For Nature: Deep Greening World-Systems Analysis for the 21st Century ! by

From its conception the world-systems perspective has been preoccupied with the study of long term global transformations (see for ex., Frank 1968, 1979; Wallerstein 1974; Amin 1974; Wolf, 1982; Chase-Dunn 1989; Chase-Dunn and Hall 1992; Kaplan 1978).2. To this extent, the various structural relationships, trends, and cycles of the world system have been identified to explain the processes of global transformation. The varied attempts to pinpoint and analyze these relations, trends, and cycles have been within the context of connections between humans, classes, status groups, industries, regions, and states in the world economy. From an ecological point of view (ontologically and epistemologically), such a manner of understanding change is quite anthropocentric, as global transformation necessitates a changing relationship with Nature. In an era of increasing global concern and awareness of the finite nature of natural resources and the growing realization of the contemporary losses in plant and animal species and the continued susceptibility of the human species to climatological changes and diseases despite various scientific and technological advances, we need to consider that besides social relations and structures, the basis of human reproduction includes our relationships with the non-human world (ecology). World-systems /world system analyses need to move beyond deciphering the processes of global change only through the social (anthropocentric) dimension of the relations underlining these processes. Keeping to just the social relations/structures of the reproduction of the system limits the range of explanations we can provide for global transformation, and also restricts the dimensions whereby the basis for these changes can be explored. This paper is an attempt to introduce the other basic dimension (our relations with Nature) into the overall equation of world-systems/world system analyses for our understanding of global change. Ultimately, it is this Culture/Nature relation along with the dynamics of Nature that in the long run determines the trajectory of the transformation of the world system. The purpose of this paper is to "green" the world-systems/world system analyses to date, and to suggest (ontologically and epistemologically) an ecocentric world system history approach beyond a humanocentric world system history analysis that has been proposed by Frank and Gills (l992(a), l992(b)).


Introduction
From its conception the world-systems perspective has been preo ccupied with the study oflong term global transformations (see for ex., Frank 1968ex., Frank , 1979Wallcrst ein 1974;Amin 1974;Wolf, 1982;Chas e-Dunn 1989; Chase-Dunn and Hall 1992; Kaplan 1978) . 2. To this extent, the various structural relationships, trends, and cycles of the world system have been identified to explain the processes of global transformation. The varied attempts to pinpoint and analyze these relations , trends, and cycles have been within t he context of connections between humans, classes, statu s groups, industri es, reg ions , and states in the world economy. From an eco logical point of view (ontologically and epistemologically), such a mann er of understanding change is quite anthropoc entric , as global transformation necess itates a changing relationship with Natur e. In an era of increasing global concern and awareness of the finite nature of natural resources and the grow ing reali zation of the contemporary loss es in plant and animal species and the cont inued susceptibility of the human species to climatological changes and diseases despite various scientific and technological advances, we need to consid er that besid es social relations and structures, the basis of human reproduction includ es our relationships with the non-human world ( ecology) . World-systems /world system analyses need to move beyond deciphering the processes of globa l change only through the soc ial (anthropocentric) dimension of the relations underlining these processes. Ke eping to just the socia l relations/structures of the reproduc tion of the system limits the range of explanations we can prov ide for globa l transformation, and also restricts the dimensions whe reby the basis for these changes can be explo red. This paper is an attempt to introduce the other basic dimension (our relation s with Nature) into the overa ll equation of world-systems/worl d system analyses for our understanding of global chan ge. Ultimately, it is this Culture/Nature relation along with the dynamic s ofNature that in the long run determines the trajectory of the transformation of the world system. The purpos e of this paper is to "green" the world-systems/world system analyses to date, and to suggest ( ontologically and epistemologically) an ecocentric world system history approach beyond a humanocentric world system history analysis that ha-. been propo sed by Frank and Gills (l992(a), l992(b)).

I. Ecological Degradation: Some Theoretical Responses
Over the course of the late 20th century, a perva-.ive issue of the planet is global ecological degradation. In the most recent addition to The Limi ts to Growth theme, Meadows ct al. (1992), have again sounded the alarm that the consumptive patterns (especially of the advanced industrial countries) have overshot the limits of the "carrying capacity" of the planet. In another context Grumbine (1992), utilizing the principles of conservation biology, has raised the issue of the deepening biodiversity crisis in North America. These two soundings of the alarm bells arc by no means lonely cries in the woods; there have been others a-. well, such a-. the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland,l 987) and Agenda 2 l that was signed by the nation-state participants at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development at Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Therefore, the environmental imperatives facing human societies on this planet arc societal issues of major concerns to not only the ordinary citizen, but also the Statc.l

[Page 382] Journa I of World-Systems Research
Nature ha-. throughout human history been viewed on most occa-.ions a-. a resource to meet the reproductive needs of human civilizations. In recent times, whether und er social-economic organizations that have been categorized a-. "capitalism" or "socialism," :! this conception ofNaturc has remained uniform (McLaughlin, 1993). As a consequence of this, the resulting human self-centered bia-. generates economic and political arrogance (notwithstanding a myopia to other livin g beings and natural processes) especially in policy discussion on social change and land/natural resource use. To a large extent it ha-. engendered ecological crisis conditions through human history for at lca-.t 5,000 years (Chew, 1992, l995a, l995b, l995c, l997a;Pontin g 1991). Over the la-.t several decades, criticisms of advanced industrial societies for their narcissis tic and exorbitant consumptiv e patterns resulting in social and ecological crises have been rife. In the area of the ecological relationships that exist between humans and other living beings and natural processes , it ha-. also led to the view that Western modernization is no longer progressive and universal, and neither is the "socialist" alternative workable in view of the ecological degradation that the latter model of socio-economic organization ha-. cngcndcrcd. 2 This thematic is shared by some 'progressi ve' scholars. Unfortunately, besides deep ecology and ccosocialism, there have been few alternate framework-. offered in light of this debunking, and especially so, with the collapse of the former Soviet Union where the socialist/communis t alternative had been used in the pa-.t a-. a referenc e point for transition. Eschewing the grand narrative, postmodern discourse ha.:; not offered much, other than celebrating the local and the dispossessed, while ccofcminism ha.:; restricted itself to its gender specific niche (sec for ex., Mies and Shiva, 1993) . .6 Ecological Marxism (for ex. O'Connor, 1988 ha.:; been preoccupied with trying to "green" Marx for the late 20th century by introducing a second contradiction. Other than including an additional component (Nature) in the overall analysis, the end result wished for in terms of social relations is an ecologically sensitive socialism within an anthropocentric framework. World-systems analysis is even more silent. Other than the work. :;ofBraudcl (1972ofBraudcl ( , 1981ofBraudcl ( , 1982ofBraudcl ( , 1984ofBraudcl ( , 1989, and some recent writings of Frank and Gills (1992(a)) and Cha.:;c-Dunn and Hall (1996), there have been few attempts to broadly address ecological issues or to include ecology a.:; a dimension. Even the rare references to Nature have been circumscribed within the process of accumulation of capital (sec for ex. Amin (1994) and Wallcrstcin (1996)). On the whole the analyses to date remain within an anthropocentric framework.

II. THE DIMENSION OF NATURE IN WORLD-SYSTEMS/WORLD SYSTEM ANALYSES: READING BRAUDEL et al.
Broadly speaking, when we review the major literature in world-systems /world system analyses, Nature as a dimension has not been of much concern. Nature has been neglected both as a primary dimension that impacts the social relations and institutions underlying the process of the accumulation of capital on a world scale, and even as an ecological victim of this same process. Undoubtedly, the primary focus of the majority of practioncrs of the world-systems/world system perspective has been on the social relations and institutions surrounding the accumulation of capital on the world scale.

[Page 383] Journa I of World-Systems Research
Perhaps, the only major exception has been the works of Fcrnand Braudcl (1972Braudcl ( , 198 l, 1982Braudcl ( , 1984Braudcl ( , 1989 where natural surroundings, physical landscape, and climatological rhythms have been treated as clements that condition social relations and social institutions of the world-economy. 1n The J\lediterranean Braudel (1972:20), in the first part of his two-volume work, sketched "man in his relationship to the environment." For Braudel, this was a level with a historical duration distinguished from and related to another level, that of social history, which comprises of economic systems, states, societies, and civilizations. For him these two levels relate to the third one of traditional history, which is about people and events -"l'histori e evenem entielle". 1n Braudcl's view the ecological variables circumscribe the processes of the social life of the Mediterranean region in both the highlands and the plains. The harsher environment of the mountains hinders the penetration of the state and the urbanizing process, and the natural resourc e rich lowlands further the formation of towns and cities. Climatological changes, besides having a set of rhythms, also impact on grain and grape harvests, which in turn condition prices. Human interventions such as deforestation might also affect climate chang es in certain places (Braudel 1972:268). Braudel (1981 continues with his awaren ess of ecological variables and their relationships with social history in his three-volume work on Civilization and Capitalism, though not to such an extent a-; it wa-; undertak en in The Afediterranean. He did not lose sight of it however, for he (1981:49-51) continues to refer to climatic rhythms a-; impacting on material life a-; these variations affecting "trees, rivers, glaciers, the level of the sea-;, and the growth of rice and corn, olive tre es and vines, men and animal-;." Where a-; The Afediterranean 's focus wa-; more regional in scope, Civilization and Capitalism underscored the world systemic nature of ecological changes and their interconnectivity and simultaneity of occurrences. Listen to what Braudel (1981:49) has to say: "The possibility of physical coherence of the world and the generalization of a certain biological history common to all mankind suggest-; one way in which the globe could be said to be unified, long before the voyages of discovery, the industrial revolution or the interpenetration of economics." This adherence to ecological variables (or a-; Braudel terms it, history and environment) continued until the end of his life in the two-volume work The Identity ofFrance. In this final work Braudel persisted in analyzing social and institutional relations within the context of the environment, pinpointing the dynamic/mutual relationships of economic life and the nature of towns and cities with the physical and clim atological landscap es.
Immanuel Wallcrstein's three-volume The Afodern World-System revolves wholl y on the level of what Braudel ha-; called social history ( economic systems, states, and civilizations). Despite the fact that Wallcrstcin (1978,1980,1984) ha-; called for a nonsectorializing approach to the study of social change and development, the ecological dimension that wa-; part of the Braudelian :framework ha-; been dropped. Instead, the overall effort ha-; been confined to the understanding of the dynamics of the capitalist world-system since the 16th century to anthropocentrically focused rel ationships via cla-;ses, status groups, commodity chains, hous eholds, states, economic cycles and trends. Lately, Wallcrstcin (1996) ha-; referred to ecological dcva-;tation a-; a consequence of the process of capital accumulation of the world-system. How ever, the identifica tion of ecological deva-;tation is viewed mostly a-; outcomes of system dynamics (via th e process of capital accumulation) rather than viewing the ecological relationship s between humans and other living beings and natu ral processes a-; a basic dimension defining the trends and dynamics of the world-system.

[Page 384] Journa I of World-Systems Research
Samir Amin's (1974) andEric Wolfs (1982) contributions parallel Wallcrstcin's at the level of a social history that identifies the processes, trends, and dynamics of produ ction and (unequal) exchange of goods and labor within the context of a world system. The dimension of Nature remains externa l to their analyses. Nature appears a-; a backdrop that supplies the ingredients for the production processes and has little conditioning effect on the dynamics of the process of accumulation. Gunder Frank's (1978) early work on world accumulation shares this neglect of Natur e a.., a dimension of analysis and targets only the politico-economic social history of the world system. However, in more recent writings Gills (1990, 1995) have called for the inclusion of an ecological dimension in our overall understanding of the dynamics of the world system. They suggest that the economic imperative of the world system is ba..,cd on a relationship with the environment, and the nature of the relationship is contingent on where the social organization is located spatially in the system. Th erefore, some of the early social organizations in the alluvial plains of Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Indus, could produce an agricultural surplus because of water supply and fertile soil. But they had to seek their other natural resource needs outside their geographic landscapes, which were deficient of these resources (such a.., timber, certain metals, etc.). Therefore, the ecological and the economic were necessarily intertwined. But, at the end Frank and Gills continue to call for a humanoccntric approach towards the understanding of world historical processes .1 In an earlier work Cha..,c-Dunn (1989) also follows the genre of Wallcrstcin et al and uses a structuralist model of the world-system to focus the spotlight on the social history leve l. However, in Rise and Demise: Comparing World-Systems, Cha..,c-Dunn and Hall have shifted somewhat to the position that understanding transformations of world systems requires ecological and demographic dimensions. Population now appears to be of primary consideration. They propose a theory oftransfonnation that will enable us to study continuity or qualitative transformations of world systems. The intention is to clarify the similarities and differences among different world-systems a.., well a.., within a single system. Systemic logic is used to distinguish a typology of social organizations and production systems, and Nature is viewed a.., an clement conditioning the dynamics of the evolution of the world-system in question.
Notwithstanding Frank/Gills' and Cha..,c-Dunn/Hall's recent urgin gs to includ e Nature in the overall understanding of the dynamics of the world-systems /world system, though not to the depth and mode of analysis of Braudcl, other world system practioncrs continue to neglect Nature . This neglect is also reflected in Martin's (1994 ) recent a ... scssmcnt of world-systems research to date.

ID. The Missing Link in World Systems Analysis:Human-Nature Nexus
For the world-sys tem.., perspective, the motor force of the world-system is the process of the cca..,clcss accumulation of capital (Wallcrstcin 1974(Wallcrstcin , 1979(Wallcrstcin , 1992Hopkins and Wallcrst cin, 1977). To date, the research efforts have been to decipher and map out the social-structural relations that have emerged over time and space to foster the accumulation process. From unequal exchange between zones of the system to the depiction of a global division of labor and commodity chains circumscribing linked production processes, studies have been undertaken to analyze the nature of these features of the system (sec for ex. Cha~c-Dunn 1989;Frobel, Heinrichs, and Krcyc 1980;Gcrcffi and Korzcnicwicz 1994;Chew 1992;McMichacl 1984). No doubt, these studies have provided revealing accounts of the dynamics of the world system in reproducing inequality and exploitation between zones and social cla~scs. Paralleling this arc investigations of the economic linkages within the parameters of state-centered activities and rivalries showing a~pcct~ of the rise and fall of states, and of great powers within the world-system (sec for ex . Bergesen, 1982;Friedman 1982).
Global transformation ha~ been explained according to two main thematics along this line of thinking: a) the dynamics of the accumulation process circumscribed by the global division of labor and punctuated by cycles of expansion and contraction, and b) the competitive rivalry between core states for global market share and hegemony. For the first thematic, Marxian type explanations of the economic logic of capital accumulation (with its inherent contradictions) --commodification, mechanization, and proletarianization a~ secular trends--arc utilized to explain possible crisis points in terms of production and circulation, coupled with Kondraticff long cycle explanations to explain the periodicity of booms and busts (Research Working Group 1979;Hopkins and Wallcrstcin 1977;Wallcrstcin 1979). System crises of the short, medium, and long terms arc interpreted from the standpoints of crises in production and exchange/realization (from the standpoint of supply and demand conditioned by differential wage level~ across the zones of the world-economy) without any reference to the limits of natural resources or to climatological changes that might affect harvest and migratory patterns (Research Working Group 1979:495-6). For the second thematic, hegemonic rivalry (rise and fall of core powers) and competition between core states arc part and parcel of the systemic crisis, which also generate anti-systemic movements a~ agents of change (Amin ct al, 1990). Ifwc scrutinized the aforementioned world-systems explanations to account for long-term transformations, invariably all the factors/conditions to explain change revolve around the social (political-economic) relations of cla~scs, regions, and core states in the world-system. But arc these supposedly materialist social factors/conditions sufficient to account for changes in the /ongue duree? In my opinion it would be incomplete because it docs not address the ultimate ecological ba~is of human/societal organization and reproduction.
To be minimally materialist the ba~is of human reproduction (in a broader context) must be viewed also through our relations with Nature ( ecology). A major question is how the social and ecological worlds interrelate. World-systems analysis ha~ focused only on the macro-level relations within the human social organization instead of also analyzing the relations between social and the natural worlds. Yet this relation is the very ba~is of the reproduction of human societies. It is underscored in the early civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia, Indus, and the Hwang Ho, whose social reproductions were contingent on economic (production of surplus) and ecological relations. These societies' reproductive and expansionary capacities were conditioned by their specific ecological surroundings coupled with the needed search/exchange in other ecological landscapes for the natural resources (timber, metals and certain stone) they lacked and/or had already exhausted by unsustainable exploitation -and "accumulation." Thus, the ecological relation is as primary as the economic relation in the self-expansionary process of these societies . [Page 386]

Journa I of World-Systems Research
These two relations therefore intertwine to condition the growth of human communities, and to a large extent they determine the rise and fall of centers of accumulation in world history. Viewed in this manner, the social and ecological (natural) worlds interact in a dialectical fa.:;hion whereby N aturc's rhythms also impact on the dynamics of socialcconomic life. For example, changes in climatological trends such a-; natural rhythmic temperature changes will impact on crop harvest.:;, which in turn will determin e grain prices or the migration of people (sec for ex., Laduric 1971 ). Ther efore, the relati on between climate and social history needs also to be undcrstood . .8.
In addition to these rhythmic climatological changes which we ha ve witn essed in world history and their concomitant effects on human communities, kingdoms, civilizations and stat es, we can also docum ent the loss of the beauty and naturaln ess due to the excesses (exuberance) of human civilizations in their productive and consumptive lifestyles. Notwithstanding the aesthetic loss, these excessive social-economic practices also generate dcgradativ c effect s on Natur e (destruction of species, global wannin g, etc.) which in turn, loop back to impact on the dynamics of social-economic life of the world system (such a-; crop failures, port siltation, temperature changes affect ing harvest yiel d, In a world-historical context, our understanding of the dynamics of the system should be directed to the analysis of the relationships underlying these two relations (social and ecological), and the vulnerability and instability circumscribing these relations a-; world history ha-; revealed. Over world history, the relations underlying the economic dimension ha-; been termed a-; macrop ara.:;itic, i.e., exploitati ve relations among groups and classes of human beings (Mc Nei ll 1992: 73). Mc Neill's depicti on must also be extended to cover the ecological dimension -that is to the exploitative relati onship between human communities and Nature. T hcrcfor c, besides the macropara.:;itic growth underlying the social rela tions of the world system which ha-; the intrinsic tendency to generate socio-economic crises, the ecologic al (Culture/Nature) relations also condition the expan sionary dynamics of the world system and the competitive relations between core states, kingdoms, and empir es, a-; we ll a-; their rise and fall in world history.
A)The Process of Accumulation and Cycles Given this intertwined relationship of social and ecolog ical relations, the thematics that world-systems /world system analyses have pursued ne ed to be revised . Furthermore, in recent years alternate approaches embracing world-systems concepts such as coreperiphery relations, hegemonic rivalry, and the process of accumulation on the wo rid scale have been applied to world systcm/s prior to the 16th century (sec for ex. Cha<;c-Dunn andHall 1991, 1996;Frank 1992aFrank , 1992bFrank , 1993Frank , 1995Modelski and Thompson 1996;Algazc 1993;Rowlands 1987;Kristiansen, 1993, Wilkinson,1994. 2_ In these recent works, notwithstanding the introduction of an alternate explanation for global development beyond the commonly accepted Eurocentric version 10, it is suggestive from this recent research that there ha<; been a cca<;clcss accumulation of capital over world history for at lea<;t 5,000 years (for ex. Gills and Frank (1992)). What Frank and Gills have not a<;scrted is that this process of accumulation over five thousand years of world history seems ultimately self-defeating in that Nature a<; the underlying ba<;is of the accumulation equation provides, conditions, and inhibits this process -and thus establishes its limits (Chew, 1997a). It is a dynamic relationship whereby excessive macropara<;itism of Nature's resources determines the limits of the expansionary dynamics of the world system, and the strength and reproduction of core states/civilizations. In the long run it is Nature that establishes the limit<; to the reproduction of world-systems/world system and its transition. The perennial socioeconomic crises that have erupted in, and even on occa<;ions, transformed kingdoms, civilizations, and states, might not just be only reactions to social exploitation and crisis of accumulation, but also responses to the limits of Nature (in terms of resource depletion), climatological changes and tectonic shifts.

Journa I of World-Systems Research
A<;sociatcd with the cca<;clcss accumulation process over 5,000 years of world history arc the long cycles of economic grov,rth and expansion of the world system with duration of 200-300 years in length that Frank ( 1993) ha<; traced. These economic pufaations of a periodic nature lead us to suggest that there might be ecological dcgradativc cycles linked with these pha<;cs of expansion and contraction of the world system. The existenc e and periodicity of ecological cycles arc linked with the economic cycles of expansion and stagnation because a<; world history ha<; shown, the materialistic reproduction of capital engenders ecological degradation. Due to the long-term duration and exponential characteristics of these ecological degradative effects, it would be more appropriat e to term these environmental dcgradativc "cycles" a<; "long swings" having a varying periodicity with exponential incrca<;cs (higher amplitudes) over the long-term.

B) Core-Periphery Relations and Hegemonic Rivalry
In world-sys tems analyses core-periphery relations have been established a<; a thematic for understanding global uneven developmen t. This core -periphery concept when placed within our revised framework docs suggest other tendencies of which we need to take note. It is clear that core-periphery relations further contribute to the a<;sault on Nature especially after a long cycle of intensive and extensive accumulation of capital (Chew 1996(Chew , 1997. Incorporation of peripheral area.., into the world-syst em further heighten s and accelerates the ecological degradation of the periphery. The core-periphery dynamic a.., exemplified through core-sponsored developmental strategics (such a.., export-oriented manufacturing) further exacerbates ecological degradation in peripheral area..,. Whether this core-periphery relation is within a specific territorial boundary or between territorial boundaries this core-periphery dynamic with its impact on Nature, over th e long term establishes limits to the reproduction of accumulation processes or the reproduction of life for that matter. With core exploitation of the periphery or even the periphery exploiting its own environment for economic growth, it ha.., led to depletion of natural resources that ha.., engendered not only conditions unable to sustain human communities or for that matter other living beings, but in some ca..,es outmigration (inter and intra) of peoples, economic crises and health related issues.
The continued ecological depletive effects in core and periph eral area.., a.., a consequence of the process of accumulation and core-periphery dynamic also force the relocation of production depending on the exigencies of the accumulation processes. Especiall y for the periphery, this ha.., led to further socio-economic and ecological crises for thos e places where production ha.., been shifted. The other related outcome ha.., been that in ca..,es in which capital resources have been invested in the periphery to further the accumulation process and economic opportunities have been maximized, it ha.., been possible for these area.., to jump temporarily ahead of the others in the development game (for example, the A..,ian tigers), though the outcome for Nature remains the same in terms of ecological degradation.

Journa I of World-Systems Research
Hegemonic rivalry in world history ha.., often been expressed v ia wars and economic trade competitions. Such economic and political rivalries have severe consequences on Nature in core and peripheral area .... The most deva..,tating being wars where whole-scale destruction ofNaturc have been inflicted to the geographic area.., where the conflicts were located, and a.., well, the need for intensive utilization of Nature's resources to produce weapons of war to mount the military campaigns. For the former, the Persian Gulf War provides an example of ecological degradation to fragile environm ents. For the latter, the Pcloponnesian War is a ca..,c in point which required large quantities of wood for shipbuildin g resulting in severe deforestation of the mainland of Greece and Asia Minor.
Hegemonic rivalries via economic and trade competition have also result ed in ecological degradation where the search for cheap natural resources a.., well a.., low labor costs ha.., led to penetration of fragile ecological environm ents to enhanc e and facilitate th e accumulati on process. Such competitive rivalry might or mi ght not lead to the rise of potential economic powers.

C) Accumulation, Ecological Crises , and World-Views
If accumulation crises have occurred over world history, the concomitant effect would be outbreak.:; of ecological crises over the long-term if we assume a materialist reproduction of history. The history of ceaseless accumulation has witnessed the move all over the globe to reproduce the process of accumulation. This accumulation on the world scale has engendered ecological degradation at the local, regional, and world-systemic level vis-avis the phase of technological development and utilization. Depending on the scale of the human community in question, ecological degradation and crisis arc often commensurate with the level of transformation of the particular community. Population, urbanization , and technological levels of a community arc some of the basic indicators that determine how communities relate to Nature and thus the ecological outcomes. Th erefor e, the mor e transformed (meaning higher) the levels of population, urbanization and tcchnologisation, the higher the ecological degradation and crisis. The endless spiralling upwards of these basic indicators have impacted on Nature for at least the last 5,000 years of human history. Ecological degradation and crises such as accumulation crises have recurr ed throughout world history regardless of socio-cultural variables and geographic locations (Chew, 1997a). This is because even for those communities that do not have a more transformed level in terms of technology or urbanization, they arc impacted ultimately via world systemic core-peripheral relations through the pen etration and domination of their socio-economic spheres by the core that has already been transform ed in terms the world-views of (that arc exploitative of Nature), urbanization, and tcchnolo gisation. A-; a result of all this, there has been very little opportunity for Natur e to rest or to restore itself.
Concomitant with ecological devastation and crisis is the emergence in world history of ecological groups/ccomovcmcnts (Chew 1995b(Chew , 1997bGrove, 1995 ). In fact, eco logical degradation has also brought forth the call for ecological preservation throu ghout world history. Such is the dialectic of the social enterprise. On this ba.:;is world systemic /natural limits coupled with human agency/world-views arc the dimensions that we ne ed to understand in order to interpr et the trajectory of the world system. [Page 389]

Journa I of World-Systems Research
At a tim e of global monum ental destruction of Na ture and our grow ing understa ndin g of the limits of Nature, we need to change the basis of our perception of Nature. This call is hardly new; there have been such calls throughout world history. Contemporary views of Natur e have extended from seeing it as a ben ign substrat e for human use to one of a precious limit ed resource that we should learn to husband (sec for example, Ecke rsley ( :8-48), McLaughlin (1993). The range of views cannot lead ultima tely to ecological integrity for they arc just gradations of an anthropoc entric 1velta nschauung whereby Nature is seen a-; having no intrin sic value . Where Nature ha -; no intrin sic va lue, ecologica l int egrity cannot be attained because on most occasions, the preservat ion/protect ion ofNaturc is measured/ra tionaliz ed against social costs w ith th e latter ultimatel y winning out. The aim therefore is to move away from this anthropocentric rationalization which always place the human a.., the center and valuing human activities, especially economic ones, a.., paramount. W c can adopt the position that docs not award primacy to the human individual (unlike even some progressive environmental approaches which continue to adhere to this valuing) and view every living being a.., having the right to unfold (Nacss 1989, Devall 1988. Such a perspective I will term a.., ccoccntrism. For us, if its ba..,ic dictum is adopted, the system will have to change qualitatively. In other words if every living being ha.., the right to unfold, then the current excessive exploitation ofNaturc means that we have not awarded intrinsic values nor rights to Nature. But if the system or rationalization is to follow the dictum of awarding intrinsic value to Nature, then surplus generation would be extremely difficult because it would be contradictory to exploit Nature if one awards intrinsic value to it.
In light of this, the next section proposes a realignment for the world system history approach via the incorporation of ccoccntrism so that a future praxis that is geared toward ecological integrity can be pursucd. ll This coupling is important for ecocentrism as well, for the practioners of the ecocentric approach such as deep ecologists have to date focused most of their efforts on the philosophical and psychological aspects of deep ecology (see for ex . Drengson, 1989;Fox, 1990

Journa I of World-Systems Research
IV. TOWARD A NEW GRAND "NARRATIVE": ECOCENTRIC WORLD SYSTEM IDS TORY ANALYSIS "What we propose is not a shift of caring away from humans and towards non-humans, but rather an extension and deepening of overall caring." Arne Nacss, Deep Ecology.for the Twenty-Second Century (1993) At this conjoncture in world system history, we need to reset our orientations toward ecological integrity for all (including other living things and natural processes). In the context of the human relationship with other living beings and natural proc esses, wh ere in the pa..,t the ecological degradation ha.., been regional in scope, less intensive in nature, and perhaps sometimes simultaneous in gco -spatial terms, the current exploitation is global in scope and intensive in nature (Chew 199 7a). The possibility of global ecological collapse is more likely now than in the pa..,t. What it also means is that at this point in time, the potential demise of the world system a.., we have known it for five thousand years could more likely be a consequence of global ecological crisis leading to severe stress on the reproducibility of the hierarchical social-economic a..,pccts of the world system than from the "falling rate of profi t " or for that matter, working cla..,s struggles.
In this regard world-systems analysis, whose raison d'etre includes a practical moment, needs therefore to offer a critical stance to this long history of human excessiveness (at lea<;t 5 ,000 years) in production and consumption at the expense of other living beings and natural processes. We need to start from different premises so that we can address the ecological imperatives and injustices that arc facing us now and into the 21st century. In this regard without eschewing the grand narrative which is so popular these days, we need to return to it because postmodern subjectivism without any anchoring to emancipatory objectives (in our ca<;c, the awarding of intrinsic values to all living and non-living entities (humans included)) a<; Habcnna<; (1987) ha<; warned us can lead to totalitarian outcomes. What is proposed is that we transcend our anthropocentric theoretical constructs and sketch out a ccoccntric world system history framework that pursues the tclos of a new human project towards ecological integrity . Ifth c tclos of th e human project is to ensure ecological integrity so that the reproducibility of living beings and natural processes continue to evolve unabated, and a<;suming that the excessiveness of social systems of organizations/civilizations is ratcheted down to the level of use-value (borrowing from Marx), the following thcmatics l 3 can be the orienting gnmdrisee or "ground rules":

A) ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY, THE PROCESS OF ACCUMULATION, AND CYCLES
l) Diversity of species (humans and other living things) should be the key lei tmotiv in our overall organization and perception of life on this planet, and it is from this that we form the architecture of ecological integrity. From this notion of divers ity of species , we therefore a<;sumc that all life (humans included) live in an interconnected unity in diversity relationship within specific arrangements that are ( often) hierarchically ordered, and in the case of humans and animals, dependent on sex, physical size, class, empires, civilizations, and nation-states (Chew 1997) .

[Page 391] Journa I of World-Systems Research
2) A corollary to this is that the interconnected diversity of relationships among humans has been organized around a world system for at least 5,000 years powered by the process of accumulation Gills 1992, 1995;Chew 1995aChew , 1997Bergesen 1996;Chew and Dcncmark 1996). This process of accumulation has been unceasing and exploitative for five thousand years to both Nature and the majority of humans.
3) For the human to human context, the interconnected relationships of diversi ty organized around the ceaseless accumulation of capital for at least 5,000 years have been punctuated by economic cycles of boom and bust. These "long swings" or logistics having periodicity of around 300 years are also repeated in "long swings" of environmental degradative occurrences such as floodings, that arc to a lar ge extent, outcomes of the exploitative relations between humans and their surroundings (Chew l995a, 1997).
4) The process of accumulation has certain consequences for th e relations betwe en humans and other living things and natural processes. The end results have often been ecological crises and disasters which often impact on human-human relations. Two outcomes result: i) For Nature, besides the loss of beauty and naturalness, one can witness biodiv ersity crisis, loss of species diversity, polluted oceans, streams, and rivers, siltation, and climatological changes. ii) In the case of humans, within this hierarchical ordering over world history for at least 5,000 years, some states, empires, civilizations, classes, etc ha ve had dominating and exploitative relationships over other states, empires, civilizations, etc. The outcome of this in the human-human context has often resulted in hegemonic rivalry, trade competition, class struggle, wars, and in some cases, genocide. These relations can be termed as macroparasitic, i.e. exploitative relations among groups and classe s of human beings (McNcill 1992:73). The tenn"macroparasitism" can also be extended to cover the human relations with animals, plants, and natural processes.

5)
A corollary to this is that as the exploitative core-peripheral relationship deepens, th e outcomes inevitably result in severe impacts on the socio-economic processes of the nations, civilizations, and empires, as well as on other living things and natural processes (Chew l 995b,l99 7a ,l 997b). The end results includ e, for exampl e, the need to relocate production processes, population losses as a consequence of floodin g, population migration from rural to urban and from peripheral to core zones, and associated health issues. The most extreme scenario being the collapse of civili zations such as the Harrapan, the Mayan, and the Mesopotamian as a consequence of extreme ecological degradation (Perlin 1989 ;Ponting 1991 ;Chew l995a, l99 7a, l99 7b). Such relationships lead us to suggest that the limits of Nature become also the limits of the world system, and the interplay between the limits of Nature and the trends and dynamics of the world system defines ultimately the historical tendencies of the world system (Chew l99 7a,l 997b). [Page 392]

B)CL™ATE
1) The rhythms of natural processes (climate) also interact with the social and ecological pr ocesses in a dialectical fashion resulting in changes that impact on all life. Wea ther can be a catalys t in engender ing change. For example, changes in clima tolog ical trends such a.., sca..,onal rhythmic tempera ture chang es imp act on crop harve sts, which in turn, determines grain prices or the mi gration of people (sec for ex., Laduric 1971 ). It also causes changes to the natural landscape and the population of animals and plants. What this means is that climate can trigger breakdowns of societies and civilizations. At the same time, humans, civilizations, kingdoms, and empires have caused changes in the cyclic character of climate by their intrusions resulting in certain fluctuations. In other words, there is a relationship between climate and social history. C) ECOLOGICAL BEING, SOCIAL ORGANIZATION, AND SOCIAL PRACTICE 1) Like Marx in his early works, such as The German Ideology and the Paris kfanuscripts, which address the concept of species living in an unalicnatcd fashion, we need as well to focus on the distantiation that has occurred between us as Humans with other living beings and natural processes. Human agency has a part to play in this overall world historical process, therefore we must retrieve our ecological selves (being) so that the Circle can be reconnected again. Consciousness raising, deep explorations, identification, and realization with other ecological selves need to take place so that a "sense of place" and a "sense of wonder" can return (Nacss 1986(Nacss , 1989(Nacss , 1995Dcvall 1988). What it means is identification and solidarity with all life. In short, value changes that arc more sensitive to the 'common circle' should be encouraged. It will mean a shift away from cultural values and practices that arc anthropocentric in orientation and deemed universal (pace Parsons) organizing principles. We need to overcome this distantiation between human beings and other living things and natural processes to what Bergesen (1995) ha~ defined a~ cco-alicnation. Listen to what Bergesen (1995:113-114)

Journa I of World-Systems Research
2) The above therefore means that the maxim of "live and let live" is translated to all life and not just to humans. In this ca<;c we should not only insist on social justice, we should also demand ecological justice, for all life has intrinsic values. We do not award value solely if it serves a human purpose or need. 14 All humans, animals and plant<; have the right to unfold.
For at lca<;t the la<;t five thousand years in the course of world history there have been social movements of protest and groups with a different view of Nature fostering alternate lifestyles sensitive to ecology (Chew 1995b(Chew , 1997b. The politics oflife therefore ha<; been eco-politics a<; well. Today, eco-politics must necessarily combin e both the local and global to try to tone down the excessive role of states, corporations , groups, etc. which to date are anthropocentric in their orientation. At the sam e time, social justic e should be sought to eliminat e hierarchical differences in terms of cla<;s es, ca<;tcs, regions, etc. (Nacss 1989(Nacss :138, 1995. We need to fight against dominati on but it does not mean the elimination of that domination (Naess, 1995: 466). For we should celebrate creativity and wildness a<; they have a necessary p lace in our lives . .Ll_ In other words, greatness and not excessiveness is what we need to strive for a<; a goal. Th erefore, the political path is neither left(r ed) nor right(blue) but "in-front. " 3) In an era of the demis e of state socialism (i.e., of an existing social-economic organization) and the increa<;ing prevalence of th e TINA syndrom e (There is No Alternativ e to Capitalism), there is a growing need to discuss other forms of socialpolitical organization and governance that are not exploit ative of the ecology (humans and other living things includ ed). The latter social political organization ("capitalism") ha<; always been exploitative of other living things, humans, and landscap es. Assuming that there is no nuclear winter or global ecological cata<;trophe in the long term , complex economies will still continue, for it is impossible to return back to simple basic forms of subsistence living, especially in view of the level of global population, and the level of human learning and historical experiences that have been attained. However , the principle of com plexity need not be one ba<; ed on current capitalist forms where specialization is favored, where urban life is fostered at the expense of rural communities, and where industriali zation is pushed against agricultural production. Instead of a :fragmentation of labor, we need an integrated variety of means of living whereby th ere is a "combination of agricultural and industrial activities, of specialized and non-sp ecialized work and a mix of urban and rural communities" (Na ess, 1973:97). Decentrali zation is called for a<; a means to increa<; ed local autonomy, with the hope that this will unlea<;h the rich potentialities of th e human being that is in rhythm with the ongoing process es of th e Earth. The pursuit of local autonomy offers an opportunity to meet the ecological equilibrium, a<; most often local interests are dropped in a centralized decision-m akin g arrangement. 1n some communities, however, there will be a need for institutions that are part of a larger unity that can serve the functions of the larger whole (Nacss 1995:450). [Page 394] Journal of World-Systems Research 4) A corollary to the above principle of complexity is the ccosophical slogan "simple in means rich in ends" referring to the conduct of life. This is not to be confused a.., an appeal to austere, Spartan and self-denying lifestyles. Rather, it is to "live richly in an age oflimits" (Devall, 1993). lt is to reorient our lives along the "middle way" in order to strive for ecological integrity, noting the diversity oflifcstylcs and cultures. This is both a social and personal act.
The above thematics outline the parameters by which we can re -orient worldsystcms/world system analyses to further understand, and perhaps to shape, the dynamics oftransfonnations of all life on this planet. It is important at this conjuncture of world history that we deliberate further on this a.., an alternative to the aged market oriented democratic social political form we have today, and the anthropocentric bia.., of social/poli tical/economic constructs that we have developed to understand these social/political/ economic organizational forms. To continue on the current path will m ean continued exploitation of the ecology (humans included) . Radical democrac y is not an alternative if it means one with an anthropocentric bia . ... At this conjuncture, fresh thinking is required to address the ecological imp eratives w e face, notwithstanding the fact that social movements have emerged to challenge the ecological degradation without much reliance on a specific theoretical orientation 16 We need to collectively look for alternative arrangements. What has been proffered above is to initiate this collective dialog.