Among environmental sociologists, ecological Marxists argue that there is an association between capitalism and ecological destruction/disorganization. This argument suggests that capitalism and nature are in contradiction with one another, so that the expansion of capitalism necessarily results in the destruction of nature. Green criminologists expand on this point and argue that ecological disorganization generates legal and illegal green crimes and injustice. This capitalism–nature association suggests that solving the current ecological crisis would require replacing capitalism. In contrast, the dissipative structure analysis (DSA) argues that capitalist nations pass through phases of development and that as advanced capitalist nations age, the level of ecological destruction they cause becomes attenuated. If true, this outcome suggests that capitalism might solve the problem of ecological destruction by aging. This article reviews these two theoretical arguments, exposes the limitation of the dissipative structure argument, and suggests that future research is required to completely address dissipative structure assumptions. A major limitation of the dissipative structure analysis is its failure to account for the effect of developing capitalist nations on the expansion of ecological disorganization. Trend charts are employed to illustrate the limitations of the DSA hypothesis concerning reduced ecological disorganization.
Read full abstract