1

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

TITLE: Securing „Supportive Environments‟ for Health in the Face of Ecosystem Collapse: Meeting the Triple Threat with a Sociology of Creative Transformation Blake Poland, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto (Ontario, Canada) Mark Dooris, Healthy Settings Development Unit, School of Health & Postgraduate Medicine University of Central Lancashire, UK Randolph Haluza-DeLay, Department of Sociology, The Kings University College (Alberta, Canada) Introduction In this paper we reflect on and explore what remains to be done to make the concept of supportive environments – one of the Ottawa Charter‟s five core action areas – a reality. As observed by Catford (2007) and Nutbeam (2008), the Ottawa Charter has been hugely influential in shaping the „new‟ public health. Its focus on supportive environments, developed further in the Sundsvall Statement (WHO, 1991), built on the emphases in the „old‟ public health on ensuring clean and safe environments. The Ottawa Charter and Sundsvall Statement introduced a socio-ecological understanding – encouraging a focus on the settings of everyday life whilst highlighting the interconnectedness of people and the planet and signaling the imperative of sustainable development. In expounding the importance of supportive environments for health and human flourishing, the Sundsvall Declaration highlighted not only physical, but social, political and economic dimensions as well as emphasising the need to respect and harness the skills and knowledge of women and indigenous peoples. In looking to the future, our focus is on the physical environment, building on the recognition that damaging environmental and ecosystem change poses an enormous threat to human health (Hancock, 2007 & in this issue; Nutbeam, 2008). Consideration of progress to date on supportive environments is provided elsewhere in this special issue (Pettersson, this issue). However, we would reiterate that the physical environment is intricately interconnected with social, political and economic dimensions (WHO, 1991). Indeed, ecological exploitation is increasingly the new vector for exploitation of indigenous peoples and other marginalized groups (Salleh, 2009; Hossay, 2006; Posner & Weisbach, 2010). As such, justice represents an overarching emphasis in this paper, which we begin with a consideration of three major emerging threats to health and health equity – namely, ecological degradation, climate change and peak oil. We then reflect on recent responses and trends at global, national and local levels, before exploring how it is possible to move forward by refocusing the concept of supportive environments and affirming the contribution of health promotion. Whilst contemporary trends paint a worrying picture of possible futures (see Hancock, this issue), the pace of change makes predicting the specific future conditions, technologies, ideas and social revolutions that will reshape human culture and behaviour in the coming years challenging, although crucial. On the positive side, this uncertainty may incentivize action to rescue a better future for humanity and life on earth in the face of daunting environmental and social challenges (Macy and Brown, 1998). Our foremost interest is how health promotion can be effective under conditions of uncertainty and change.

2

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Emerging Threats to Health and Health Equity It is now widely recognized that demands placed on the planet vastly exceed its natural carrying capacity, and that these demands are compounded by a continued population growth and steadfast political commitment to economic growth (Speth, 2008). The declining ecological systems that Hancock (this issue) describes place the existing global social order in serious question. That human civilization may be at the brink of catastrophic collapse is no longer dismissible as the apocalypticism of fringe elements; they are increasingly reflected in government-commissioned reports (e.g. Hirsh et al, 2005) and echoed by respected scholars (e.g. Chew, 2008; Homer-Dixon, 2006; Skrimshire, 2010). Three threats - ecological degradation, climate change and peak oil - will increasingly dominate the public and political landscapes in the years to come, with the potential to radically transform society. Since all human societies rely on resources and services (e.g. water purification) provided by nature, ecological degradation poses serious threats to human well-being. Accordingly, the World Health Organization now considers environmental hazards one of the defining issues for public health in the 21st century and a significant threat to achieving „Health For All‟ and the Millennium Development Goals (Chan, 2007). Already, human impacts on the environment have become an international crisis that is said to be responsible for up to one-quarter of the global burden of disease (Smith et al., 1999). The conditions Hancock (this issue) summarizes - especially for younger generations facing such daunting global insecurity in future prospects – have scarcely imaginable consequences for human mental health and physical health. The exponential nature of the decline suggests an increased risk of cascading ecosystem collapse, with the comprehensive review by the United Nations Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) suggesting that “the ability of the planet‟s ecosystems to sustain future generations can no longer be taken for granted”. Beyond general ecological degradation, there are worrying signs that a second emerging threat to global health equity – climate change – is accelerating faster than even the worst predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Hulme, 2009; Urry, 2011; Hansen, 2010). The social and economic impacts of climate change are predicted to be substantial (Stern et al, 2006), once again hitting the poor and marginalized hardest, especially in the global South where socioeconomic resources for adaptation are weakest (Adger et al, 2006; Roberts and Parks, 2007; Rao, 2009). There is a growing literature on current and predicted future health consequences of climate change (e.g. Frumkin et al, 2008; Griffiths et al, 2009; Rao, 2009). This situation may also fuel new waves of environmental refugees, and potentially undo more than 20 years of poverty reduction work around the world (UNDP, 2008). Peak oil is a third emerging threat to health and health equity (Frumkin et al 2007, Harrison 2006; Parker & Schwartz, 2010). Peak oil is not the end of oil but rather that point at which the rate of production enters terminal decline, typically occurring when half the oil has been used up, or 25-30 years after a peaking in the discovery of new oilfields (Bardi, 2009). According to a wide range of sources, including the usually conservative International Energy Association (2010), we are already past or very close to the global peak of oil production. The result is likely to be further volatility in oil prices, especially as human efforts to exploit more remote reserves such as deep sea and oil sands run into significant cost over-runs and encounter or cause significant ecological problems. Given the reliance on cheap oil in our increasingly globalized world, the consequences of constrained availability and sharp increases in fuel costs are likely to be substantial – in terms of societal impact, escalation of conflicts, food insecurity and stability

3

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

of health systems (Hanlon and McCartney 2008; Klare, Levy and Sidel, 2011; Neff et al, 2011; Schwartz, Parker and Hess, 2011). As with environmental degradation and climate change, impacts are likely to have the greatest effect on the global South, the poor and the less powerful (Winch and Stepnitz, 2011), a point to which we return below. The combined impacts of climate change, environmental degradation and peak oil are likely to be felt acutely at a time when the global economy remains extremely fragile following the financial meltdown of 2008, and as growth itself is in question (Victor, 2008; Rubin, 2009; Heinberg, 2011). It should be noted that the „triple threat‟ of environmental degradation, climate change and peak oil is closely interwoven with injustice in a society that is organized politically, economically and socially around the pursuit of short-term profit and accumulation of wealth. More specifically, social research from around the world has shown a clear pattern of unequal distribution of environmental risks according to social differences such as race, class, gender, indigeneity and other markers of social exclusion – factors which are also linked to ability to resist unjust conditions and advocate for better ones (Agyeman, 2005; Agyeman et al, 2003, 2009; Salleh, 2009). These vulnerabilities follow a predictable pattern in which environmental risk compounds an inequitable social distribution of a wide range of determinants of health such as access to safe and affordable housing, nutritious food, clean water, and adequate, income enabling social and political participation. In other words, damaging exploitation of the natural world and exploitation of fellow human beings are interwoven – making it crucial that that social justice, long a signature element of health promotion, is understood to be inextricably linked to environmental justice (Eyles, 2009; Masuda et al, 2008). Unfortunately, those bearing the largest burden have the least voice in society and are often ignored when it comes to proposing solutions for better ecological stewardship – even when they are the most culturally, economically, and spiritually tied to the land and reliant on its continued health for their own survival and well-being. Our argument so far is summarized in Figure 1. What is clear is that these threats have not yet been met with commensurate changes in policy, economic restructuring, or significant shifts in consumer and institutional behaviour. Governments, industry, and most of the general public appear to place considerable faith in the capacities of the market and technology to rise to the challenge. However, critics of “ecological modernism” call for more fundamental reform (Homer-Dixon, 2006; Victor, 2008), limits to growth (Heinberg, 2011; Nickerson, 2006) and even the dismantling of capitalism itself (Jensen, 2006; Kovel, 2007). Others believe rising environmental stressors will increase social inequity, and question how responses can be both sustainable and just (Newman et al, 2009). How to avoid socio-ecological crises in a positive manner that promotes environmental, health and social justice? We may need to rethink our assumptions about the nature of social change (at least as it applies to the triple threat) and long-cherished assumptions about effective action that are central to health promotion theory and practice. In the following sections, we compare three perspectives on social change for what they suggest about effective health promotion practice. We make the case for a sociological perspective on „collective lifestyle practices‟ characteristic of contemporary high-mobility, consumption and growth-oriented globalization. Based on this analysis, we go on to identify three promising areas for health promotion intervention in the coming decade.

4

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Rethinking Social Change In the global North, contemporary perspectives on social change have been dominated by accounts of „progress‟ that emphasize incremental hard-won improvements in quality of life as triumphs of science and technology (Boudon, 1991; Victor, 2008). Despite critiques of meta-narratives of progress, many still believe that progress on environmental and social justice

Fig. 1: From triple threat to just low-carbon future. Source: Poland et al., 2010.

issues will result from rational planning and the right combination of data, moral suasion, intersectoral collaboration, public policy, risk management, and market incentives. This reformist posture is often framed as a „reasonable‟ alternative to more far-reaching or „radical‟

5

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

demands. However, this comforting narrative is belied by numerous examples of serious ecological decline despite the best efforts of scientists, citizens, and (ostensibly) well-intentioned governments at „risk management‟. The decline of the North American cod fishery and the resultant social dislocation is but one example (Findlayson & McCay, 1998). Contrasting with this emphasis on incremental „progress‟, many believe that it will take the catastrophic collapse of ecological and social systems to catalyze change on the scale and depth required to reorient humanity on a sustainable path. It would appear that Speth (2008: 211) is not alone in noting that „unfortunately, the surest path to widespread cultural change is a cataclysmic event that profoundly affects shared values and delegitimizes the status quo and existing leadership‟. This „push‟ model of social change fits with Bourdieu‟s (1990, 1998) notion of hysteresis or crisis as the catalyst to changes in a society‟s accepted worldview and modus operandi. Historical analyses of societies that have collapsed as a result of exceeding ecosystem carrying capacity suggests that change often comes too late to save the majority of affected citizens (Catton, 1982; Diamond, 2005; Chew, 2008). This has led some commentators to characterize the present as a „race of the tipping points‟: will climactic and ecosystem tipping points be achieved before social (change) tipping points (Poland and Dooris, 2010). A third perspective on social change emphasizes the potential for wholesale cultural change akin to a widescale „awakening‟ to the potential for a new way of being and organizing human affairs in alignment with life, ecology, and ancient indigenous wisdom. According to some accounts (Macy and Brown, 1998; Korten, 2006), we are already in the midst of “The Great Turning” – a monumental shift from an industrial growth economy to a life-sustaining society that rivals the agricultural and industrial revolutions in terms of scale and impact. Hawken (2007) chronicles the emergence of an estimated one million grassroots groups doing vital environmental and social justice work at the local, regional and global levels. He claims this groundswell of action has eluded mainstream media attention because it does not match assumptions about contemporary social movements (e.g. that they must be led by charismatic leaders). Alongside this, Carlsson (2007) posits a sea-change in people‟s relationship to work, with increasing numbers working reduced hours at the fringes of mainstream society in endeavors that embody their core values; and Hubbard (1998) and others discuss the emergence of the „evolutionary consciousness‟ movement. The issue as we see it is less about which of these models of social change is more „accurate‟ and instead about the effects of adopting one as the dominant cultural narrative about the future –and the implications this has for (health promotion) practice. We would contend that the incrementalist perspective on „progress‟ offered by „ecological modernization‟ serves powerful vested interests, fails to successfully dismantle the generative mechanisms favouring inequity, and supports options compatible with a deeply flawed status quo (e.g. using climate change as an opportunity for the marketization of carbon in new carbon trading schemes – see Goldtooth, 2009; Rogers, 2010) when a more radical rethinking of the fundamental tenets of a globalized market-based growth-oriented economy is called for. Likewise, we believe that the second model – with its emphasis on „preparing for collapse‟ – while potentially „accurate‟, offers few compelling options for policy and practice. Rather, drawing on the third option, our interest in this paper is to examine the conditions under which cultural change on the scale required to realize the vision of „supportive environments for all‟ might be catalyzed, and the contribution that health promotion as a field could play in this process.

6

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Rethinking Education for Social Change: A Sociological Perspective on Culture and Collective Lifestyle There have been a number of attempts to explain the lack of meaningful action regarding climate change, environmental degradation and peak oil. However, these either adopt an individualistic perspective and engage in a form of psychological reductionism, or focus on the political and economic coordinates of energy and emissions path-dependency thereby providing little help in understanding social transformation or discerning agents of change. Furthermore, none of the models offer a coherent explanation of the interrelated triple threat phenomena as they occur at individual, small group, institutional, and societal levels. While environmental awareness has penetrated the public consciousness (Toronto Star, 2007), it is not certain how interest translates to action, in terms of changed lifestyle practices, structural changes, or the spread of values, norms, dispositions, and institutional forms representing a „culture‟ of sustainability. Insofar as the public response to the triple threat has been underwhelming, it cannot be said to result from a lack of pertinent information. Building on the scholarship of researchers like Norgaard (2011) on climate change, we suggest that although the basic premise of an enlightened, democratic and modern society is that information will lead to public and institutional responses, the triple threat poses a challenge to this paradigm. Large numbers of people in the global North who report to be concerned about climate change manage to ignore it and not follow through on the implications either intellectually or politically. This phenomenon of „cultural inertia‟ demonstrates that environmental education (increasingly an acknowledged component of coherent health promotion) has been inadequate to generate the scale of change to our collective lifestyle required to address the triple threat. In response to this, more robust sociological perspectives are needed to explain cultural inertia regarding climate change. Combined with sociological insights drawn from French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu‟s (1990) theory of practice (Norgaard, Haluza-DeLay & Brulle, under review; Haluza-DeLay, 2008), research on social learning and some of our earlier work on unpacking the social context of collective lifestyles (Haluza-Delay & Berezan, forthcoming; Poland et al, 2006, 2008 but see also Frohlich et al, 2001), we see the response to the triple threat as a social process across micro, meso and macro levels that includes the internalization of cultural practices in ways that reify individuals in terms of existing political economic systems and the collective expression of lifestyles. That is, current social organization and ways of life are so familiar and psychologically entrenched that the widespread change implied by the triple threat are nearly impossible for most people to conceive. According to Norgaard (2011), this is how populations „live in denial‟ despite awareness of the facts about climate change. Psychological and sociological theory holds that primary and secondary socialization lead people to construct ways of life and understandings of the world that guide every day interactions. Bourdieu uses the concept of „habitus‟ to refer to the deeply internalized, durable dispositions that produce regularized practices of everyday life learned in the intersection of biography and environment. Individuals become the carriers of the orientations and practices that constitute our social order. In this context, a disjuncture opens between our taken-for-granted ways of living and socio-ecological conditions – such as new behaviors necessitated by the triple threat. When this occurs, there are powerful processes that work at the psychological, institutional, and societal levels to maintain habitus and ensure social stability in spite of the evidence. Thus, cultural and social stability creates a form of inertia that inhibits social change. In other

7

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

words, consumption and industrial production, mobility, and relative abundance, habits of mind and social practice of the privileged in the global North are shaped by pervasive cultural forces and the interplay of existing social institutions and psychologies at odds with new environmental paradigms (Urry, 2011). In the context of the triple threat, cultural inertia is rooted in this disposition to stability (Norgaard, 2007), as well as the social impracticality of living ecologically in an unecological society (Haluza-DeLay, 2008). If the triple threat requires societal restructuring and alteration of lifestyle practices, it is little wonder that individuated and knowledge-oriented education has been ineffective. Although habitus can be a powerful source of resistance to change, we maintain that working from a more sociologically sophisticated understanding of the social context of transformative learning can open up new possibilities for working proactively on culture change. The most important observation from this model of learning and its supporting research is that a habitus – always based in social contexts – can maintain itself or change in supportive social conditions. An extensive literature on social learning and learning for sustainability has emerged in the last decade (e.g. Falk 2005; Wals, 2007), much citing the importance of transformative learning (Lange, 2004; O‟Sullivan & Taylor, 2004), experiential learning (Fenwick, 2000; Le Cornu, 2005) and non-formal and incidental trajectories for learning (Dillon, 2003; Marsick & Watkins, 2001). The literature concludes that, for adults at least, the social context of learning is central, meaning that learning environments are best understood as “communities of practice” (Hildreth & Kimble, 2004; Wenger, 2006). Further, while much research has focused on individual environmental practice (Dietz et al, 2005; Kollmus & Agyeman, 2002), cultural studies and cultural geography emphasize how a distinctive culture of place emerges from the pragmatic and routinized interactions between engaged participants and social processes (Poland et al, 2005; Hess et al, 2008). This accords with research on neighbourhood effects on health (e.g. Blackman, 2006; Finkelstein et al, 2005; Popay et al, 2003) and the many links between place and health, including the influence of the physical environment (e.g. Dustin et al, 2010; Frumkin, 2001, 2003). Drawing on these bodies of scholarship, we propose that attention be devoted to creating „communities of practice‟ (Lave & Wenger, 1991), where logics of practice relevant to the triple threat are legitimated and performed by others and facilitate efficacious personal and collective change. Drawing on a developing literature on the cultural and social learning outcomes of social movement (Earl, 2004; Hart, 1996; Williams, 2004), we also suggest that emerging grassroots place-based responses to the triple threat often function as „communities of practice‟. – not only shaping local policy, but also helping to create a „culture of sustainability‟. Transition Towns is one such movement. Originating in 2004 in the UK and now spreading rapidly around the world, the movement – for which the Transition Network (www.transitionnetwork.org) serves as an organizational hub – seeks an integrated and community-based response to the triple threat outlined above. Movement leaders argue that successful transition to a low-carbon society requires grassroots action to build community resilience, while emphasizing opportunities for greater connectedness, equity, and quality of life (Brook, 2009; R. Davis, 2010; Hopkins, 2008; North, 2010). Unlike most environmental movements, Transition Towns explicitly emphasizes social equity and diversity in its discourses (Hopkins, 2008). Transition Town initiatives can be seen as reflexive communities of practice for the anchoring and internalization of ways of living that make real a post-carbon society. A Bourdieusian perspective on Transition Towns emphasizes the tacit, pre-cognitive, contextual, place-based, experiential, and practice-oriented learning associated with the embodiment and internalization

8

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

of a habitus in social movement groups. This accords with what Bell (2004, p.226) describes as one of the goals of groups working toward a sustainable society: “living environmentally without trying”. Arguably, one of the main reasons pro-environmental attitudes among the general public are not matched by environmentally-sound lifestyles is that our lives are socially organized in the context of a less-than-environmentally sound society. In Bourdieu‟s terms, for most people an ecological habitus is mis-aligned with the social field. Drawing on research among environmentally-active citizens in one Canadian city, Haluza-DeLay (2008) concludes that several components are needed for development of an ecological praxis in existing social fields where sustainability is not a priority:

specific, place-based information on ecologically sound lifestyle practices consistent with the local ecosystems;

critique of existing social structures (political-economics, institutional, and cultural);

sociological sophistication about how contemporary social relations resist an ecological worldview and lifestyle

a sense of the possible (often anchored in storytelling)

association with a reflexive „community of practice‟. We suggest that health promotion could play an important role in supporting each of these and in the next section turn our attention to implications for practice. However, the Transition Towns movement has been subject to criticism for the dissonance between rhetoric and practice in relation to social equity and diversity, being predominantly white and middle class by its own admission (where it has taken root in the global North). Furthermore, the jury is still out as to whether Transition initiatives can accomplish a meaningful increase in community resilience, relocalization of production, and concomitant shift in culture/habitus (Brook, 2009; Burton, 2010; North, 2010; Poland, 2010). Early indications, based on purely anecdodal evidence, are that:

community-building precedes meaningful shifts in everyday ecological practice, and this takes time

most people‟s engagement with transition initiatives is nowhere near at the level seen, for example, in intentional communities and ecovillages, which raises questions about capacity to support the development of ecological habitus/praxis

even for many core members of Transition Towns steering committees (let alone the broader membership), unecological practices such as vacation air travel remain the norm (see Urry 2010 for a provocative analysis of the relative intransigence of high-mobility globalized consumption culture).

Implications for Health Promotion: Building Supportive Environments For us, a central question remains the how to avoid potential fear and social collapse, while engaging in a positive process that faces environmental and social justice challenges with creativity and humanity. In light of our discussion of the triple threat, our call to rethink social change and the implications of a sociological perspective on culture and collective lifestyle, we advance three directions for health promotion in securing „supportive environments‟ for health in the coming decade. The first is hardly a „new‟ direction at all, but instead echoes a call for health promotion to return to its more radical roots (Baum & Saunders, 1995) and the articulation of a critical social science

9

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

perspective in health promotion (Eakin et al, 1996; Poland, 1992). Given the rapid rate of ecosystem destruction, resource depletion and loss of resilience in socio-ecological systems, traditional resistance work and organizing aimed at halting or slowing the rate of destruction will continue to be of paramount importance. Health promotion can and should be at the forefront in calling attention to the impacts of ecosystem destruction, climate change and resource depletion on human health and well-being; in amplifying the voice of marginalized groups in this regard; and in more forcefully connecting environmental and climate justice to social justice (Masuda et al, 2010). This will require a more explicit alignment in solidarity with indigenous groups and allied social movements, a willingness to value other ways of knowing (Brown et al, 2005; Bopp & Bopp, 2006), and a willingness to reach out to other perspectives and fields of enquiry such as political economy (Carvalho, 2001; Coburn, 2004; Navarro, 2009), political ecology (Elliott, 2005; King, 2010; Robbins, 2004;), ecofeminism (Salleh, 2009; Littig, 2001), and ecosocialism (Kovel, 2007). In this sense we argue for a shift in root metaphor for health promotion from „helping‟ to „bearing witness‟ (Poland & Holmes, 2009). This would move the field much closer to critiquing existing social structures that impact environmental health and justice and for sociological sophistication about how contemporary social relations resist an ecological worldview and lifestyle – both of which are preconditions for „a sense of the possible‟. A second direction is a strengthening of engagement with local or settings-focused „ecological habitus work‟. This imperative flows from our assessment of settings-/place-based movements and collectives as „communities of practice‟ for generating knowledge about „living well in place‟ and helping members integrate that into practices of daily living. It is beyond the scope of this paper to explicate this direction in detail, but a starting place can be found in the five components noted above for an ecological praxis. We would also point to connections to existing veins of practice with an established history in health promotion. One strong point of connection is the settings approach with its focus on the contextual nature of practice (e.g. Chu and Simpson, 1994; Dooris, 2006, 2009; Poland, Green and Rootman, 2000; Poland et al, 2009) and its strong history of work in communities (e.g. Hancock, 1988); cities (e.g. Kjellstrom, 2008), workplaces (e.g. Chu et al, 2000), health services (e.g. Pelikan, 2007), schools (e.g. Davis and Cooke, 2007), universities (e.g. Orme and Dooris, 2010) and prisons (e.g. Gatherer et al, 2005) – as well as recent attention to the potential for working across settings (Dooris, 2004; HCC, 2010). In our recent review of settings-based approaches to local sustainability work (Poland and Dooris, 2010), we articulate six core principles: adopt an ecological „whole system‟ approach; start where people are; root practice in place; deepen the social analysis; build on strengths and successes; and build resilience. We would reiterate that working locally to build resilience in the face of the triple threat means investing in community development as an arena of practice for health professionals (Butler and Cass, 1993; Germann & Wilson, 2004; Labonte, 1993; Poland et al, 2000b) and resourcing the development of collaborations with groups in other health and non-health sectors (Poland et al, 2005b; Singer & Kegler, 2004). Our third direction is a paradigm shift away from an approach to health based on risk management (anchored in classical scientific apparatuses of surveillance, epidemiology and causative aetiology) towards ways of thinking and acting that reflect the complexity, emergence and interconnectedness that increasingly informs our understanding of contemporary issues. Although upstream efforts to address social determinants of health are informed by the social sciences and a portion of the health promotion enterprise is anchored in qualitative methods and other ways of knowing, such work is not the mainstream of what is taught or funded – and, further, much qualitative research remains oriented to informing programs addressing individual behaviour (Poland, 1992). If the risks are socially produced as the triple threats are, they cannot be managed at the level of individual behaviours. More specifically, the limitations

10

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

of a risk management approach in an increasingly uncertain and rapidly changing world, and its close alliance with ecological modernization and dominant narratives of incremental progress have been noted above. Our understanding of this dimension is informed by theories of organisational learning and change (Senge et al, 2004; Scharmer, 2009), adaptations of complexity science to understanding social change and social movements (Westley et al, 2006), dialogical methods (Holman et al, 2007; Isaacs, 1999; Labonte et al, 1999; Tandon, 1981), work on the new cosmology (Swimme, 2001, 2008), indigenous ways of knowing (Berkes et al, 2000; Elliott, 2005; Kavach, 2010; Smith, 2007) and new ways of understanding the human story and our connection to the natural world (Hathaway & Boff, 2009; Harding, 2006). Specifically, we refer readers to a wonderful new book by Peggy Holman entitled “Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into Opportunity” (Holman, 2010). Drawing on complexity science, Holman describes emergence as „order (self-organizing novel coherent structures) emerging from upheaval and chaos‟ and describes approaches, principles, and practices for engaging creatively with the latent opportunities present within disturbances that threaten to undo conventional thinking and practices. Drawing on approaches such as Appreciative Inquiry and Open Space Technology, she emphasizes context-sensitive ways of working with groups to manifest collective wisdom, insight and emergent clarity about new ways of thinking and acting in the presence of system disruptions and apparent breakdown. Given the likelihood that the coming decade will be characterized by accelerated change, disruption to accepted ways of thinking and to systems of food and energy production associated with the triple threat, the book is a timely invitation to step out of old ways of approaching risk (as something to be „managed‟ through linear incremental progress) and into new ways of engaging emergence and working with discontinuous change in profoundly democratic and dialogical ways. The book is also a very practical manifesto, full of tips and advice without being overly prescriptive. It aligns well with recent work on sensing and helping „midwife‟ the change that „wants to happen‟ (see Hathaway & Boff, 2009; Senge et al, 2004; Westley et al, 2006). One of the intriguing aspects of Holman‟s work (and that of Scharmer, 2009) is its potential to bridge two of the models of social change presented earlier by linking upheaval and disruption (which catalyze and provide an opening for change) with intentional proactive collective engagement (to accelerate culture change and co-invent its operationalization into practice) in ways that strengthen community, build new partnerships, and shift culture. CONCLUSION To meaningfully address the interconnected challenges of environmental degradation, climate change, and peak oil, as well as their effects on health and social inequality, will require reconsidering the practices of the field of health promotion. So far, health promotion has not sufficiently addressed the key role of the environment as a mediating factor of the social determinants of health. Nor has it developed a robust theorization that explicitly bridges health promotion and environmental justice (but see Buzzelli & Veenstra, 2007; Howze et al., 2004; Schulz & Northridge, 2004; Masuda et al, 2010 for notable exceptions). In this paper we have proposed means to do so, rooted in sociological adaption of the health promotion orientation to supportive environments. First and foremost, healthy ecosystems are a foundation for supporting human health at individual, community and global levels. As summarized in figure 1, the triple threats of ecological degradation, climate change and peak oil pose threats that cross each of these levels;

11

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

their health impacts are already becoming visible. Second, despite the welter of trans-disciplinary data about these threats, we see resistance to addressing them. This can be expected to exacerbate health risks for the near future, as well as health inequities. The central question is how to avoid serious societal crisis and civilizational collapse while engaging in a positive process that squarely faces the socio-ecological and environmental justice challenges. To meet these challenges, we presented an approach to creating supportive environments that drew on Bourdieu‟s theory of practice, noting how an ecologically-sound habitus is anchordd in social context and requires social fields in which its logic is supported. Without healthy ecosystems, other health determinants pale in comparison. Therefore, we proposed, health promotion would do well to engage three strategies. First, it must be socio-politically engaged on the issue of sustainability. Second, it must see development of the orientation to live in ecologically healthful ways as its crucial task for the coming years, which includes something akin to what Hancock (2011) elsewhere in this volume refers to as “managing decline”. Third, we suggested a paradigm shift from risk management to finding in upheaval the latent possibilities of reconfiguring social and environmental praxis – the opportunity described by Holman as engaging emergence of new possibilities. With the triple threat of ecological peril poised over global society, health promotion must meet a dramatically new challenge with radically new ways of conceiving and conducting practice. Acknowledgements: We wish to acknowledge the contributions of several valued colleagues to the ideas that inform this paper: Paul Antze, Bob Brulle, Chris Buse, Fabio Cabarcas, Francisco Cavalcante, Bethany Elliot, Rebecca Hasdell, Kari Norgaard, and Cheryl Teelucksingh.

12

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

REFERENCES CITED Adger, W. N., Paavola, J., Huq, S., & Mace, M. J. (Eds.). (2006). Fairness in Adaptation to Climate Change. Boston, MA: MIT Press. Agyeman, J., Cole, P., Haluza-DeLay, R., & O'Riley, P. (Eds.). (2009). Speaking for Ourselves: Environmental Justice in Canada. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Agyeman, J., Bullard, R. B., & Evans, B. (Eds.). (2003). Just sustainabilities: Development in an unequal world. London: Earthscan/MIT Press. Agyeman, Julian. 2005. Sustainable communities and the challenge of environmental justice. NY: New York University Press Bardi, Ugo. 2009. Peak oil: The four stages of a new idea. Energy 34(3):323-326. Bell, M. (2004). An Invitation to Environmental Sociaology (2nd Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge. Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2000). Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications, 10, 1251-1262. Blackman, T. (2006). Placing Health: Neighbourhood Renewal, Health Improvement and Complexity. Bristol, UK: The Policy Press. Bopp, M., & Bopp, J. (2006). Recreating the World: A Practical Guide to Building Sustainable Communities (2nd Edition). Calgary, AB: Four Worlds Press. Boudon, R. (1991). Theories of Social Change: A Critical Appraisal. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press. Brook, I. (2009). Turning up the heat on climate change: are transition towns an answer? Environmental Values, 18(2), 125-128. Brown, V. A., Grootjans, J., Ritchie, J., Townsend, M., & Verrinder, G. (2005). Sustainability and Health: Supporting Ecological Integrity in Public Health. Sydney, Australia: Allen and Unwin. Burton, L. (2010). In U.S. Transition Towns, the big challenge is bringing people together. YES! Magazine, 55), 30. Butler, P., & Cass, S. (1993). Case Studies of Community Development in Health. Blackburn, Australia: Centre for Development and Innovation in Health. Buzzelli, M., & Veenstra, G. (2007). New approaches to researching environmental justice: combining critical theory, population health and geographic information sciences (GIS). Health & Place, 13(1), 1-2. Carlsson, C. (2008). Nowtopia: How Pirate Programmers, Outlaw Bicyclists, and Vacant-Lot Gardeners Are Inventing the Future Today! Oakland, CA: AK Press. Carvalho, G. O. (2001). Sustainable development: Is it achievable within the existing international political economy context? Sustainable Development, 9(2), 61-73. Catford, J. (2007) Ottawa 1986: The fulcrum of global health development. Promotion & Education, S2: 6-7. Catton, W. R. J. (1982). Overshoot: The Ecological Basis of Revolutionary Change. University of Illinois Press. Chan, M. (2007) Climate change and health: preparing for unprecedented challenges. The 2007 David E. Barmes Global Health Lecture. World Health Organization, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

13

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Chew, S. C. (2008). Ecological Futures: What History Can Teach Us. AltaMira Press. Chu, C., Breucker, G., Harris, N., Stitzel, A., Gan, X., Gu, X. et al. (2000). Health-promoting workplaces: international settings development. Health Promotion International, 15(2), 155-167. Chu, C., & Simpson, R. (1994). Ecological Public Health: From Vision to Practice. Institute of Applied Environmental Research, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia and Centre for Health Promotion, University of Toronto, Canada. Coburn, D. (2004). Beyond the income inequality hypothesis: Class, neo-liberalism and health inequalities. Social Science & Medicine, 58, 41-56. Davis, J. M., & Cooke, S. M. (2007). Educating for a healthy, sustainable world: an argument for integrating Health Promoting Schools and Sustainable Schools. Health Promotion International, 22(4), 346-353. Davis, R. (2010). Transition towns - the art of resilience. New Internationalist, 430, 10-11. Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. Penguin. Dietz, T., Fitzgerald, A., & Shwom, R. (2005). Environmental values. Annual Review of Environment & Resources, 30, 335-372. Dillon, J. (2003). On learners and learning in environmental education: Missing theories, ignored communitiies. Environmental Education Research, 9(2), 215-226. Dooris, M. (2004). Joining up settings for health: a valuable investment for strategic partnerships? Critical Public Health, 14, 37-49. Dooris, M. (2006). Health promoting settings: future directions. IUHPE - Promotion & Education, 13(1), 4-6. Dooris, M. (2009). Holistic and sustainable health improvement: the contribution of the settings-based approach to health promotion. Perspectives in Public Health, 129(1), 29-36. Dustin, D. L., Bricker, K. S., & Schwab, K. A. (2010). People and nature: Toward an ecological model of health promotion. Leisure Sciences, 32(1), 3-14. Eakin, J., Robertson, A., Poland, B., Coburn, D., & Edwards, R. (1996). Towards a critical social science perspective on health promotion research. Health Promotion International, 11(2), 157-165. Earl, J. (2004). The cultural consequences of social movements. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (pp. 508-530). London: Blackwell. Elliott, B. (2005). The political ecology of health: Perceptions of environment, economy, health and well-being among 'Namgis First Nation. Health & Place, 11, 349-365. Eyles, John. 2009. Population health, environmental justice and the distribution of diseases: Ideas and practices from Canada. In Speaking for ourselves: environmental justice in Canada, edited by Julian Agyeman, Peter Cole, Randolph Haluza-DeLay, and Patricia O'Riley. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press. Falk, J. H. (2005). Free-choice environmental learning: Framing the discussion. Environmental Education Research, 11(3), 265-280. Fenwick, T. (2000). Expanding conceptions of experiential learning: A review of the five contemporary perspectives on cognition. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(4), 243-273. Finkelstein, M., Jerrett, M., & Sears, M. R. (2005). Environmental inequality and circulatory disease mortality gradients. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 481-487. Finlayson, A. C., & McCay, B. J. (1998). Crossing the threshold of ecosystem resilience: the commercial extinction of northern cod. In F. Berkes & C. Folke (Eds.), Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience (pp. 311-337). Cambridge University Press.

14

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Frohlich, K. L., Corin, E., & Potvin, L. (2001). A theoretical proposal for the relationship between context and disease. Sociology of Health & Illness, 23(6), 776-797. Frumkin, H. (2001). Beyond toxicity: human health and the natural environment. Am J Prev Med, 20, 234-240. Frumkin, H. (2003). Healthy places: Exploring the evidence. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1451-1456. Frumkin, H., Hess, J., Luber, G., Malilay, J. N., and McGeehin, M. (2008). Climate change: the public health response. American Journal of Public Health, 98: 435-445. Frumkin, H., Hess, J., and Vindigni, S. (2007). Peak petroleum and public health. JAMA, 298(14): 1688-1690. Gatherer, A., Moller, L., & Hayton, P. (2005). The World Health Organization European health in prisons project after 10 years: Persistent barriers and achievements. American Journal of Public Health, 95(10), 1696-1700. Germann, K., & Wilson, D. (2004). Organizational capacity for community development in regional health authorities: a conceptual model. Health Promotion International, 19(3). Goldtooth, T. B. K. (2009). Indigenous perspective on co2lonialism. Canadian Dimension, 43(6), 31-33. Griffiths, J., Adshead, F., Rao, M. and Thorpe, A. (2009) The Health Practitioner‟s Guide to Climate Change: Diagnosis and Cure. London: Earthscan. Haluza-DeLay, R. B. (2008). A theory of practice for social movements: Environmentalism and ecological habitus. Mobilization, 13(2), 205-218. Haluza-DeLay, R. B., & Berezan, R. (forthcoming). Permaculture in the city: Ecological habitus and the distributed ecovillage. In J. Lockyear & J. Veteto (Eds.), Localizing Environmental Anthropology: Bioregionalism, Permaculture, and Ecovillage Design for a Sustainable Future. NY: Berghan Books. Hancock, T. (1988). Developing healthy communities. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 79(6), 416-419. Hancock, T. (2007) Creating environments for health – 20 years on. Promotion & Education, S2: 7-8. Hancock, T. (2011) It’s the environment, stupid! Declining ecosystem health is THE threat to health in the 21st century. Health Promotion International, 26, ii168–ii172. Hanlon, P. and McCartney, G. Hanlon, P., and McCartney, G. (2008). Peak oil: will it be public health's greatest challenge? Public Health, 122(7), 647-652. Hansen, J. (2010). Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth about the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity. Bloomsbury USA. Harding, S. (2006). Animate Earth: Science, Intuition and Gaia. White River Jt, VT: Chelsea Green. Harrison, D. (2006). Peak oil, climate change, public health and well-being. Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 126(2), 62-63. Hart, S. (1996). The cultural dimension of social movements: A theoretical reassessment and literature review. Sociology of Religion, 57(1), 87-100. Hathaway, M., & Boff, L. (2009). The Tao of Liberation: Exploring the Ecology of Transformation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis. Hawken, P. (2007). Blessed Unrest: How the Largest Movement in the World Came Into Being, and Why No One Saw It Coming. Viking/Penguin. HCC. (2010). Stepping It Up: Moving the Focus from Health Care in Canada to a Healthier Canada. Toronto:

15

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Health Council of Canada. Available online at http://www.healthcouncilcanada.ca/docs/rpts/2010/promo/HCCpromoDec2010.pdf Heinberg, R. (2011). The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality. New Society. Hess, J. J., Malilay, J. N., & Parkinson, A. J. (2008). Climate change: the importance of place. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(5), 468-478. Hildreth, P. M., & Kimble, C. (2004). Knowledge Networks: Innovation Through Communities of Practice. London: Idea Group Publishing. Hirsh, R. L., Besdek, R., & Wending, R. (2005). Peaking of world oil production: impacts, mitigation, and risk management. Science Applications International Corporation Report fo the US Department of Energy. Holman, P. (2010). Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into Opportunity. Berret-Koehler. Holman, P., Devane, T., & Cady, S. (2007). The Change Handbook: The Definitive Resource on Today's Best Methods for Engaging Whole Systems (2nd Edition). Berret-Koehler. Homer-Dixon, T. (2006). The Upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization. Toronto, ON: Alfred A Knopf Canada. Hopkins, R. (2008). The Transition Handbook: From Oil Dependency to Local Resilience. Devon, UK: Green Books. Hossay, Patrick. 2006. Unsustainable: A primer for global environmental and social justice. London: Zed Books. Howze, E. H., Baldwin, G. T., & Kegler, M. C. (2004). Environmental health promotion: Bridging traditional environmental health and health promotion. Health Education and Behavior, 31, 429-440. Hubbard, B. M. (1998). Conscious Evolution: Awakening the Power of Our Social Potential. Novato, CA: New World Publishers. Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why we disagree about climate change: Understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. International Energy Association. (2010). World Energy Outlook 2010. Paris, France: International Energy Agency. Isaacs, W. (1999). Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. New York, NY: Doubleday/Currency. Jensen, D. (2006). Endgame. Volume 1: The Problem of Civilization. New York, NY: Seven Stories Press. Kavach, M. (2010). Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations, and Contexts. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press. King, B. (2010). Political ecologies of health. Progress in Human Geography, 34(1), 38-55. Kjellstrom T. (2008) Our Cities, Our Health, Our Future. Acting on Social Determinants for Health Equity in Urban Settings. Report to the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health from the Knowledge Network on Urban Settings. Kobe City, Japan: WHO Centre for Health Development. Klare, M., Levy, B. and Sidel, V. (2011) The public health implications of resource wars. American Journal of Public Health, 21 July, 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300267 Kollmus, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentallly and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239-260. Korten, D. C. (2006). The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press. Kovel, J. (2007). The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of Nature? (2nd Edition). New York: Zed Books.

16

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Labonte, R., Feather, J., & Hills, M. (1999). A story/dialogue method for health promotion knowledge development and evaluation. Health Education Research, 14(1), 39-50. Labonte, R. (1993). Community development and partnerships. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 84(4), 237-240. Lange, E. A. (2004). Transformative and restorative learning: A vital dialectic for sustainable societies. Adult Education Quarterly, 54(2), 121-139. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Le Cornu, A. (2005). Building on Jarvis: Towards a holistic mode of processes of experiential learning. Studies in the Education of Adults, 37(2), 166-181. Littig, B. (2001). Feminist Perspectives on Environment and Society. Prentice Hall. Turner, T. E., & Macy, J., & Brown, M. Y. (1998). Coming Back to Life: Practices to Reconnect Our Lives, Our World. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers. Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2001). Informal and incidental learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 25-34. Masuda, J., Poland, B., & Baxter, J. (2010). Reaching for environmental health justice: Canadian experiences for a comprehensive research, policy and advocacy agenda in health promotion. Health Promotion International, 25(4), 453-463. Masuda, J., Zupancic, T., Poland, B., & Cole, D. (2008). Environmental health and vulnerable populations in Canada: mapping an integrated equity-focused research agenda. The Canadian Geographer, 54(4), 427-450. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Living Beyond our Means: Natural Assets and Human Wellbeing (Statement from the Board) Available at www.maweb.org/documents/document.429.aspx.pdf (Downloaded 8 August 2011) Navarro, V. (2009). What we mean by social determinants of health. Global Health Promotion, 16(1), 5-16. Neff, R., Parker, C., Kirschenmann, F., Tinch, J.and Lawrence, R. (2011) Peak oil, food systems, and public health. American Journal of Public Health, 21 July, 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300123 Newman, P., Beatley, T.I., & Boyer, H. (2009). Resilient cities: Responding to peak oil and climate change. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Nickerson, M. (2006). Life, Money and Illusion: Living On Earth As If We Want to Stay. Lanark, ON: Seven Generations Publishing. Norgaard, K. (2011). Living in denial: Climate change, emotions, and everyday life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Norgaard, K. (2007). “People want to protect themselves a little bit”: Emotions, denial, and social movement nonparticipation. Sociological Inquiry, 76(3), 372-396. Norgaard, K., Haluza-DeLay, R. & Brulle, R. (under review). Strategic Environmental Education in the Face of Cultural Inertia about Climate Change. Paper to be presented to American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, BC, April, 2012. North, P. (2010). Eco-localisation as a progressive response to peak oil and climate change: A sympathetic critique. Geoforum, 41(4), 585-594. Nutbeam, D. (2008) What would the Ottawa Charter look like if it were written today? Critical Public Health, 18(4): 435-441.

17

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Orme, J. & Dooris, M. (2010) Integrating health and sustainability: the higher education sector as a timely catalyst. Health Education Research 25(3): 425-437. O'Sullivan, E., & Taylor, M. (Eds.). (2004). Learning Toward an Ecological Consciousness: Selected Transformative Practices. New York: Palgrave. Parker, C. L., & Schwartz, B. S. (2010). Human health and well-being in an era of energy scarcity and climate change. In R. Heinberg & D. Lerch (Eds.), The Post-Carbon Reader: Managing the 21st Century's Sustainability Crises. University of California Press. Pelikan, J. (2007) Health Promoting Hospitals – Assessing developments in the network. Italian Journal of Public

Health, 4: 261-270 Pettersson, B. (2011) <to be inserted> Health Promotion International <to be inserted> Poland, B. D. (2010). The transition handbook: from oil dependency to local resilience, by Rob Hopkins (book review). Critical Public Health, 20(3), 385-387. Poland, B., Boutilier, M., Tobin, S., & Badgley, R. (2000). The policy context for community development practice in Public Health: a Canadian case study. Journal of Public Health Policy, 21(1), 5-19. Poland, B. D., & Dooris, M. (2010). A green and healthy future: the settings approach to building health, equity and sustainability. Critical Public Health, 20(3), 281-298. Poland, B., Frohlich, K., & Cargo, M. (2008). Context as a fundamental dimension of health promotion program evaluation. In L. Potvin & D. V. McQueen (Eds.), Health Promotion Evaluation Practices in the Americas (pp. 297-315). Springer. Poland, B., Frohlich, K. L., Haines, R., Mykhalovskiy, E., Rock, M., & Sparks, R. (2006). The social context of smoking: the next frontier in tobacco control? Tobacco Control, 15, 59-63. Poland, B. D., Graham, H., Walsh, E., Williams, P., Lum, J., Polzer, J. et al. (2005). ‟Working at the margins‟ or „leading from behind‟? A Canadian study of hospital-community collaboration. Health and Social Care in the Community, 13(2), 125-135. Poland, B., Green, L. W., & Rootman, I. (Eds.). (2000). Settings for Health Promotion: Linking Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Poland, B., & Holmes, D. (2009). Celebrating risk: the politics of self-branding, transgression and resistance in public health. Aporia, 1(4), 27-36. Poland, B., Krupa, E., & McCall, D. (2009). Settings for health promotion: an analytic framework to guide intervention design and implementation. Health Promotion Practice, 10(4), 505-516. Poland, B., Lehoux, P., Holmes, D., & Andrews, G. (2005). How place matters: unpacking technology and power in health and social care. Health and Social Care in the Community, 13(2), 170-180. Popay, J., Thomas, C., Williams, G. H., Bennett, S., Gatrell, A., & Bostock, L. (2003). A proper place to live: health inequalities, agency and the normative dimensions of space. Social Science & Medicine, 57, 55-69. Posner, Eric A., and David Weisbach. 2010. Climate change justice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rao, M. (2009) Climate change is deadly: the health impacts of climate change. In Griffiths, J., Adshead, F., Rao, M. and Thorpe, A. The Health Practitioner‟s Guide to Climate Change: Diagnosis and Cure. London: Earthscan. Robbins, P. (2004). Political Ecology: A Critical Introduction. Blackwell. Roberts, J. T., & Parks, B. C. (2007). A Climate of Injustice: Global Inequality, North-South Politics, and Climate Policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

18

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Rogers, H. (2010). Green Gone Wrong: How Our Economy is Undermining the Environmental Revolution. London: Verso. Rubin, J. (2009). Why Your World is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller: Oil and the End of Globalization. Random House Canada. Salleh, Ariel. 2009. Eco-sufficiency & global justice: Women write political ecology. London: Pluto Press. Scharmer, C. O. (2009). Theory U: Leading From the Future as It Emerges. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Schulz, A., & Northridge, M. E. (2004). Social determinants of health: implications for environmental health promotion. Health Education and Behavior, 31(4). Schwartz, B., Parker, C. and Hess, J. (2011) Public health and medicine in an age of energy scarcity: the case of petroleum. American Journal of Public Health, 21 July, 10.2105/AJPH.2010.205187 Senge, P., Scharmer, C. O., Jaworski, J., & Flowers, B. S. (2004). Presence: An Exploration of Profound Change in People, Organizations, and Society. New York, NY: Currency/Doubleday/Random House. Singer, H. H., & Kegler, M. C. (2004). Assessing inter-organizational networks as a dimension of community capacity: Illustrations from a community intervention to prevent lead poisoning. Health Education and Behavior, 31(6), 808-821. Skrimshire, Stefan (ed.). 2010. Future ethics: Climate change and the apocalyptic imagination. London: Continuum Smith, H. A. (2007). Disrupting the global discourse of climate change: The case of indigenous voices. In M. E. Pettenger (Ed.), The Social Construction of Climate Change: Power, Knowledge, Norms, Discourses (pp. 197-215). Burlington, VT: Ashgate. Smith, K. R., Carlos, F., Corvalan, C. F. and Kjellstrom, T. (1999) How much global ill health is attributable to environmental factors? Epidemiology, 10, 573–584. Speth, J. G. (2008). The Bridge at the Enge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Stern, N., Peters, S., Bakhshi, V., Bowen, A., Cameron, C., Catovsky, S. et al. (2006). Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change. HM Treasury: London, UK. Swimme, B. (2001). The Universe is a Green Dragon. Rochester, VT: Bear & Co. Swimme, B. (2008). The Hidden Heart of the Cosmos: Humanity and the New Story. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis. Tandon, R. (1981). Dialogue as inquiry and intervention. In P. Reason & J. Rowan (Eds.), Human Inquiry. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons. Toronto Star (2007) How deep a shade of green? (March 30). UNDP. (2008). Human Development Report 2007/2008: Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in a Divided World. New York, NY: United Nations Development Program. Urry, John. (2011) Climate change and society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Urry, J. (2010). Consuming the planet to excess. Theory, Culture & Society, 27(2-3), 191-212. Victor, P. A. (2008). Managing Without Growth: Slower by Design, Not Disaster. Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Wals, A. E. J. (Ed.). (2007). Social Learning: Towards A Sustainable World. Wageningen Academic Publishers. Wenger, E. C. (2006). Communities of practice: a brief introduction. http://www.ewenger.com/theory.

19

Post-print version:

Poland, Blake, Dooris, Mark T and Haluza-Delay, Randolph (2011) Securing 'supportive environments' for health in the face of

ecosystem collapse: meeting the triple threat with a sociology of creative transformation. Health Promotion International, 26

(suppl ). ii202-ii215. ISSN 0957-4824

Westley, F., Zimmerman, B., & Patton, M. Q. (2006). Getting To Maybe: How the World is Changed. Random House Canada. Williams, R. (2004). The cultural contexts of collective action: Constraints, opportunities, and the symbolic life of social movements. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (pp. 89-115). London: Blackwell. Winch, P. and Stepnitz, R. (2011) Peak oil and health in low- and middle-income countries: impacts and potential responses. American Journal of Public Health, 21 July, 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300231. World Health Organization (WHO). (1991). Supportive environments for health: The Sundsvall Statement. Health Promotion International, 6(4), 297-300.