Where Does Ecological Wisdom Come from? Historical and Contemporary Perspectives

Abstract

On October 17–18, 2014, the first international symposium on Ecological Wisdom for Urban Sustainability was held in Chongqing, China. The symposium engaged more than 200 participants from eight different countries and diverse disciplines (e.g., philosophy, ecology, architecture, landscape architecture, planning, engineering, literature) (Healey in Symposium on ecological wisdom for urban sustainability a great success 2014; Young in Landscape Urban Plann 166:27–36, 2016a). Besides having a fruitful and inspiring symposium, participants reached the consensus that answering several important questions is needed to move ecological wisdom research forward. These questions include: What is ecological wisdom? Where does it come from? How is it related to ecological knowledge? What are the general principles of ecological wisdom? Subsequently, a team of participants convened for a post-symposium workshop. This review is a result of these activities, which answers important questions raised above. In addition, this chapter speculates on how ecological wisdom can become (more) actionable in contemporary planning, design, and management. The chapter concludes with a proposal for future research.

Appendix: Recognized Wise Figures in China and Europe–America

Laozi

Laozi [老子, or 老聃, 571 BC–471 BC] was an “axial” philosopher whose insights helped shape the course of human development (Arendt 1974; Chen 1969). Dao (道), as the core of Laozi ’s thoughts, has cosmogenetic and ontological meanings (“the Mother of the world”) (Chen 1974, p. 51; Chan 2014). Dao articulates that the relation of human and nature (or cosmos) is holism . Laozi ’s credo of “The unity of human and nature” (天人合一) illuminates the relation being the “One” (Lao 1970; Cheng and Bunnin 2008).

Laozi espouses holism in his naturalistic philosophy, distilled in his seminar book Dao-de-jing (道德经). The power of Dao-de-jing lies in its insights into way of life. An essential element of Laozi ’s naturalistic philosophy is the concept of wuwei (无为, “nonaction” as the transliterated form). Wuwei explains naturalness in practice. It means “non-assertive action,” or “non-coercive action,” rather than total inaction (Chan 1998, 2014; Lai 2007). This concept differs from any form of action characterized by self-serving desire, in that Laozi ’s “leaning was devoted to self-effacement and not having fame.” Essentially, wuwei could be understood as a “do-no-harm” approach. It is a philosophy of life, which is transformed into a naturalistic philosophy characterized by “simplicity, calmness, and freedom from the tyranny of desire” (Chan 2014, p. 23). Thus, this naturalist thinking at the metaphysical level speaks on ancient Chinese’s (land) ethics and has considerable contemporary relevance (Chen 1969; Cheng and Bunnin 2008).

Li Bing

Li Bing [李冰, c.a. 300 BC–200 BC] lived during the Warring States period (480 BC–221 BC) in China. Li was the governor of the Shu Shire under the Qin Kingdom. In 256 BC, he presided over development of the Dujiangyan (都江堰) project, which is one of the world’s oldest, large-scale irrigation projects. Benefits of the project include serving irrigation water for more than 0.68 million ha of farmland in the Chengdu Plain of Sichuan and domestic water supply for tens of millions of people for the past 23 centuries (Zhang et al. 2012; Cao et al. 2010). It is also important to mention that he was achieved with minimal impact on the ecology, contrary to large dams which can have similar benefits in irrigation and water supply .

Dujiangyan is a self-regulating hydraulic system comprising three uniquely designed components—a fish mouth-shaped water diversion embankment (yuzui), a sediment and overflow spillway (feishayan), and a bottleneck-shaped irrigation gateway (baopingkou) (Xiang 2014a). This hydraulic compound automatically diverges upstream water in a seasonally alternated four-to-six ratio and naturally discharges 90% of the sediments before channelizing the water into distribution systems (Zhang et al. 2012; Xiang 2014a). For yearly maintenance, people summarize their construction experiences in simple slogans: “harnessing shoals deep, building dams low” (Li and Xu 2006; Peng 2008). In short, Dujiangyan project offers an example of harmonious coexistence between human and nature (Li and Xu 2006). With virtually no guidance from science and with limited technology, Li’s comprehensive analysis from project conceptualization, design, construction, and maintenance demonstrates the essential of ecological wisdom in ensuring project vigor and success. Li’s secret is the idea of daofaziran (道法自然, following nature’s lead) in Daoism (Peng 2008; Xiang 2014a), as elaborated in Laozi ’s Tao-de-ching.

Qian Xuesen

Qian Xuesen [钱学森, 1911–2009] was a prominent scientist of aerodynamics. Although Qian was not a designer per se, his ecological wisdom sheds light on urban development and sustainability . Qian’s Shan-Shui City theory is a response to worsening environmental problems in urbanizing China. “Shan [山]” means mountain, and “Shui [水]” means water—two essential components in Chinese garden designs. “Shan” and “Shui” together refer to the natural environment, and “city” stands for the built environment . Qian envisioned that all citizens can live in a garden through the marriage of classical garden arts with contemporary city planning (Hu, n.d.; Bao 2000; Wu 2001).

Qian’s Shan-Shui City theory has been widely accepted and applied in cities such as Guilin (1987), Sanya and Wuxi (1990), and Guangzhou (2000) (Hu, n.d.; Su 2011), for the reason that his theory is deeply anchored in traditional Chinese history, culture , and philosophy. Shan-Shui [山水] itself reflects Chinese peoples’ reverence for nature. Archeological findings suggest that Chinese agricultural civilizations mostly developed in foothills or hillsides, and as a result, the Chinese are in awe to mountains (nature). Shan-Shui evolves from the primitive idea of awe of nature, environmental aesthetics, and recreation opportunities that Shan-Shui provides (Yang 2005; Wu and Fu 2009). Qian’s theory further emphasizes the importance of protecting natural and cultural landscapes , and urban biodiversity during rapid urbanization . The interpretations of Shan-Shui are found in naturalistic philosophies and other ideas from ancient Chinese philosophers such as Laozi , Zhuangzi, and Confucius (Yang 2005). In summary, Qian’s theory finds its roots in Chinese traditional human settlements and related wisdom (e.g., Fengshui principles in site selection. The theory provides inspirations for today’s urban design activities (Wu and Fu 2009; Da 2012).

Liang Sicheng

Liang Sicheng [梁思成, 1901–1972] was internationally recognized as the “Father of Modern Chinese Architecture” (Lin 1996; Li 2002). His major achievements were historical preservation of Chinese architecture (e.g., pagoda) and development of an architecture national style. Liang’s ecological wisdom was best revealed in his proposal (with Chen Zhanxiang) to preserve the old Beijing (Lou 2003; Lai et al. 2004). In 1952, the Communist Party’s plan was to transform Beijing, an ancient cultural and political center of the recent 800 years, into an industrial city. Contrary to this plan, Liang’s proposal was to protect the fabric of the city and the natural environment entirely, through establishing a new urban center west of the old Beijing—protecting the ancient capital as a living laboratory of China’s civilization.

Unfortunately, Liang’ proposal was baffled. However, history shows that Liang’s holistic perspectives on urban development sixty years ago are far-reaching. Current urban problems that Beijing experiences are exactly what Liang predicted (Lin 1996; Hu 2006). High-rise buildings and street realignment replaced the old city fabric (e.g., city walls, gateway entrances, old dwellings) and entirely destroyed the physical appearance of old Beijing. Since 1949, Beijing has increased five times in urban area and four times in population. From 1959 to 1992, Beijing lost nearly one third of its green land. Today, around 25% of the traffic intersections are extremely congested (Wang 2003; Hu 2006). The Great Smog in 2013 is another wake-up call of Beijing’s severe air pollution and environmental degradation. Ironically, Beijing is now starting to build new satellite towns that may alleviate functional conflicts and urban syndromes. History attests to Liang’s ecological wisdom and his prescient warnings from sixty years ago.

Aristotle

Aristotle (384 BC–322 BC) was known for nearly two millennia as The Philosopher. In the Western secular tradition, the historical roots in philosophy and science are built upon Aristotle and his teacher Plato. Aristotle as the most prominent successor of the pre-Socratic philosophers strove to order the extant knowledge about the world. He laid out episteme, techne, and phronesis for the foundation of science, technology, and wisdom , respectively (Ruderman 1997; Gardner 2008).

Specifically, Aristotle ’s concept of phronesis speaks on practical wisdom (prudence). Contrary to Plato’s view that wisdom , as the “master virtue” is theoretical, abstract, and available to only a few, Aristotle viewed wisdom as a practical, balancing act, and the procurement of wisdom as open to all individuals. These different perspectives on wisdom beholders are important. For Aristotle , wisdom depends on “one’s ability to perceive the situation, to have the appropriate feelings or desires about it, to deliberate about what is appropriate in these circumstances, and to act” (Schwartz and Sharpe 2010). Aristotle distilled the idea of practical wisdom in his classic book, Nicomachean Ethics (Aristotle 1999). Ethics, for Aristotle , is not mainly about establishing moral rules and following them, but rather, is about performing a particular social practice well (Tessitore 1996; Schwartz and Sharpe 2010). Therefore, Aristotle ’s ideas of phronesis and ethics are not metaphysical treaties. They harbor deep insights into the practicality of wisdom . Along the same vein, ecological wisdom embraces the characteristic of practicality . It emphasizes wise design (or policy) and decision making on real ground. It is all about how to act rightly. Hence, ecological wisdom is distinctly practical, not theoretical.

Patrick Geddes

Patrick Geddes (1854–1932) was a Scottish botanist and urban planner. Geddes’ goal was to bring nature into urban areas (Geddes 1915). Geddes’ ecological wisdom lies in his belief that an egalitarian society needs to be in harmony with nature. People need to understand their landscapes (“civic survey”), and the understanding at regional scale is paramount (Meller 2005; Talen 2005). Focusing on this scale, Geddes proposed a method, called “Valley Section,” to understand human activities and their relations to nature (Welter 2002; Steinitz 2008).

Geddes’ regional survey approach depended on information not only from the natural sciences (e.g., soil, geology, climate, rainfall, winds), but also information grounded in empirical observations of a place in order to illuminate the relations among culture , work, and environment, better known as “folk-work-place” (Steiner et al. 1988). To reveal these relations, Geddes implied an understanding of the ecological connections among the “folk-work-place” attributes, although he did not use the term ecology (Steinitz 2008; Ndubisi 2014).

The ecological wisdom of Geddes was summarized in his seminal book: Cities in Evolution: An Introduction to the Town Planning Movement and to the Study of Civics (Geddes 1915). In this book, Geddes elaborated that town planning requires “a synoptic vision of Nature to enable a constrictive conservation of its order and beauty” (Geddes 1915, p. v). In other words, town planning is dependent upon knowledge of the large-scale, regional complexities of the landscape, and the human response to that landscape (Young 2017).

Ian Lennox McHarg

Ian McHarg (1920–2001) was a Scottish American ecological planner and landscape architect. He was best known for the seminal book Design with Nature (McHarg 1969). McHarg’s ecological wisdom is manifested in his comprehensive design process, demonstrated in more than 90 actual projects—with noteworthy ones such as The Woodlands town development (Texas, USA) (Yang and Li 2011; Yang et al. 2015) and the Staten Island study (New York, USA) (McHarg 1969, 1996). McHarg’s extensive involvement in projects allowed him the opportunity to constantly reflect on the success and lessons learned. Through linking his theory (“creative fitting”) to practice, McHarg substantially refined and expanded his ideas and methods in ecological planning (McHarg and Steiner 1998; Ndubisi 2014).

Influenced by Geddes, McHarg incorporated nature into the design process and set the premise for contemporary practice, and he was also influential outside of landscape architecture and planning fields. His ecological wisdom also includes his capability to communicate in layman’s language which persuaded numerous individuals to accept his ideas (Spirn 2000). His theory and methodology pervaded the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) and then other federal and state environmental management programs (Bass et al. 2001).

Multiple-scale synthetic thinking was critical to McHarg’s ecological wisdom . It allowed him to assemble the right colleagues to consult and work with (e.g., interdisciplinary team approach). McHarg was also capable of interpreting complex ecological data and (re)prioritizing design goals to recast simple(r) design problems. McHarg applied his ecological wisdom , through his design process and analytic framework, in suburban and exurban settings primarily. His followers expanded and extended his wisdom and approach to urban settings (Spirn 1984; Steiner et al. 2013; Steiner 2014).

Arne Naess

Arne Naess (1912–2009) was a Norwegian philosopher who first proposed the concept of ecosophy (“ecological wisdom ”), and in conjunction with this concept, he launched the deep ecology movement in the early 1970s. To Naess, the status quo economy (i.e., economy placed before the environment) is the shallow ecology movement, with economic growth and increased consumption being the central values of the society. In contrast, he coined the terms deep ecology and ecosophy to call for a paradigm shift in reviewing human and nature relations (Naess 1973, 2005; Drengson and Devall 2010).

Specifically, Naess offered eight Platform Principles for the deep ecology movement (Naess 2008; Drengson and Inoue 1995), such as: “all living beings have intrinsic value; humankind does not have a right to reduce this diversity and richness; and an ideological change would essentially entail seeking a better quality of life rather than a raised standard of living.” Further, Naess specified ecosophy ’s norms, such as “Self-realization for all living beings!”, and “Self-realization!” as the ultimate norm (Naess and Rothenberg 1989, p. 197).

Essentially, Naess explained how personal philosophies of life could be consciously articulated to aim for ecological harmony and wisdom , in tackling the relation with the environment (nature). Naess’ thoughts originated from ecology, which emphasizes the diversity and complexity of life, and symbiosis, which maximizes self-realization potentials under conditions of limited resources (Naess, and Rothenberg 1989, p. 199). Naess’ thoughts were similar to principles for resilient ecosystems, which embraces diversity and richness of species in the ecosystems, as in his ecological philosophy that “Self-realization for all living beings!” is essential for “Self-realization!” He also pointed out that ecological wisdom needs to be practical. The ultimate norm “Self-realization!” implies the imperative to realize oneself and to help others to realize themselves. In this sense, ecosophies (“ecological wisdom ”) are not just theories. They are ways of life that are actively engaged on a daily basis (Drengson and Devall 2010; Drengson et al. 2011).