theory, environmental Kuznets curve theory, post-materialist theory) with the suite of theories that argue that
continued growth will continue to degrade the environment (e.g., Blühdorn and Welsh 2007; Foster 1999; Schnaiberg 1980). Structural theories, such as world systems theory, are very much engaged and there are
active efforts to understand the role the environmental constraints and institutional form plays. Recently,
we have made a foray into using this approach to develop a new approach to conceptualizing sustainability
(Dietz, Rosa, and York 2008).
Providing a path to the problem of scaling. It is widely acknowledged that learning how to embed local
analyses in larger contexts and, in a complementary way, learning to “down-scale” macro-comparative
analysis to the regional and local levels is one of the most fundamental challenges in the study of coupled
human and natural systems (Carpenter et al. 2009; Liu et al. 2007; Reid, Berkes, and Wilbanks 2006). The
majority of work on coupled human and natural systems is done at the local level, and there are only a handful
of efforts that synthesize across local studies (Chhatre and Agrawal 2008; Rudel 2005). Yet moving from
the local scale is essential to capture the effects of contextual factors such as culture, political economy and
institutions that are relatively invariant at the local level (Dietz and Henry 2008). Marco-comparative analysis
also has limitations, but it is well suited to examine these factors. It is likely that the local and the macro will
“meet in the middle” in analyses at the landscape level, and I believe many of the concepts, methods and
theories developed at the macro-level will be critical to this new form of analysis.
Yielding relatively robust findings. There seems to be a consensus that human population size has an elasticity
of about 1 indicating it is neither irrelevant nor the dominant driver. Further work is trying to unpack the
effects of population structure on environmental impacts. Most analyses cast doubt on the arguments that
increased affluence/ economic growth lead eventually to reduced environmental impact, except perhaps in the
case of local environmental impacts (e.g. local air and water quality).
Important for assessments. The IPCC is driven by modeling exercises that have, at their heart, the Kaya
identity, also known as the IPAT equation. While social scientists have been highly critical of IPAT, this line
of analysis provides more sophisticated alternatives. The Millennium Assessment (Reid et al. 2005) strongly
emphasizes the role of “direct” and “indirect” drivers.
Data are available. As I will note below, much more could be done to develop the empirical base for this
research. But much of the data needed is already developed for other purposes, and much of it is of high
quality. Increasingly, it is possible to do panel analysis which, while not a panacea, can help a great deal in
disentangling causality.
What do we need to know: What are the major sociological research questions?
Barriers to progress.
Funding. This remains a cottage industry, with almost no funding for either individual and team research
projects or gatherings of the community of researchers working in this area. Even modest funding could yield
important advances.
Data. The community has made good use of data available for other purposes, indeed is an exemplar of
effective use of secondary data. However, a few targeted efforts might greatly enhance our ability to answer
key questions. For example there are logical arguments that social movements and engagement in trans-