|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ecology movement redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|The contents of the merged into Environmental movement on July 19, 2014. and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history.page were|
|This redirect is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I believe the "ecology movement" is fundamentally used to refer to defensive actions to defend those things that ecology tells humans are very important, while the term "environmental movement" is much broader and more about inter-human relationships, e.g. planting olive trees to get peace in the mideast and other fuzzy stuff.
To me the "ecology movement" is people who volunteer to go to Rwanda to pick up a gun and shoot at poachers who are trying to kill gorillas (with the encouragement and permission of the government of course), but that's just me.
- Yes, that's just you. Ecologists shooting people? (Sigh...) By the way, I cannot understand why you have added so much stuff on violence to the article Ecology movement, when violence -with very few exceptions- is completely marginal and widely rejected in this movement. It is mostly non-violent and closely related to the pacifist movement. In the current version, more than half of the article on the Ecology movement is about violence. In my opinion this is really unbalanced. For instance, you say: "In general, those who believe that bodily harm is acceptable in defense of biodiversity under some circumstances join Green Parties (...)". In reality, the Green Parties around the world are based on their well-known Four Pillars, that is, on non-violence. -- Juan M. Gonzalez 11:45 Sep 10, 2002 (UTC)
- Well, I've just seen long info and comments on the controversial work of this writer (188.8.131.52) at Wikipedia:Pages needing attention, in the section "Articles of dubious merit, accuracy and/or validity". -- Juan M. Gonzalez 12:04 Sep 10, 2002 (UTC)
- It seems that 184.108.40.206 is not posting on Wikipedia from April 2002. Anyway, does someone know the Ecology movement with enough extent and depth to write a good article, instead of the current mess? I've seen there are others at Wikipedia who I think more suitable than me. Thanks. :-) -- Juan M. Gonzalez 19:33 Sep 10, 2002 (UTC)
- The Green movement is a political movement and the environment movement is a social movement. The article seems to be about the environmental movement. The term "ecology movement" is rarely used. I would suggest that the ecology movement is about a social movement by ecologists and conservationists. Alan Liefting 09:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- I am becoming convinced that the origianl author did not know the difference between ecology and environment. The two words are often confused. Alan Liefting 21:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Don't Merge: Ecology is a specific scientific field (although it can be broken down into factions like ecofeminism, social ecology, deep ecology...) that principally uses biology to study the relationship between living organisms and their environments. Environmentalism is a lot more general, and encompasses physical science, but more social science, and usually is only concerned with studing the anthropogenic impact of humans on the earth. Almost anyone can be part of the environmental movement, while to be a Green you might need a specific political affiliation, and to be an ecologist you need some undestanding of the field of ecology. Although there may be some overlap, it would be like merging the DLC with the GOP, just because they are both largely neo-liberal. --Howrealisreal 13:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ecofeminism, social ecology and deep ecology are all a subset of environmentalism rather than ecology. They rely on ecology to formulate the ideas however. Alan Liefting 21:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Ecological science and 'ecology movement'
Using the same word for a social movement and for a scientific field is inherently confusing. While many ecological scientists are active environmentalists (not all by any means), most work carefully to maintain the distinction. One agenda -- the social movement -- is explicitly and appropriately value-driven and result-oriented. The other -- the science -- can't be either of these and remain legitimate. Good scientific research is critical for effective support of most environmental agendas (not all; some are really matters of pure faith), and so it is not in the interest of environmentalists to further this confusion. The confusing usage, at this point, permeates general rhetoric, but recognizing this doesn't make it less confusing. I'd strongly prefer that the relevant social, political, economic agendas -- all value-driven, appropriately -- be placed under some heading (environmentalism seems the obvious one) that doesn't use the word 'ecology'. That may never happen, but I will at least do edits, as here, that point out the confounding of these areas. 220.127.116.11 03:48, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- Ecology movement is sometimes used to mean the environmental movement. Alan Liefting 21:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Ecology was a term that now means Environment
I have stumbled across a book called Ecology in the 20th Century by Anna Bramwell published in 1989. It is all about what we now call environmentalism yet the word never occurs in the book. Does anyone have info on how the usage of the words "environmental" and "environmentalism" have changed in the past 30 odd years? Alan Liefting 21:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- The term Ecology movement seem confusing to me also. Is it similar enough to deep ecology or "New Ecology. If so the best name might be the "Deep Ecology Movement which has been around for some time. KAM 10:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- http://www.broadleft.org/greens.htm Comprehensive list of green and alternative parties
- EnviroLink Network - A non-profit clearinghouse of environmental news and information
- In-Situ Conservation, The Convention on Biological Diversity
- Ex-Situ Conservation, The Convention on Biological Diversity
- The World Conservation Union (IUCN)
- IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
- The Convention on Biological Diversity
- Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, IUCN
- IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group
- Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, IUCN: CBSG “PHVA” Reports (Population and Habitat Viability Assessment)
- DOWNLOADS: IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group & the NEWSLETTER: "Re-introduction NEWS"
- The World Wide Fund for Nature
- ONLINE BOOK: “In situ conservation of livestock and poultry”, 1992, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the United Nations Environment Programme
Atulsnischal 05:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I vote for a merge with "Environmental Movement." This article is substantially similar to that one and these don't seem to be different in any way. As said before on this talk page, ecology does not equal environment, and somebody seems to have gotten confused. Be bold. Merge, or, yeah, just delete it, there's nothing here that isn't there. Envirocorrector 19:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
|This article was nominated for merging with Environmental movement on April 2013. The result of the discussion was to merge Ecology movement into Environmental movement. Karmos (talk) 05:45, 20 July 2014 (UTC).|