Analysis of The Three Ecologies by Felix Guattari - Essay Example

? “The Three Ecologies'' by Felix Guattari Introduction The basic claim according to Guattari’s work d “The Three Ecologies” indicates that the evolution it strategies transform the Earth while pushing its ecology to disequilibrium; which “will ultimately threaten the continuation of life on the planet’s surface” (page 27). In agreement with this statement, it is a situation, in the world, fitting the description of a deteriorating Earth in terms of people’s modes of living and social context (Dosse, 2011). The deterioration is notable through mass media and co-modification. As a result, the global world will experience increasing homogenization from the sponsorship of control forces, which he names Integrated World Capitalism. It is under the three relation types (subjective, social and environmental), which constitute the three ecologies under the Guattari’s book title (Ricke, 2012). This article will discuss the environmental impacts of a meat industry. In addition, the essay will focus on the measures that people can take to reduce the environmental disasters and why people fail to act as a group. Guattari indicates that people should think in unison about the three crucial ecologies based on a worldwide scale under the ethico-political point of view as he labels it ecosophy (p. 28). According to Guattari, it is unheard of for people to separate the three ecologies especially because he argues that the divide in culture/nature has fallen down due to technical developments (Ricke, 2012). Extending the meaning of ecology in order to take into consideration the human subjectivity, environmental concerns and social relations, “The Three Ecologies” indicates that all the ecological Earth crisis threatening the planet originates from capitalism's expansion. Therefore, Guattari suggests that people should develop new ecosophical strategies that will respect the distinctions between a living system and another. On this note, it is essential to discuss the environmental impacts of meat production and consumption. Environmental impacts of meat industries By March 2010, the global production of meat tripled, and the trend had been so for three continuous decades. Consequently, by 2020, the meat productions all over the world will double the amount currently (Dosse, 2011). The increasing livestock evolution exerts several impacts not only to the environment, but also to the social life such as environmental destruction, worldwide economy, and impacts on human health. Brief Background Statistics show a shocking aspect by indicating that when a person consumes one pound in meat form, it is equal as leveling fifty-five square feet in terms of rainforest. The production of meat is the leading contributing aspect causing environmental issues in the world such as water crisis, pollution, climate change, rainforest destruction and the diminishing arable farmland (Miller & Spoolman, 2008). In as much as people might gather health advantages of consuming meat, the same not only puts their health at risk, but also indicates a significant danger to the environment in the future. More so, it is crucial to outline some of the key results in the report. Over 1.7 billion livestock in the world constitutes the livestock production, which occupy over a quarter of the entire land on Earth. The production and distribution of animal staple feed takes around a third of the entire arable land. At least forty percent of the worldwide agricultural product from the domestic sources comes from livestock production (Guattari, 2005). The sector of livestock production inclusive of transport and feed production emits at least eighteen percent of the entire greenhouse air pollution through gas emissions in the world (Ricke, 2012). Around 800 million citizens in the US could consume the entire grain that livestock feed. The industries feed their farm animals using at least 70 percent of the grain. Industries consume over a half of the total water consumption in the US for livestock production (Miller & Spoolman, 2008). The industry requires four hundred and forty-one water gallons to produce a single pound of animal meat. In case an industry reduces its meat production by one pound, it can save at least 3,000 until 5,000 gallons in terms of water consumption. Discussion on the Impacts There are several websites and organizations aiming at taking conscious steps for maintaining the people’s intent. Well, some people relax and assume the act of reducing environmental destruction through meat production is not under their concern (Ricke, 2012). For instance, there are teams that believe and adopt the methods of incorporating non-meat options for themselves and their companions. Consequently, there are several justifications of adapting to such measures of reducing environmental degradation. The crucial reason is to assist in reducing the essence of global warming. People fail to take precautions out of ignorance while to some extent people hardly have the knowledge or idea on how to react against industrial disasters not only from meat production, but also from other production industries (Miller & Spoolman, 2008). Nevertheless, a meat industry, regardless of size, contributes to tremendous negative impacts on the planet such as depleting the forest and its precious species, water and land pollution. It is through the adoption of the meat-free diets that people will assist in reducing the levels of environmental destruction out of meat production. According to “The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations” the meat industries cause extensive and detrimental effects on the planet as mentioned in this article. This report summarizes the environmental devastation emanating from meat production (Ricke, 2012). In addition, the United Nations report calls the devastation as “one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global.” People should take recommending measures in regard to animal agriculture and make it a crucial policy focus while solving the problems contributed by the meat industries such as biodiversity decrease, climate change, water pollution, water shortage, air pollution and land degradation. Meat industries and water The livestock production does not only pollute the drinking water, but also the natural water bodies. For instance, around sixty-five percent of the total population in California is under the threats of access to pure drinking water due to the increased meat production (Miller & Spoolman, 2008). Another report indicates that livestock contribute to 37 percent of total pesticides industries use, 55 percent of erosion, 33 percent of total phosphorous and 32 percent of nitrogen load present in the freshwater sources, and 50 percent of total volume of animal antibiotics. Aside from discussing the negative impacts of meat production in terms of contamination and pollution, the meat production industries consume eight percent of the water that people use all over the world, where the seven percent goes to watering the animal crops (Guattari, 2005). In as much as the industries wish to increase profits, they should invest in methods of increasing water catchment areas through planting trees and digging bore holes to reduce the danger of running out of the water. Habitat destruction and deforestation The meat production industries play a vital role in habitat destruction and deforestation. The result is out of the industry’s efforts to clear the land and trees with the efforts of creating additional space to enable smooth feed crop production and animal grazing. These are some of the crucial factors contributing to not only land degradation, but to reduce loss of vital animal species, as well. The animals that industries raised for producing by-products or for food feed on grains alongside grazing or as a substitute for grazing (Miller & Spoolman, 2008). Currently, people have cleared tremendous forests leading to loss of habitat for animals and killing some in the process of creating room for animal grazing. In as much as the environmental danger increases, industries and sole individuals require taking action. For instance, the government should transition the system for meat production to smaller scale systems. In doing so, the farms will concentrate solely on those practices that deliver high yields while at the same time producing safer food without harming the environment (Miller & Spoolman, 2008). The animals under smaller farms hardly consume numerous grasses, implying that they require no additional feeds. Such an action will not only reduce feed consumption, but land destruction, energy and water consumption, as well. Conclusion Reducing meat consumption and investing in better ways to manage waste; are other strategies for reducing environmental disasters due to meat production. Statistics all over the world indicate that the consumption of meat increase regardless of state (Guattari, 2005). This is because people become affluent often thus increasing consumption. Some people can reduce meat consumption by selecting a vegetarian way of living while others can opt to take less meat in the diet than they used to take. Whichever the solution, the truth is that meat industries cause harm to one or two of Guattari’s three ecologies. Referencing Cleaner production assessment in meat processing. (2000). Paris: UNEP. Dosse, F. (2011). Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari: Intersecting lives. New York: Columbia University Press. Guattari, F. (2005). The three ecologies. London: Continuum. Miller, G. T., & Spoolman, S. (2008). Environmental science: Problems, concepts, and solutions. Belmont, CA: Brooks Cole. Miller, G. T., & Spoolman, S. (2012). Living in the environment. Pacific Grove, Calif.?: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning. Ricke, S. C. (2012). Organic meat production and processing. Chicago, IL: Wiley-Blackwell. Read More