Thomas Dietz
University of MichiganGlobal Environmental Change and Sociology: Substance and MethodWhat do we know: What does Sociology bring to the table for studying the human
dimensions of global climate change?
Macro-comparative analysis of anthropogenic drivers
Marco-comparative analyses of the anthropogenic drivers of global change are already among the
most robust research areas at the interface of the social and ecological sciences.^43 I believe it is one of the most
promising areas for continued development for several reasons.^44 It is:
Strongly responsive to the “grand challenges” identified by the NRC and others.^45 This line of work
examines environmentally significant consumption and how institutions and policy shape human stress on the
environment. These are among the most commonly identified top research priorities. This work aligns well
with efforts to develop mitigation policy.
Highly interdisciplinary. While sociology is probably the strongest discipline contributing to this approach,
there are also significant contributions from economics, political science, international relations, and
geography. Ecologists are also engaging with in macro-comparative analyses of drivers (Liu, Daily, Ehrlich,
and Luck 2003; Mikkelson, Gonzalez, and Peterson 2007). Our group has had success in publishing in a
variety of interdisciplinary venues (e.g. Dietz, Rosa, and York 2007; Dietz and Rosa 1997; Rosa, York, and
Dietz 2004; York, Rosa, and Dietz 2005; York, Rosa, and Dietz 2003) as well as in core sociology journals.
Thus the discourse around macro-comparative analysis is highly interdisciplinary and allows sociology to
have a broad influence.
Moving toward integrative theory. For most analyses the goal is to explain cross-national variation in
anthropogenic stressors, such as greenhouse gas emissions or ecological footprint. The explanatory factors
include demographic, economic, institutional, cultural, technological, and environmental variables, though
not all these lines of analysis are equally well developed. This encourages synthetic theory. Further, there
are moves towards explaining not just stressors but also ecosystems responses, which will ultimately require
modeling coupled human and natural systems.
Built on strong methods. Macro-comparative work has always been a basis for innovation in quantitative
methods. Recently methods that span the qualitative and the quantitative are being deployed (e.g., Rudel
2005).
Encouraging well developed theory. Broadly, one can contrast the suite of theories that argue that economic
growth and related process lead to resolution of environmental problems (e.g. ecological modernization
(^43) A recent review, on which this essay draws heavily finds over 100 books, chapters and papers providing empirical and/ or theoretical
macro-comparative analyses of the anthropogenic drivers of environmental change, indicating that this is a very healthy area of research
(Dietz, Rosa, and York In press).
(^44) A recent issue of Human Ecology Review (www.humanecologyreview.org; V. 16, #1) has a special section devoted to macro-comparative
analysis.
(^45) These are reviewed in various National Academies reports (see especially Brewer and Stern 2005).