{"id":7628,"key":"Bright_green_environmentalism","title":"Bright green environmentalism","latest":{"id":1223268,"timestamp":"2026-01-08T22:16:38Z"},"content_model":"wikitext","license":{"url":"https://www.appropedia.org/Appropedia:Copyrights","title":"CC-BY-SA-4.0"},"source":"[[File:Gometrobusgreen.png|329x329px|thumb]]\n\n'''Bright green environmentalism{{w|Bright green environmentalism}}''', as defined in Wikipedia:\n:aims for a society that relies on new technology and improved design to achieve gains in ecological [[sustainability]]{{w|sustainability}} without reducing (indeed, increasing) the potential for economic growth. Its proponents tend to be particularly enthusiastic about green energy, hybrid automobiles{{w|hybrid automobiles}}, efficient manufacturing systems and bio and nanotechnologies, are supportive of dense urban settlements{{w|New Urbanism}}.\n\n=== Origin and evolution of bright green thinking ===\n\nThe term \"bright green\", first coined in 2003 by writer Alex Steffen{{w|Alex Steffen}}, refers to the fast-growing new wing of environmentalism{{w|environmentalism}}, distinct from traditional forms.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150101224127/http://www.worldchanging.com:80/archives/001000.html WorldChanging: Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green Future: Reports from the Team<!--Bot-generated title-->]</ref> Bright green environmentalism aims for a society that relies on new technology and improved design to achieve gains in ecological sustainability thereby increasing the potential for economic growth and attending to human needs.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070927235312/http://www.yaleherald.com/article.php?Article=4834 Green schools show New Haven students the light] - The Yale Herald{{w|The Yale Herald}}</ref> Similarly the principle of demographic transition{{w|demographic transition}} shows that as populations gain access to greater technology and a better standard of living their rates of population growth generally slow or even reverse.\n\nIts proponents tend to be particularly enthusiastic about [[green energy]]{{w|green energy}}, [[Hybrid vehicles|hybrid automobiles]]{{w|hybrid vehicles}}, efficient manufacturing systems, bio{{w|biotechnology}} and [[Nanotechnology|nanotechnologies]]{{w|nanotechnology}}, ubiquitous computing{{w|ubiquitous computing}}, dense urban settlements{{w|new urbanism}}, closed loop{{w|closed loop}} materials cycles and sustainable product designs. \"One-planet living\" is a frequently heard buzz-phrase{{w|Buzzword}}.<ref>[http://www.socialtext.net/brightgreen/index.cgi?mission_statement Bright Green Living wiki mission statement] (Note: Wiki is inactive.)</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20160124071236/http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004343.html \"On Earth Day\"], Alex Steffen - Worldchanging website</ref> They tend to focus extensively on the idea that through a combination of well-built communities, new technologies and [[sustainable living]]{{w|sustainable living}} practices, quality of life can actually be improved even while ecological footprints shrink.\n\n=== Technology ===\n\nThe [[bright green]] approach puts its trust in [[technology]] to give us answers in time, if we just put suitable resources into researching and applying solutions.\n\nTechnology is advancing and technologies such as [[thin film solar photovoltaics]]{{w|thin film solar photovoltaics}} (e.g. copper indium gallium diselenide{{w|copper indium gallium diselenide}}) offer great hope. However, the rate of progress is uncertain, and as climate change is already happening, action is needed now, without waiting for these new technologies.\n\n=== Dark greens, light greens and bright greens ===\n\nContemporary environmentalists{{w|environmentalist}} are often described as being split into three groups, \"dark\", \"light\", and \"bright\" greens.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20090207202153/http://gristmill.grist.org:80/story/2005/9/1/124941/1990 Interview with Alex Steffen, part three | Gristmill: The environmental news blog | Grist<!--Bot-generated title-->]</ref>\n\n\"'''Light greens'''\" see protecting the environment first and foremost as a personal responsibility. They fall in on the transformational activist{{w|Activism#Transformational_activism}} end of the spectrum, but light greens do not emphasize environmentalism as a distinct political ideology, or even seek fundamental political reform{{w|reformism}}. Instead they often focus on environmentalism as a lifestyle{{w|lifestyle}} choice. The motto \"Green is the new black{{w|the new black}}\" sums up this way of thinking, for many.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080724132515/http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/17/style/feco.php Eco-friendly: Why green is the new black - International Herald Tribune<!--Bot-generated title-->]</ref> Though many environmentalists of all stripes use \"lite green\" to describe products or practices they believe are greenwashing{{w|greenwashing}}.\n\nIn contrast, \"'''dark greens'''\" believe that environmental problems are an inherent part of industrialized capitalism{{w|capitalism}}, and seek radical political change{{w|Political radicalism}}. Dark greens tend to believe that dominant political ideologies (sometimes referred to as industrialism{{w|industrialism}}) are corrupt and inevitably lead to consumerism{{w|consumerism}}, alienation{{w|alienation}} from nature and resource depletion{{w|resource depletion}}. Dark greens claim that this is caused by the emphasis on economic growth{{w|economic growth}} that exists within all existing ideologies, a tendency referred to as \"growth mania\". The dark green brand of environmentalism is associated with ideas of deep ecology{{w|deep ecology}}, post-materialism{{w|post-materialism}}, holism{{w|holism}}, the Gaia hypothesis{{w|Gaia hypothesis}} of James Lovelock{{w|James Lovelock}} and the work of Fritjof Capra{{w|Fritjof Capra}} as well as support for a [[Overpopulation|reduction in human numbers]]{{w|overpopulation}} and/or a relinquishment of technology{{w|anarcho-primitivism}} to reduce humanity's impact on the biosphere{{w|biosphere}}.\n\nMore recently, \"'''bright greens'''\" emerged as a group of environmentalists who believe that radical changes are needed in the economic and political operation of society in order to make it sustainable, but that better designs, new technologies and more widely distributed social innovations are the means to make those changes - and that society can neither shop nor protest its way to [[sustainability]]{{w|sustainability}}.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150907215325/http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/007073.html WorldChanging: Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green Future: Don't Just Be the Change, Mass-Produce It<!--Bot-generated title-->]</ref> As Ross Robertson writes, \"[B]right green environmentalism is less about the problems and limitations we need to overcome than the “tools, models, and ideas” that already exist for overcoming them. It forgoes the bleakness of protest and dissent for the energizing confidence of constructive solutions.\"<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20181003122009/http://www.wie.org:80/j38/bright-green.asp?page=1 A Brighter Shade of Green: Rebooting Environmentalism for the 21st Century, by Ross Robertson<!--Bot-generated title-->]</ref>\n\nThe term \"Viridian\" is also used (signifying a shade of green that does not occur naturally) for example in the Viridian design movement{{w|Viridian design movement}}. See [[Wikipedia:Bright green environmentalism#Currents]].\n\n=== Arguments of supporters and critics ===\n\nTheir ideas can be contrasted with what they consider traditional environmentalism: pessimistic, return-to-primitivism, unattractive, \"dark green\" ideas that depend on [[Overpopulation|a reduction in human numbers]]{{w|overpopulation}} or a relinquishment of technology{{w|Anarcho-primitivism}} to reduce humanity's impact on the Earth's ecosphere.\n\nOthers contrast \"bright green\" environmentalism with \"light green\" environmentalism, which they characterize as superficial moves to buy or use products which claim to be environmentally preferable, but in fact offer limited sustainability benefits. Many environmentalists of all stripes use \"light\" or \"lite\" green to describe products or practices they believe are greenwashing{{w|greenwashing}}.\n\nCritics of bright green environmentalism consider it to be an unrealistic way of reducing pollution and increasing sustainability. They view such bright greens as wanting to have all of their environmental goals without needing to reduce material prosperity and comfort. Many dark green movements take a moralistic approach of emphasizing catastrophe, suffering, and guilt, while framing environmental progress in terms of tremendous sacrifices, lowered standards of living, and renunciation of the benefits and possibilities of future technological growth. To them, bright green is a pointless attempt to conjure a win-win situation where these major sacrifices would not be required.\n\nEcosocialist{{w|Ecosocialist}} critics of bright green environmentalism argue that the idea that technological progress{{w|technological progress}} will solve ecological{{w|ecological}} problems is popular because it deludes people into hoping that it will prevent them from having to seriously question and change their individual and collective way of life{{w|way of life}}.{{Verification needed}}<br>\n\nJoel Kovel{{w|Joel Kovel}} posits an eco-socialist analysis, that patterns of production and social organisation are more important than the forms of technology used within a given configuration of society. Under capitalism, he suggests that technology \"has been the essential condition of growth{{w|Economic growth}}\", so even in a world with hypothetical \"free energy\", the effect would be to lower the cost of [[automobile]]{{w|automobile}} production, leading to massive overproduction{{w|overproduction}} of vehicles, \"collapsing infrastructure\", chronic resource depletion{{w|resource depletion}} and the \"paving over\" of the \"remainder of nature{{w|nature}}\".<ref name=\"Kovel\">Kovel, J., ''The Enemy of Nature'', 2002.</ref> This suggests he sees capitalism as intrinsically unable to regulate itself, in spite of environmental regulation{{w|environmental regulation}} in Western countries leading to massive improvements in many areas (though not yet in terms of [[greenhouse gases]]{{w|greenhouse gases}}).\n\nIn the modern world, Kovel considers the supposed efficiency of new post-industrial{{w|post-industrial}} commodities is a \"plain illusion\", as miniaturized{{w|Miniaturization}} components involve many substances and are therefore non-[[Recycling|recyclable]]{{w|Recycling}} (and, theoretically, only simple substances could be retrieved by burning out-of-date equipment, releasing more pollutants{{w|pollutants}}). He warns \"environmental liberals{{w|Green liberalism}}\" against over-selling the virtues of [[Renewable energy|renewable energies]]{{w|Renewable energy}} that cannot meet the mass energy consumption of the era; although he would still support renewable energy projects, he believes it is more important to restructure societies to [[Energy conservation|reduce energy use]]{{w|energy conservation}} and not relying on renewable energy technologies alone.<ref name=\"Kovel\" />\n\n=== Organizations and websites ===\n\nOrganizations and websites with an explicit \"bright green\" philosophy include:\n\n* Worldchanging{{w|Worldchanging}} blog<ref name=\"Hughes 2002\">{{cite paper|author=Hughes, James{{w|James Hughes (sociologist)}}|title=Democratic Transhumanism 2.0|year=2002|url=http://www.changesurfer.com/Acad/DemocraticTranshumanism.htm|accessdate=2007-01-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Viridian notes|url=http://viridiandesign.org/NotesIndex.htm}}</ref><ref name=\"Steffen 2006\">{{cite book|author=Steffen, Alex{{w|Alex Steffen}}|title=Worldchanging{{w|Worldchanging}}: A User's Guide for the 21st Century|publisher=Harry N. Abrams|year=2006|isbn=0810930951}}</ref>\n\nOf course the ideas are widely shared, whether or not the term \"bright green\" is used.\n\n=== See also ===\n\n* [[Sustainable technology]]{{w|Sustainable technology}}\n* [[Appropriate technology]]{{w|Appropriate technology}}\n* [[Energy efficiency]]{{w|Energy efficiency}}\n* [[Green wikis and development wikis]]{{w|Green wikis and development wikis}}\n* [[Open design]]{{w|Open design}}\n\n=== References ===\n\n<references />\n\n== External links ==\n\n* [[Wikipedia:Bright green environmentalism]]\n* [https://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.05/green.html The Next Green Revolution] - Wired magazine{{w|Wired magazine}}\n* [https://web.archive.org/web/20181003122009/http://www.wie.org:80/j38/bright-green.asp?page=1 A Brighter Shade of Green: Rebooting Environmentalism for the 21st Century] - WIE magazine\n* [http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,2035002,00.html \"Go Bright Green\" - article in the Guardian]\n* [http://worldchanging.com Worldchanging]\n\n{{Page data\n| license = CC-BY-SA-3.0\n| ported-from = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright_green_environmentalism\n| description = Bright green environmentalism combines tech and ecology. Appropedia explains how innovation drives sustainability and economic opportunity.\n}}\n\n[[Category:Environmental philosophy]]\n[[Category:Green living]]"}