciously set global goals of social development.
All these requirements presuppose the movement of mankind towards a single global integrity based on the joint formation and maintenance of a new planetary shell, which Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky called noosphere .
The scientific basis for such activities should be a new branch of knowledge - social ecology .
Prehistory of social ecology. Reasons for the emergence of social ecology as an independent scientific discipline
The problems associated with the interaction of society and its environment are called environmental problems. Initially, ecology was a branch of biology (the term was introduced by Ernst Haeckel in 1866). Environmental biologists study the relationship of animals, plants, and entire communities with their environment. Ecological view of the world- such a ranking of values and priorities of human activity, when the most important is the preservation of a human-friendly environment.
The prehistory of social ecology begins with the appearance of man on Earth. The English theologian Thomas Malthus is considered the herald of the new science. He was one of the first to point out that there are natural limits to economic growth, and demanded that population growth be limited: “The law in question consists in the constant desire, inherent in all living beings, to multiply faster than is allowed by the number at their disposal. food” (Malthus, 1868, p. 96); "... to improve the situation of the poor, it is necessary to reduce the relative number of births" (Malthus, 1868, p. 378). This idea is not new. In Plato's "ideal republic", the number of families should be regulated by the government. Aristotle went further and proposed to determine the number of children for each family.
Another forerunner of social ecology is geographical school in sociology: adherents of this scientific school pointed out that the mental characteristics of people, their way of life are directly dependent on the natural conditions of the area. Let's remember that S. Montesquieu claimed that "the power of the climate is the first power in the world." Our compatriot L.I. Mechnikov pointed out that world civilizations developed in the basins of the great rivers, on the shores of the seas and oceans. K. Marx believed that a temperate climate is most suitable for the development of capitalism. K. Marx and F. Engels developed the concept of the unity of man and nature, the main idea of which was: to know the laws of nature and apply them correctly.
The emergence and subsequent development of social ecology was a natural consequence of the ever-increasing interest of representatives of various humanitarian disciplines (such as sociology, economics, political science, psychology, etc.) in the problem of harmonizing the relationship between society and nature, man and the environment. And this is possible only when the basis of the socio-economic development of society becomes rational nature management .
Initially, the scientific principles of rational nature management tried to develop many existing sciences - biology, geography, medicine, economics. Recently, ecology has become increasingly involved in these issues. Medico-biological and medico-demographic aspects of the relationship between society and nature were considered in medical geography, environmental health, and later in a new field of ecology - human ecology. In general, a lot of new sections have appeared in the traditional sciences. For example, engineering geology began to deal with the protection and rational use of the geological environment. In jurisprudence, socioecological law began to take shape. In economic science, such a section as the economics of environmental management has arisen.
Representatives of various scientific disciplines began to assert that the problem of rational nature management is only their domain. But it turned out that each science, when studying the problem of rational nature management, focused on those moments that were closer to it. Chemists, for example, were not concerned with studying a problem from a social or economic point of view, and vice versa.
It became obvious that an isolated study of all aspects of this problem - medical, biological, social, economic, etc., does not allow creating a general theory of a balanced interaction between society and nature and effectively solving practical tasks rational environmental management. This required a new interdisciplinary science .
Such a science began to take shape almost simultaneously in many countries of the world. In our country, different names were used to designate it - natural sociology, sozology, environmental science, applied ecology, global ecology, socio-economic ecology, modern ecology, big ecology, etc. However, these terms are not widely used.
1.2. Stages of development of social ecology.
Subject of social ecology
The very term "social ecology" appeared thanks to social psychologists - American researchers R. Park and E. Burgess. They first used this term in 1921 in their work on the theory of the behavior of the population in the urban environment. Using the concept of "social ecology", they wanted to emphasize that in this context we are talking not about biological, but about social phenomenon, which, however, and biological characteristics. Thus, in America, social ecology was originally more of a sociology of the city or urban sociology.
In 1922 H. Burroughs turned to American Association geographers with a presidential address called "Geography as human ecology » . The main idea of this appeal is to bring ecology closer to man. The Chicago school of human ecology has gained worldwide fame: the study of the mutual relations of man as a holistic organism with his holistic environment. It was then that ecology and sociology first came into close interaction. Ecological techniques began to be applied to the analysis of the social system.
One of the first definitions of social ecology was given in his work in 1927 by Dr. R. McKenzil, characterizing it as a science of territorial and temporal relations of people, which are influenced by selective (selective), distributive (distributive) and accommodative (adaptive) forces of the environment. Such a definition of the subject of social ecology was intended to become the basis for the study of the territorial division of the population within urban agglomerations.
It should be noted, however, that the term "social ecology", apparently best suited to designate a specific direction of research into the relationship of a person as a social being with the environment of his existence, has not taken root in Western science, in which preference from the very beginning began to be given to the concept of "human ecology" (human ecology). This created certain difficulties for the formation of social ecology as an independent, humanitarian in its main focus, discipline. The fact is that in parallel with the development of the socio-ecological problems proper, within the framework of human ecology, bioecological aspects of human life were developed in it. Having passed by this time a long period of formation and, due to this, having more weight in science, having a more developed categorical and methodological apparatus, human biological ecology for a long time “shielded” humanitarian social ecology from the eyes of the progressive scientific community. Nevertheless, social ecology existed for some time and developed relatively independently as the ecology (sociology) of the city.
Despite the obvious desire of representatives of the humanitarian branches of knowledge to free social ecology from the "yoke" of bioecology, it continued to experience a significant influence from the latter for many decades. As a result, social ecology borrowed most of the concepts, its categorical apparatus from the ecology of plants and animals, as well as from general ecology. At the same time, as D. Zh. Markovich notes, social ecology gradually improved its methodological apparatus with the development of the spatio-temporal approach of social geography, the economic theory of distribution, etc.
Significant progress in the development of social ecology and the process of its separation from bioecology occurred in the 60s of the current century. The 1966 World Congress of Sociologists played a special role in this. Fast development social ecology in subsequent years led to the fact that at the next congress of sociologists, held in Varna in 1970, it was decided to create a Research Committee of the World Association of Sociologists on the problems of social ecology. Thus, as noted by D. Zh. Markovich, the existence of social ecology as an independent scientific branch was, in fact, recognized and an impetus was given to its faster development and a more accurate definition of its subject.
During the period under review, the list of tasks that this branch of scientific knowledge, which was gradually gaining independence, was called upon to solve, significantly expanded. If at the dawn of the formation of social ecology, the efforts of researchers mainly boiled down to searching in the behavior of a territorially localized human population for analogues of laws and ecological relations characteristic of biological communities, then from the second half of the 60s, the range of issues under consideration was supplemented by the problems of determining the place and role of man in the biosphere. , working out ways to determine the optimal conditions for its life and development, harmonization of relationships with other components of the biosphere. The process of its humanitarization that has engulfed social ecology in the last two decades has led to the fact that, in addition to the above tasks, the range of issues it develops includes the problems of identifying the general laws of the functioning and development of social systems, studying the influence of natural factors on the processes of socio-economic development and finding ways to control the action. these factors.
In our country, by the end of the 1970s, conditions had also developed for separating social and environmental problems into an independent area of interdisciplinary research. A significant contribution to the development of domestic social ecology was made by E.V. Girusov, A. N. Kochergin, Yu. G. Markov, N. F. Reimers, S. N. Solomina and others.
One of the most important problems facing researchers at the present stage of the formation of social ecology is the development of a unified approach to understanding its subject. Despite the obvious progress made in the study of various aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature, as well as a significant number of publications on social and environmental issues that have appeared in the last two or three decades in our country and abroad, on the issue of what exactly this branch of scientific knowledge studies, there are still different opinions. In the school reference book "Ecology" by A.P. Oshmarin and V.I. Oshmarina, two options for defining social ecology are given: in the narrow sense, it is understood as the science of "the interaction of human society with the natural environment", and in the broad sense - the science of "the interaction individual and human society with natural, social and cultural environments”. It is quite obvious that in each of the presented cases of interpretation we are talking about different sciences that claim the right to be called “social ecology”. No less revealing is the comparison between the definitions of social ecology and human ecology. According to the same source, the latter is defined as: “I) the science of the interaction of human society with nature; 2) ecology of the human personality; 3) the ecology of human populations, including the doctrine of ethnic groups. The almost complete identity of the definition of social ecology, understood "in the narrow sense", and the first version of the interpretation of human ecology is clearly visible. The desire for the actual identification of these two branches of scientific knowledge, indeed, is still characteristic of foreign science, but it is quite often subjected to well-reasoned criticism by domestic scientists. S.N. Solomina, in particular, pointing out the expediency of breeding social ecology and human ecology, limits the subject of the latter to consideration of the socio-hygienic and medical-genetic aspects of the relationship between man, society and nature. V.A. Bukhvalov, L.V. Bogdanova and some other researchers agree with such an interpretation of the subject of human ecology, but N.A. Agadzhanyan, V.P. Kaznacheev and N.F. the discipline covers a much wider range of issues of the interaction of the anthroposystem (considered at all levels of its organization - from the individual to humanity as a whole) with the biosphere, as well as with the internal biosocial organization of human society. It is easy to see that such an interpretation of the subject of human ecology actually equates it with social ecology, understood in a broad sense. This situation is largely due to the fact that at present there has been a steady trend of convergence of these two disciplines, when there is an interpenetration of the subjects of the two sciences and their mutual enrichment through the joint use of the empirical material accumulated in each of them, as well as methods and technologies of socio-ecological and anthropoecological research.
Today, an increasing number of researchers tend to broaden the interpretation of the subject of social ecology. So, according to D.Zh.Markovich, the subject of study of modern social ecology, understood by him as a private sociology, are specific links between man and his environment. Based on this, the main tasks of social ecology can be defined as follows: the study of the influence of the environment as a combination of natural and social factors on a person, as well as the influence of a person on the environment, perceived as the framework of human life.
A somewhat different, but not contradictory to the previous, interpretation of the subject of social ecology is given by T.A. Akimova and V.V. Khaskin. From their point of view, social ecology as part of human ecology is a complex of scientific branches that study the relationship of social structures (starting with the family and other small social groups), as well as the relationship of a person with the natural and social environment of their habitat. This approach seems to us more correct, because it does not limit the subject of social ecology to the framework of sociology or any other separate humanitarian discipline, but emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature.
Some researchers, when defining the subject of social ecology, tend to emphasize the role that this young science is called upon to play in harmonizing the relationship of mankind with its environment. According to E.V. Girusova, social ecology must first of all study the laws of society and nature, by which he understands the laws of self-regulation of the biosphere, implemented by man in his life.
Like any other scientific discipline, social ecology developed gradually. There are three main stages in the development of this science.
The initial stage is empirical, associated with the accumulation of various data on the negative environmental consequences of the scientific and technological revolution. The result of this area of environmental research was the formation of a network of global environmental monitoring of all components of the biosphere.
The second stage is the "model". In 1972, the book by D. Meadows et al., The Limits to Growth, was published. She was a huge success. For the first time, data on various aspects of human activity were included in a mathematical model and studied using a computer. For the first time, a complex dynamic model of interaction between society and nature was studied at the global level.
Criticism of The Limits to Growth has been comprehensive and thorough. The results of criticism can be reduced to two provisions:
1) modeling on the computer of socio-economic systems at the global and regional levels promising;
2) "models of the world" Meadows is still far from adequate to reality.
Currently, there is a significant variety of global models: the Meadows model is a lace of direct and feedback loops, the Mesarovic and Pestel model is a pyramid cut into many relatively independent parts, the J. Tinbergen model is a “tree” of organic growth, the model of V. Leontiev - also a tree.
The beginning of the third - global political - stage of social ecology is considered to be 1992, when the International Conference on Environment and Development was held in Rio de Janeiro. Heads of 179 states adopted an agreed strategy based on the concept of sustainable development.
1.3. The place of social ecology in the system of sciences.
Social ecology is a complex scientific discipline
social ecology originated at the intersection of sociology, ecology, philosophy and other branches of science, with each of which it closely interacts. In order to determine the position of social ecology in the system of sciences, it must be borne in mind that the word "ecology" means in some cases one of the ecological scientific disciplines, in others - all scientific ecological disciplines. Ecological sciences should be approached in a differentiated way (Fig. 1).
Social ecology is link between the technical sciences (hydraulic engineering, etc.) and the social sciences (history, jurisprudence, etc.).
The following argumentation is given in favor of the proposed system. There is an urgent need to replace the concept of the hierarchy of sciences with the idea of a circle of sciences. The classification of sciences is usually built on the principle of hierarchy (subordination of some sciences to others) and successive fragmentation (separation, not combination of sciences). Classification is best built according to the type of circle (Fig. 1).
Rice. 1. Place of ecological disciplines in the integral system of sciences (Gorelov, 2002)
This diagram does not claim to be complete. Transitional sciences (geochemistry, geophysics, biophysics, biochemistry, etc.) are not marked on it, the role of which is extremely important for solving the environmental problem. These sciences contribute to the differentiation of knowledge, cement the entire system, embodying the inconsistency of the processes of "differentiation - integration" of knowledge. The scheme shows the importance of the "connecting" sciences, including social ecology. In contrast to the sciences of the centrifugal type (physics, etc.), they can be called centripetal. These sciences have not yet reached the proper level of development, because in the past insufficient attention was paid to the connections between the sciences, and it is very difficult to study them.
When the knowledge system is built on the principle of hierarchy, there is a danger that some sciences will hinder the development of others, and this is dangerous from an environmental point of view. It is important that the prestige of the sciences of the natural environment should not be lower than the prestige of the sciences of the physicochemical and technical cycles. Biologists and ecologists have accumulated a lot of data that testify to the need for a much more careful, careful attitude to the biosphere than is the case at present. But such an argument weighs only from the standpoint of a separate consideration of branches of knowledge. Science is a connected mechanism, the use of data from some sciences depends on others. If the data of the sciences are in conflict with each other, preference is given to sciences that enjoy great prestige, i.e. at present, the sciences of the physicochemical cycle.
Science should approach the degree of a harmonious system. Such a science will help create a harmonious system of relationships between man and nature and ensure the harmonious development of man himself. Science contributes to the progress of society not in isolation, but together with other branches of culture. Such a synthesis is no less important than the greening of science. Value reorientation is an integral part of the reorientation of the whole society. The attitude to the natural environment as integrity presupposes the integrity of culture, the harmonious connection of science with art, philosophy, etc. Moving in this direction, science will move away from focusing solely on technical progress, responding to the deepest demands of society - ethical, aesthetic, as well as those that affect the definition of the meaning of life and the goals of society's development (Gorelov, 2000).
The place of social ecology among the sciences of the ecological cycle is shown in fig. 2.
Rice. 2. The relationship of social ecology with other sciences (Gorelov, 2002)
Social ecology is a scientific discipline about the harmonization of the relationship between nature and society. This branch of knowledge analyzes the human relationship (taking into account the correspondence of the humanistic side) with the needs of development. At the same time, comprehension of the world in its general concepts is used, expressing the degree of historical unity of nature and man.
The conceptual and categorical structure of science is in constant development and improvement. This process of change is quite diverse and penetrates all ecologies, both objectively and subjectively. In this peculiar way, scientific creativity is reflected and the evolution of methods of scientific research and the interests of not only individual scientists, but also various teams as a whole are influenced.
The approach to nature and society that social ecology proposes to apply may, to a certain extent, seem intellectually demanding. At the same time, he avoids some of the simplification of dualism and reductionism. Social ecology seeks to show the slow and multi-phase process of the transformation of nature into society, taking into account all the differences on the one hand and, on the other hand, the degree of interpenetration.
One of the primary tasks facing researchers at the stage of the modern establishment of science is the definition of a general approach to understanding the subject of the discipline. Despite some progress that has been made in the study of various areas of interaction between man, nature and society, a large amount of material published over the past decades, there is still a lot of controversy on the question of what exactly social ecology studies.
An increasing number of researchers prefer an extended interpretation of the subject of the discipline. For example, Markovic (a Serbian scientist) believed that social ecology, considered by him as a private sociology, studies the specific connections that are established between a person and his environment. Based on this, the tasks of the discipline may consist in studying the influence of a combination of social and natural factors that make up the surrounding conditions on a person, as well as the impact of an individual on external conditions perceived as the boundaries of a person’s life.
There is also to some extent another, however, not contradicting the above explanation of the interpretation of the concept of the subject of discipline. So, Haskin and Akimova consider social ecology as a complex of individuals who explore the relationship between social structures (starting with the family itself and other small public collectives and groups), as well as between a person and the natural, social environment. Using this interpretation, it becomes possible to study more fully. In this case, the approach to understanding the subject of the discipline is not limited to the framework of one. At the same time, attention is focused on the interdisciplinary nature of the discipline.
Defining the subject of social ecology, some researchers tend to emphasize the importance that it is endowed with. The role of discipline, in their opinion, is very significant in the issue of harmonizing the interaction between mankind and its environment. A number of authors believe that the task of social ecology, first of all, is to study the laws of nature and society. In this case, these laws are understood as the principles of self-regulation in the biosphere, applied by man in his life.
social ecology - a scientific discipline that examines the relationship in the "society-nature" system, studying the interaction and interrelationships of human society with the natural environment (Nikolai Reimers).
But such a definition does not reflect the specifics of this science. Social ecology is currently being formed as a private independent science with a specific subject of study, namely:
The composition and characteristics of the interests of social strata and groups that exploit natural resources;
Perception of different social strata and groups of environmental problems and measures to regulate nature management;
Consideration and use in the practice of environmental measures of the characteristics and interests of social strata and groups
Thus, social ecology is the science of interests social groups in the field of natural resources.
Types of social ecology.
Social ecology is divided into the following types:
Economic
Demographic
Urban
Futurological
Legal
Main tasks and problems
Main task social ecology is the study of the mechanisms of human impact on the environment and those changes in it that are the result of human activity.
Problems social ecology are basically reduced to three main groups:
on a planetary scale - a global forecast for the population and resources in conditions of intensive industrial development (global ecology) and the determination of ways for the further development of civilization;
regional scale - the study of the state of individual ecosystems at the level of regions and districts (regional ecology);
microscale - the study of the main characteristics and parameters of urban living conditions (urban ecology or urban sociology).
Wednesday, human environment, its specificity and condition.
Under the habitat usually understand natural bodies and phenomena with which the organism (organisms) are in direct or indirect relationship. Separate elements of the environment to which organisms react with adaptive reactions (adaptations) are called factors.
Along with the term "habitat", the concepts "ecological environment", "habitat", "environment", "environment", "surrounding nature", etc. are also used. There are no clear differences between these terms, but some of them should stay. In particular, the recently popular term "environment" is understood, as a rule, as an environment that has been modified to some extent (in most cases, to a large extent) by man. Close in meaning to it are "technogenic environment", "anthropogenic environment", "industrial environment".
The natural environment, the surrounding nature is an environment that has not been changed by man or changed to a small extent. The term "habitat" is usually associated with the living environment of an organism or species in which the entire cycle of its development is carried out. In the "General Ecology" it is usually about the natural environment, the natural environment, habitats; in "Applied and Social Ecology" - about the environment. This term is often considered an unfortunate translation from the English environment, since there is no indication of the object that the environment surrounds.
The influence of the environment on organisms is usually assessed through individual factors (lat. making, producing). Ecological factors are understood as any element or condition of the environment to which organisms react with adaptive reactions, or adaptations. Beyond adaptive reactions lie lethal (disastrous for organisms) values of factors.
The specifics of the action of anthropogenic factors on organisms.
There are several specific features of the action of anthropogenic factors. The most important of them are the following:
1) the irregularity of action and, therefore, unpredictability for organisms, as well as the high intensity of changes, incommensurable with the adaptive capabilities of organisms;
2) practically unlimited possibilities of action on organisms, up to complete destruction, which is characteristic of natural factors and processes only in rare cases (natural disasters, cataclysms). Human impacts can be both targeted, such as competition with organisms called pests and weeds, and unintentional fishing, pollution, destruction of habitats, etc.;
3) being the result of the activity of living organisms (human), anthropogenic factors act not as biotic (regulating), but as specific (modifying). This specificity is manifested either through a change in the natural environment in a direction unfavorable for organisms (temperature, moisture, light, climate, etc.), or through the introduction of agents alien to organisms into the environment, united by the term "xenobiotics";
4) no species performs any actions to the detriment of itself. This feature is inherent only to a person endowed with reason. It is a person who has to fully receive negative results from a polluted and destroyed environment. biological species simultaneously change and condition the environment; a person, as a rule, changes the environment in a direction unfavorable for himself and other beings;
5) a person has created a group of social factors that are the environment for the person himself. The effect of these factors on a person, as a rule, is no less significant than natural ones. An integral manifestation of the action of anthropogenic factors is a specific environment created by the influence of these factors.
Man, and to a large extent, other creatures currently live in an environment that is the result of anthropogenic factors. It differs from the classical environment, which was considered in general ecology in terms of the action of natural abiotic and biotic factors. A noticeable change in the human environment began when he moved from gathering to more active activities, such as hunting, and then the domestication of animals and the cultivation of plants. Since that time, the principle of "ecological boomerang" began to work: any impact on nature, which the latter could not assimilate, returned to man as a negative factor. Man more and more separated himself from nature and enclosed himself in the shell of his own created environment. The contact of man with the natural environment has been decreasing more and more.
The goal of social ecology is to create a theory of the evolution of the relationship between man and nature, the logic and methodology for transforming the natural environment.
Social ecology reveals the patterns of relationships between nature and society, it is designed to understand and help bridge the gap between the humanities and natural sciences.
The laws of social ecology are as fundamental as the laws of physics. However, the subject of social ecology is very complex: three qualitatively different subsystems - inanimate nature, wildlife, human society. At present, social ecology is predominantly an empirical science, and its laws often look like extremely general aphoristic statements (“Commoner's laws”*).
The concept of law is interpreted by most methodologists in the sense of an unambiguous causal relationship. In cybernetics, a broader interpretation has been adopted: the law is the restriction of diversity. This interpretation is more suitable for social ecology.
Social ecology reveals the fundamental limitations of human activity. The adaptive possibilities of the biosphere are not unlimited. Hence the "environmental imperative": human activity should in no case exceed the adaptive capacity of the biosphere.
As the basic law of social ecology, the law of the correspondence of productive forces and production relations to the state of the natural environment is recognized.
12.Functions of social ecology.
Functions of social ecology:
1. theoretical - the development of the main conceptual paradigms that explain the nature of the ecological development of society, man and nature (the concept of the noosphere, the concept of zero growth, the limits of growth, sustainable development, co-evolution);
2. pragmatic - dissemination of environmental knowledge, environmental information, environmental concerns, advanced training of managers and managers;
3. prognostic - determining the immediate and distant prospects for the development of society and changes in the biosphere;
4. environmental - study of the impact of environmental factors on the environment; environmental factors are divided into:
a) abiotic - factors of inanimate nature (sunlight, radiation, temperature, humidity, relief, climate, soil composition, atmospheric air composition);
c) anthropogenic factors - the impact of human economic activity and the size of the human population on the environment, manifested in excessive depletion of natural resources and pollution of the natural environment.
13.Methods of social ecology.
Nature is studied natural Sciences such as biology, chemistry, physics, geology, etc., using a natural science (nomological) approach. Society studies the humanities - sociology, demography, ethics, economics, etc. - and uses a humanitarian (ideographic) approach. social ecology as an interdisciplinary science, it is based on three types of methods: 1) natural sciences, 2) humanities, and 3) systemic research that combines natural sciences and the humanities.
An important place in the methodology of social ecology is occupied by the methodology of global modeling.
Main stages global simulation come down to the following:
1) a list of causal relationships between variables is compiled and a feedback structure is outlined;
2) after studying the literature and consulting demographers, economists, ecologists, geologists, etc., a general structure is revealed that reflects the main relationships between levels.
After the global model in general view created, it is necessary to work with this model, which includes the following steps: 1) quantitative assessment of each connection - global data are used, and if there are no global data, then characteristic local data are used; 2) with the help of a computer, the effect of the simultaneous action of all these connections in time is determined; 3) the number of changes in the underlying assumptions is checked to find the most critical determinants of the system's behavior.
The global model uses the most important relationships between population, food, investment, resources and output. The model contains dynamic statements about the physical aspects of human activity. It contains assumptions that the nature of social variables (income distribution, family size regulation, etc.) will not change.
The main task is to understand the system in its elementary form. Only then can the model be improved on the basis of other, more detailed data. The model, once it has emerged, is usually constantly criticized and updated with data.
The value of the global model is that it allows you to show the point on the chart where growth is expected to stop and the beginning of a global catastrophe is most likely. To date, various private methods of the global modeling method have been developed. For example, the Meadows group uses the principle of system dynamics. The peculiarity of this technique is that: 1) the state of the system is completely described by a small set of values; 2) the evolution of the system in time is described by differential equations of the 1st order. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that system dynamics deals only with exponential growth and a state of equilibrium.
The methodological potential of the theory of hierarchical systems applied by Mesarovich and Pestel is much wider than that of the Meadows group. It becomes possible to create multi-level systems.
Wassily Leontiev's input-output method is a matrix reflecting the structure of intersectoral flows, production, exchange and consumption. Leontiev himself studied structural relationships in the economy in conditions where "a multitude of seemingly unrelated interdependent flows of production, distribution, consumption and investment constantly influence each other and, ultimately, are determined by a number of basic characteristics of the system" (Leontiev, 1958 , p. 8).
The real system can be used as a model. So, for example, agrocenosis is an experimental model of biocenosis.
All activities to transform nature are modeling, which accelerates the formation of theory. Since the organization of production must take into account the risk, the simulation allows you to calculate the probability and severity of the risk. Thus, modeling contributes to optimization, i.e. choosing the best ways to transform the natural environment.
14.The structure of social ecology.
The term "ecology" (from the Greek oikos- home, dwelling, habitat and logos- science) was introduced into scientific circulation by the German scientist E. Haeckel in 1869. He also gave one of the first definitions of ecology as a science, although some of its elements are contained in the works of many scientists, starting with thinkers Ancient Greece. The biologist E. Haeckel considered the relationship of the animal with the environment as a subject of ecology, and, initially, ecology developed as a biological science. However, the ever-increasing anthropogenic factor, the sharp aggravation of relations between nature and human society, the emergence of the need to protect the environment immeasurably expanded the scope of the subject of ecology.
At the moment, ecology must be considered as a complex scientific direction that generalizes, synthesizes data from natural and social sciences about the natural environment and its interaction with man and human society. It has truly become the science of "home", where "home" (oikos) is our entire planet Earth.
Among the environmental sciences, a special place is occupied by social Ecology, considering the relationship in the global system "human society-environment" and studying the interaction of human society with the natural and man-made environment created by it. Social ecology develops the scientific foundations of nature management, which involves improving the quality of human life in its environment while ensuring the conservation of nature.
human ecology includes the ecology of the city, the ecology of population, the ecology of the human personality, the ecology of human populations (the doctrine of ethnic groups), etc.
At the intersection of human ecology and building ecology, a architectural Ecology, which studies methods of creating a comfortable, durable and expressive environment for people. It is ecologically unacceptable to destroy the architectural environment of the city, which often occurs in the absence of a compositional and artistic connection between new and old objects, etc., since architectural disharmony causes a decrease in working capacity and deterioration in human health.
A new scientific direction is directly adjacent to architectural ecology - videoecology, studying the interaction of man with the visible environment. Videoecologists consider dangerous for humans on physiological level so-called homogeneous and aggressive visual fields. The first are bare walls, glass showcases, blank fences, flat roofs of buildings, etc., the second are all kinds of surfaces, dotted with identical, evenly spaced elements, from which ripples in the eyes (flat facades of houses with identical windows, large surfaces lined with rectangular tiles , etc.).
15.Man and society as subjects of socio-ecological interaction.
Human ecology and social ecology have as their subject the study of man (society) as a central object at the heart of a large, multi-level system called the environment.
modern science sees in Man, first of all, a biosocial being who has gone through a long path of evolution in his development and developed a complex social organization.
Coming out of the animal kingdom, Man still remains one of its members. Kingdom Animals, subkingdom Multicellular, section Bilaterally symmetrical, type Chordata, subtype Vertebrates, group Jaws, class Mammals, order Primates, suborder Monkeys, section Narrow-nosed, superfamily Higher narrow-nosed (hominoids), family Hominids, genus Man, species Homo sapiens - such its position in the system of the organic world.
According to the ideas prevailing in science modern man descended from an ape-like ancestor. The reason for the departure of human ancestors from the general line of evolution, which predetermined an unprecedented leap in improving its physical organization and expanding the possibilities of functioning, was the change in the conditions of existence that occurred as a result of the development of natural processes. The general cooling, which caused a reduction in the areas of forests - natural ecological niches inhabited by human ancestors, made it necessary for him to adapt to new, extremely unfavorable circumstances of life. One of the features of the specific strategy of adaptation of human ancestors to new conditions was that they “stakes” mainly on the mechanisms of behavioral rather than morphophysiological adaptation. This made it possible to respond more flexibly to current changes in the external environment and thus more successfully adapt to them.
The most important factor that determined the survival and subsequent progressive development of man was his ability to create viable, extremely functional social communities. Gradually, as a person mastered the skills of creating and using tools, creating a developed material culture, and, most importantly, developing intellect, he actually moved from passive adaptation to the conditions of existence to their active and conscious transformation. Thus, the origin and evolution of man not only depended on the evolution of living nature, but also largely predetermined serious environmental changes on Earth.
The level (individual, population, society, etc.) corresponds to its own environment and its own ways of adapting to it.
This model-matrix emphasizes the complexity of man and the diversity of human communities. Even at the level of an individual person, an individual in each of the subsystems, one has to deal with an innumerable variety of traits, signs, properties, because there are no two genetically identical people. Also, obviously, no two personalities are the same, etc. etc. This is also true for associations of people, the diversity of which increases with the growth of the hierarchical level, up to the unique - humanity, represented by an infinite variety of people and human communities.
The most important characteristics of a person are his properties, among which are the presence of needs and the ability to adapt.
One of the first positions in this series of properties is occupied by needs, considered as a need for something necessary for human life and development. Reflecting its dependence on environmental conditions, they at the same time act as a source of human activity in its relations with the environment, a regulator of its behavior, direction of thinking, feelings and will.
One of the key properties of a person in his relationship with the environment is adaptability, ability to actively adapt to the environment and its changes.
concept adaptation mechanisms reflects ideas about how a person and society adapt to changes in the environment. The entire set of such mechanisms can be conditionally divided into two large groups: biological and extrabiological mechanisms. The first can be attributed to the mechanisms of morphological, physiological, immunological, genetic and behavioral adaptation, to the second - social behavior and mechanisms of cultural adaptation.
As indicators of the degree of human adaptation to specific conditions of existence, studies on human ecology and social ecology use such characteristics as social and labor potential And health.
16.The human environment and its elements as subjects of socio-ecological interaction.
The human environment is a complex formation that integrates many different components, which makes it possible to talk about a large number of environments, in relation to which the “human environment” is a generic concept. The diversity, the multiplicity of heterogeneous environments that make up a single human environment, ultimately determine the diversity of its influence on him.
The human environment in its most general form can be defined as a set of natural and artificial conditions in which a person realizes himself as a natural and social being. The human environment consists of two interrelated parts: natural and social.
1. The natural component of the environment is the total space directly or indirectly accessible to a person. This is, first of all, the planet Earth with its diverse shells. The social part of the human environment is made up of society and social relations, thanks to which a person realizes himself as a social active being.
The atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, plants, animals and microorganisms are considered as elements of the natural environment.
The atmosphere is called the gas, air shell that surrounds the globe and the force of gravity associated with it.
The hydrosphere is the water shell of the Earth, which includes the World Ocean, land waters (rivers, lakes, glaciers), as well as groundwater.
The lithosphere (or the earth's crust) is the upper solid stone shell of the Earth, bounded from above by the atmosphere and hydrosphere, and from below by the surface of the mantle substrate, established by seismic data.
Plants, animals and microorganisms make up the living natural environment person.
2. The natural environment transformed by people (“second nature”), otherwise the environment is quasi-natural (from Latin quasi - “as if”). She is incapable of self-maintenance for a long time. This different kind"cultural landscapes" (pastures, gardens, arable land, vineyards, parks, lawns, domestic animals, indoor and cultivated plants).
3. Man-made environment ("third nature"), artenatural environment (from Latin arte - "artificial"). It includes residential premises, industrial complexes, urban developments, etc. This environment can only exist if it is constantly maintained by a person. Otherwise, it is inevitably doomed to destruction. Within its boundaries, the cycles of substances are sharply disturbed. This environment is characterized by the accumulation of waste and pollution.
4. Social environment. It has a great influence on a person. This environment includes the relationship between people, the degree of material security, the psychological climate, health care, general cultural values, etc.
17.Socio-environmental consequences of population growth.
The interaction of society and nature is the key problem of the political and socio-economic development of society. Expanding and strengthening anthropogenic and technogenic pressure on nature, society is faced with a repeatedly reproduced "boomerang effect": the destruction of nature turns into economic damage and social damage. The processes of ecological degradation acquire the character of a deep ecological crisis. The question of the conservation of nature is turning into a question of the survival of mankind. And there is no political system in the world that in itself would guarantee the ecological well-being of the country.
Many environmental problems of relationships in the "society-nature" system have now stepped over the boundaries of national economies and have acquired a global dimension. Soon, not ideological, but ecological problems will come to the fore all over the world, not relations between nations, but relations between nations and nature will dominate.
The only way to survive is to maximize the strategy of frugality in relation to the outside world. All members of the world community must participate in this process.
Factors contributing to the emergence and exacerbation of global problems were:
· a sharp increase in the consumption of natural resources;
· negative anthropogenic impact on the natural environment, deterioration of the ecological conditions of people's lives;
· increased unevenness in the levels of socio-economic development between industrialized and developing countries;
creation of weapons of mass destruction.
Already now there is a threat of irreversible changes in the ecological properties of the geo-environment, a threat of violation of the emerging integrity of the world community and a threat of self-destruction of civilization.
Now man is facing two major problems: the prevention of nuclear war and environmental catastrophe. The comparison is not accidental: anthropogenic pressure on the natural environment threatens the same as the use of atomic weapons - the destruction of life on Earth.
A feature of our time is the intensive and global human impact on the environment, which is accompanied by intense and global negative consequences. The contradictions between man and nature can become aggravated due to the fact that there is no limit to the growth of human material needs, while the ability of the natural environment to satisfy them is limited. Contradictions in the system "man - society - nature" have acquired a planetary character.
There are two aspects of the environmental problem:
– environmental crises arising as a result of natural processes;
– crises caused by anthropogenic impact and irrational nature management.
The main problem is the inability of the planet to cope with the waste of human activity, with the function of self-purification and repair. The biosphere is being destroyed. Therefore, the risk of self-destruction of humanity as a result of its own life activity is great.
Nature is influenced in the following ways:
– use of environmental components as a resource base for production;
– the impact of human production activities on the environment;
– demographic pressure on nature (agricultural land use, population growth, growth of large cities).
Here, many global problems of mankind are intertwined - resource, food, demographic - all of them have access to environmental issues.
The current situation on the planet is characterized by a sharp deterioration in the quality of the environment - air pollution, rivers, lakes, seas, unification and even complete disappearance of many species of flora and fauna, soil degradation, desertification, etc. This conflict creates a threat of irreversible changes in natural systems, undermining the natural conditions and resources of the existence of generations of the inhabitants of the planet. The growth of the productive forces of society, population growth, urbanization, scientific and technological progress are the catalysts for these processes.
The depletion of the ozone layer is a much more dangerous reality for all life on Earth than the fall of some super-large meteorite. Ozone prevents dangerous cosmic radiation from reaching the Earth's surface. If not for ozone, these rays would destroy all life. Studies of the causes of the depletion of the ozone layer of the planet have not yet given definitive answers to all questions. Observations from artificial satellites have shown a decrease in ozone levels. With an increase in the intensity of ultraviolet radiation, scientists associate an increase in the incidence of eye diseases and oncological diseases, the occurrence of mutations. Man, the oceans, climate, flora and fauna were under attack.
18. Socio-ecological consequences of the resource crisis.
Energy resource problem. The rapid growth of industry, accompanied by global pollution of the natural environment, has posed an unprecedentedly acute problem of raw materials. Now a person in his economic activity has mastered almost all types of resources available and known to him, both renewable and non-renewable.
Until the beginning of the 20th century, wood was the main energy resource, followed by coal. It was replaced by the extraction and consumption of other types of fuel - oil and gas. The era of oil gave impetus to the intensive development of the economy, which in turn required an increase in the production and consumption of fossil fuels. If we follow the forecasts of optimists, then the world's oil reserves should be enough for 2-3 centuries. Pessimists, on the other hand, believe that the available oil reserves can meet the needs of civilization for only a few decades.
The main directions of the economy of energy resources are: improvement technological processes, improving equipment, reducing direct losses of fuel and energy processes, improving equipment, reducing direct losses of fuel and energy resources, structural changes in production technology, structural changes in manufactured products, improving the quality of fuel and energy, organizational and technical measures. Carrying out these activities is caused not only by the need to save energy resources, but also by the importance of taking into account environmental issues when solving energy problems. Of great importance is the replacement of fossil fuels with other sources (solar energy, wave energy, tide energy, earth energy, wind energy). These sources of energy resources are environmentally friendly. By replacing fossil fuels with them, we reduce the harmful impact on nature and save organic energy resources. .
Land resources, soil cover is the basis of all living nature. Only 30% of the land fund of the world is agricultural land used by mankind for food production, the rest of the territory is mountains, deserts, glaciers, swamps, forests, etc.
Throughout the history of civilization, population growth has been accompanied by an expansion of cultivated land. More land has been cleared for settled agriculture in the past 100 years than in all previous centuries.
Now in the world there is practically no land left for agricultural development, only forests and extreme territories. In addition, in many countries of the world, land resources are rapidly declining (growth of cities, industry, etc.).
Land degradation is a serious problem. The fight against the reduction of land resources is the most important task of mankind.
Of all types of resources, fresh water is in the first place in terms of the growth of demand for it and the increase in the deficit. 71% of the entire surface of the planet is occupied by water, but fresh water makes up only 2% of the total, and almost 80% of fresh water is in the Earth's ice cover. About 60% total area land falls on areas in which there is not enough fresh water. A quarter of humanity feels the lack of it, and more than 500 million people suffer from lack and poor quality.
The situation is complicated by the fact that a large number natural waters contaminated with industrial waste. All this eventually ends up in the ocean, which is already heavily polluted.
Water is a prerequisite for the existence of all living organisms on Earth.
The ocean is the main reservoir of the most valuable and increasingly scarce resource - water (the production of which by desalination is increasing every year). Scientists believe that the biological resources of the ocean are enough to feed 30 billion people.
The main reasons for the depletion of biological resources include: irrational management of the world's fisheries, pollution of ocean waters.
In the future, the situation with another natural resource that was previously considered inexhaustible - the oxygen of the atmosphere - is alarming. When the products of photosynthesis of past eras - combustible fossils - are burned, free oxygen is bound into compounds. Long before fossil fuels are depleted, people must stop burning them, so as not to suffocate themselves and destroy all life.
The population explosion and the scientific and technological revolution have led to a colossal increase in the consumption of natural resources. At such a rate of consumption, it became obvious that many natural resources would be depleted in the near future. At the same time, waste from giant industries began to pollute the environment more and more, destroying the health of the population.
The danger of an ecological - resource crisis with the scientific and technological revolution is not accidental. The scientific and technological revolution creates conditions for the removal of technical restrictions on the development of production. A new contradiction has taken an exceptionally sharp form - between the internally unlimited possibilities for the development of production and the naturally limited possibilities of the natural environment.
19.Socio-ecological consequences of changes in the gene pool.
Habitat change resulting from human activities has an impact on human populations that is mostly harmful, resulting in increased morbidity and reduced life expectancy. However, in developed countries, life expectancy is steadily - by about 2.5 years per decade - approaching its biological limit (95 years), within which a specific cause of death is of no fundamental importance. Impacts that do not seem to lead to premature death, however, often reduce the quality of life, but the deeper problem lies in the imperceptible gradual change in the gene pool, which is becoming global.
The gene pool is usually defined as the totality of genes present in individuals of a given population, group of populations, or species, within which they are characterized by a certain frequency of occurrence.
The impact on the gene pool is most often talked about in connection with radiation pollution, although this is by no means the only factor affecting the gene pool. According to VA Krasilov, there is a big gap between everyday and scientific ideas about the effect of radiation on the gene pool. For example, they often talk about the loss of the gene pool, although it is quite clear that the gene pool of the human species can be lost only if people are practically completely destroyed. The loss of genes or their variants in the foreseeable time scale is likely only in relation to very rare variants. In any case, the emergence of new gene variants, changes in gene frequencies and, accordingly, the frequencies of heterozygous and homozygous genotypes are no less possible.
VA Krasilov notes that not everyone evaluates the change in the gene pool as a negative phenomenon. Supporters of eugenics programs believe that it is possible to get rid of unwanted genes by physical destruction or exclusion of their carriers from the reproduction process. However, the action of a gene depends on its environment, interaction with other genes. At the level of personality, defects are often compensated by the development of special abilities (Homer was blind, Aesop was ugly, Byron and Pasternak were lame). And the methods of gene therapy available today open up the possibility of correcting birth defects without interfering with the gene pool.
The desire of most people to preserve the gene pool as nature created it has quite natural grounds. Historically, the gene pool has developed as a result of a long evolution and has ensured the adaptation of human populations to a wide range of natural conditions. The genetic diversity of people at the population and individual levels is sometimes obviously adaptive (for example, dark skin color in low latitudes associated with resistance to ultraviolet radiation), while in other cases it is neutral with respect to environmental factors. Regardless of this, genetic diversity predetermined the diversity and dynamism of the development of human culture. The highest achievement of this culture - the humanistic principle of the equivalence of all people - translated into biological language means the preservation of the gene pool, which is not subject to artificial selection.
At the same time, the action of natural factors of change in the gene pool continues - mutations, genetic drift and natural selection. Environmental pollution affects each of them. Although these factors act together, it makes sense for analytical purposes to consider them separately.
20.The natural movement of the population.
Vital movement of the population is the change in population due to births and deaths.
The study of natural movement is carried out using absolute and relative indicators.
Absolute indicators
1. Number of births for the period(R)
2. Number of deaths per period(U)
3. Natural increase (decrease) population, which is defined as the difference between the number of births and deaths for the period: SP \u003d P - Y
Relative indicators
Among the indicators of population movement, there are: the birth rate, the death rate, the natural increase rate and the vitality rate.
