Talk:Environmentalism

Removed further reading list

I've removed this "further reading" list as I don't think it adds value to this global article. Most of the content in this list is rather US-centric. Such a list would also have to be regularly curated and kept up to date. Articles that are important and useful should rather be used for inline citations. EMsmile (talk) 11:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Apps, Jerry, and Natasha Kassulke. Planting an Idea Critical and Creative Thinking about Environmental Issues (2023) online

• Borowy, Iris. "Before UNEP: who was in charge of the global environment? The struggle for institutional responsibility 1968–72." Journal of Global History 14.1 (2019): 87–106.
• Daynes, Byron W., and Glen Sussman, eds. White House Politics and the Environment: Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush (Texas A&M University Press; 2010) 300 pages; evaluates how 12 presidents helped or hindered the cause of environmental protection.
• Johnson, Erik W., and Scott Frickel, (2011). "Ecological Threat and the Founding of U.S. National Environmental Movement Organizations, 1962–1998," Social Problems 58 (Aug. 2011), 305–29.
• Lear, Linda (1997). Rachel Carson: Witness for Nature. New York: Henry Holt and Company. ISBN 978-0-8050-3428-8.
• Martell, Luke. "Ecology and Society: An Introduction". Polity Press, 1994.
• McCormick, John. 1995. The Global Environmental Movement. John Wiley. London. 312 pp. ISBN 9780471949404 OCLC 33832322
• Palmer, Joy. Fifty Key Thinkers on the Environment (Routledge, 2001)
• de Steiguer, J. Edward. 2006. The Origins of Modern Environmental Thought. University of Arizona Press. Tucson. 246 pp. ISBN 9780816524617
• Tooze, Adam, "Democracy and Its Discontents", The New York Review of Books, vol. LXVI, no. 10 (6 June 2019), pp. 52–53, 56–57. "Democracy has no clear answer for the mindless operation of bureaucratic and [technological power. We may indeed be witnessing its extension in the form of artificial intelligence and robotics. Likewise, after decades of dire warning, the environmental problem remains fundamentally unaddressed.... Bureaucratic overreach and environmental catastrophe are precisely the kinds of slow-moving existential challenges that democracies deal with very badly.... Finally, there is the threat du jour: corporations and the technologies they promote." (pp. 56–57.)
• Verweij, Marco; Thompson, Michael (eds), 2006, Clumsy Solutions for a Complex World: Governance, Politics and Plural Perceptions, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 978-0-230-00230-2
• Vogel, David. California Greenin': How the Golden State Became an Environmental Leader (2018) 280 pp online review
• Woodhouse, Keith M. "The Politics of Ecology: Environmentalism and Liberalism in the 1960s," Journal for the Study of Radicalism, Volume 2, Number 2, 2009, pp. 53–84
• World Bank, 2003, "Sustainable Development in a Dynamic World: Transforming Institutions, Growth, and Quality of Life" Archived 17 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine, World Development Report 2003, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Oxford University Press.

EMsmile (talk) 11:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Removed section on Exergy and availability of resources

I've removed a section that had been added in this edit in 2023. I regard it as essay-like and not WP:DUE. This is the section that I removed: EMsmile (talk) 11:56, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

"Thermodynamic derived environmentalism is based on the second law of thermodynamics, minimization of exergy disruption (or entropy generation)and the concept of availability. It moves from the milestone work of Jan Szargut who emphasized the relation between exergy and availability, it is necessary to remember "Exergy Ecology and Democracy". by Goran Wall, a short essay, which evidences the strict relation that relates exergy disruption with environmental and social disruption. More recently it has verified that governmental emissions and impacts balances underestimate the effective GHG production by means of human processes. In fact, they often neglects the impacts of import/export related emissions. In addition they have analyzed the UN SDGs and the methods which are suggested for verifying the advances of the countries. This activity has evidenced that objective and coherent parameters are missing. Therefore, they suggest the introduction of exergy analysis as the most effective method for estimating the environmental degradation. Therefore, a novel fiscal model based on Exergy and availability disruption has been defined as the only possible way for overcoming the problems induced by the globalized markets." EMsmile (talk) 11:56, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

References

Move anything from environmentalist?

I see that recently, the article environmentalist was redirected to this article. That's good but I am just a bit baffled that nothing from that article was regarded as worth keeping? Was that a conscious decision or did it happen in a rush? E.g. at least those photos of people might be a bit useful? Although I wonder if we are better off creating a list article, such as list of environmental activists or alike? Pinging people who were involved in the earlier delete/redirect discussion: User:Benison, User:Eddie891, User:Bearian. EMsmile (talk) 09:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

EMsmile, it was a clear consensus to redirect the artixle. The edit history is saved under history and if you want to salvage anything, you are free to do so. Photos are saved in Commons, so they are not deleted or gone anywhere. You can add those into the article using proper reliable sources and add the images as per our policies and guidelines. — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

On a second glance, you are en experienced editor, who is already aware of it all. So you can go right ahead and add those content if RS supports it. Consensus was clear in redirecting it after a week of discussion. — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:01, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your fast reply. Just for reference, the earlier discussion was here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Environmentalist. Perhaps I should also ping User:Anonymous who had proposed the redirect. Anonymous had also said "That said, a standalone list of notable environmentalists would be perfectly valid, and one could easily be created by splitting off the existing list within this article (presumably to List of environmentalists, which is currently a redirect)." It surprised me a little that the existing content was regarded as not worth keeping at all. I probably would have done a merge + redirect instead of just a redirect. So before potentially resurrecting any of the old stuff from the history I wanted to make sure that others hadn't already looked and deemed the old stuff as unworthy of keeping (thus saving me time). EMsmile (talk) 10:47, 30 April 2025 (UTC)