Human Ecology Theory

1. Human Ecology Theory Bubolz, M. M., & Sontag, M. S. (1993). Human ecology theory. In P. G. Boss, W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 419-448). New York: Plenum Press.

2. Basic Premises • Families interact with their environment to form an ecosystem. • Families carry out the following for the good of itself as well as the good of society: • biological sustenance, • economic maintenance, • psychosocial and nurturance functions. • All peoples of the world are interdependent on the resources of the earth: there is a balance between • cooperation and integration in the ecosystem • with demands of the individual for autonomy and freedom. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

3. Assumptions: • Families and the environment are interdependent. • Families are part of the total life system, so they are interdependent with other forms of life. • Adaptation is a continuing process in families. They can “respond, change, develop, and act on and modify their environment.” • All parts of the environment are interrelated and influence each other. • Families interact with multiple environments. • Families require matter-energy. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

4. Assumptions(cont.) • Interactions between families and environments are guided by two sets of rules: • Physical and biological laws of nature (e.g., laws of thermodynamics). • Human-derived rules (e.g., social norms). • Environments do not determine human behavior but pose limitations and constraints as well as possibilities and opportunities for families. • Decision making is the central control process in families that directs actions for attaining individual and family goals. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

5. Underlying Values • Survival: maintenance and sustainability are important features of life. • “Four great virtues that contribute to the ‘ultimate good’”: • economic adequacy, • justice, • freedom, • peacefulness. • Other virtues that contribute to the quality of life: • health, • education and learning, • loving and nurturing relationships, • productive work and work environments, • experiences and symbolic systems that sustain meaning and a sense of community, • beauty, • trustworthiness. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

6. Underlying Values(cont.) • Scholars and practitioners, acting on these values, are expected to attend to the problems of groups and subcultures who lack • power, • self-determination, • and access to resources. • Humans should be responsible to other living species and the nonliving environment. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

7. Consistency Between Family Ecology and Feminist Theory • Hermeneutic (post-positivism) and critical science perspectives are necessary to gain valid knowledge and bring about change. • Recognition of a plurality of family forms. • Acknowledge the importance of sociohistorical and cultural context and environment. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

8. Summary of the Main Problems or Questions • How do families function and adapt to • assure survival, • improvement of quality of life, • and sustain natural resources? • How do families allocate and manage resources to meet the needs of individuals and the family as a group? • How does environmental (e.g., meso-, exo-, and macrosystems) change influence human development? • How can families and family professional contribute to the process of positive change? • What should be done to enhance the quality of life while conserving the environment? Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

9. Family Human Built Environment Social-Cultural Environment Natural Physical-Biological Environment Figure 17-1: Family Ecosystem Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

10. Human Ecological Concepts • Human ecosystem: • Interaction between humans and their natural environment, including • physical-biological, • social-cultural, • and human-built. • Family ecosystem: family system interacting with its environment (see Figure 17-1). • Environment: totality of surroundings and context. Surroundings include • physical, • biological, • social, • economic, • political, • aesthetic, • and structural. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

11. Human Ecological Concepts(cont.) • Adaptation: • Behavior of living systems, including families, that changes • the state or structure of the system, • the environment, • or both. • Adaptation is recursive: humans adapt to environment and change it. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

12. Family Ecological Concepts • Family • Inclusive definition: • Includes persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption. • Also includes sets of interdependent but independent persons who share • common goals, • common resources, • and a commitment to each other. • Family members are simultaneously autonomous and dependent. • Needs: requirements for survival (e.g., sustenance). • Values: • Human conceptions about what is good, right, and worthwhile • They are an integral part of family processes. • Management: comprehensive process to meet goals and realize values Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

13. Family Ecological Concepts (cont.) • Decision-making • Central cybernetic control system of family organization. • The decision-making process involves: • recognition of the need to make a decision; • identification , evaluation, and comparison of alternatives; • choice of alternative. • Human development: • Ongoing process of interrelated change in ability to perceive, conceptualize, and act. • Development is dynamic. • Development usually leads to greater levels of sophistication. • Quality of human life: extent to which basic needs are met and values realized; synonymous with well-being. • Quality of the environment: • capacity for supplying human and non-human resources; • and capacity for sustaining life and the non-human environment. Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson

14. Limitations of the Theory • Are systems concepts compatible with family ecology theory? Are mechanistic or biological principles generalizable to human and family systems? • Is it too broad and inclusive? • New constructs may create confusion or redundancy. • Are the concepts too abstract? Dr. Ronald J. Werner-Wilson