The author discusses his collaboration with William Catton that led to several early articles aimed at providing an intellectual foundation for a field of environmental sociology. The differing backgrounds and interests they each brought to their collaboration and the context in which it developed are outlined, along with the author's assessment of the major goals of their key publications. The growth of environmental sociology and increased disciplinary attention to ecological problems, spurred by the growing societal salience of such problems, suggests that sociology has begun to shed the human exemptionalist paradigm that dominated the discipline when the field of environmental sociology was launched.
Buttel, F.H. (1978). Environmental sociology: A new paradigm? The American Sociologist, 13, 252-256.
2.
Buttel, F.H. (1987). New directions in environmental sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 13, 465-488.
3.
Buttel, F.H., & Gijswijt, A. (2001). Emerging trends in environmental sociology. In J. R. Blau (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to sociology (pp. 43-57). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
4.
Catton, W.R., Jr. (1972). Sociology in an age of fifth wheels. Social Forces, 50, 436-447.
5.
Catton, W.R., Jr., & Dunlap, R.E. (1978a). Environmental sociology: A new paradigm. The American Sociologist, 13, 41-49.
6.
Catton, W.R., Jr., & Dunlap, R.E. (1978b). Theories, paradigms and the primacy of the HEP-NEP distinction. The American Sociologist, 13, 256-259.
7.
Catton, W.R., Jr., & Dunlap, R.E. (1980). A new ecological paradigm for post-exuberant sociology . American Behavioral Scientist, 24, 15-47.
8.
Duncan, O.D. (1961). From social system to ecosystem. Sociological Inquiry, 31, 140-149.
9.
Dunlap, R. E. (Ed.). (1980). Ecology and the social sciences: An emerging paradigm. American Behavioral Scientist, 24, 1-151.
10.
Dunlap, R.E. (2001). A brief history of the section. Environment, Technology, and Society, 100, 1, 4-5.
11.
Dunlap, R.E. (2002). Paradigms, theories and environmental sociology . In R. E. Dunlap, F. H. Buttel, P. Dickens , and A. Gijswijt (Eds.), Sociological theory and the environment: Classical foundations, contemporary insight (pp. 329-350). Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield.
12.
Dunlap, R.E. (2008). The NEP Scale: From marginality to worldwide use . Journal of Environmental Education, 40 (1), 3-18.
13.
Dunlap, R.E., & Catton, W.R., Jr. (1979a). Environmental sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 5, 243-273.
14.
Dunlap, R.E., & Catton, W.R., Jr. (1979b). Environmental sociology: A framework for analysis. In T. O'Riordan & R. C. d'Arge (Eds.), Progress in resource management and environmental planning (Vol. 1, pp. 57-85). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
15.
Dunlap, R.E., & Catton, W.R., Jr. (1983). What environmental sociologists have in common (whether concerned with "built" or "natural" environments) . Sociological Inquiry, 53, 113-135.
16.
Dunlap, R.E., & Catton, W.R., Jr. (1992). Toward an ecological sociology: The development, current status, and probable future of environmental sociology . Annals of the International Institute of Sociology, 3, 263-284. [Available in W. V. D'Antonio , M. Sasaki, & Y. Yonebayshi (Eds.), Ecology, society and the quality of life (pp. 11-31). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishing, 1994.]
17.
Dunlap, R.E., & Catton, W.R., Jr. (1994). Struggling with human exemptionalism: The rise, decline and revitalization of environmental sociology. The American Sociologist, 25, 5-30.
18.
Dunlap, R.E., & Catton, W.R., Jr. (2002). Which functions of the environment do we study? A comparison of environmental and natural resource sociology . Society and Natural Resources, 15, 239-249.
19.
Dunlap, R.E., & Gale, R.P. (1972). Politics and ecology: A political profile of student eco-activists. Youth & Society, 3, 379-397.
20.
Dunlap, R.E., & Gale, R.P. (1974). Party membership and environmental politics: A legislative roll-call analysis. Social Science Quarterly, 55, 670-690.
21.
Dunlap, R.E., & Marshall, B.K. (2007). Environmental sociology . In C. D. Bryant & D. L. Peck (Eds.), 21st century sociology: A reference handbook (Vol. 2, pp. 329-340). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
Dunlap, R.E., & Van Liere, K.D. (1978). The "new environmental paradigm": A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10-19.
23.
Dunlap, R.E., & Van Liere, K.D. (1984). Commitment to the dominant social paradigm and concern for environmental quality. Social Science Quarterly, 65, 1013-1028.
24.
Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.G., & Jones, R.E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
25.
Goldman, M., & Schurman, R.A. (2000). Closing the "great divide": New social theory on society and nature. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 563-584.
26.
Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W.W., III. (1972). The limits to growth. New York: Universe Books.
27.
Pirages, D.C., & Ehrlich, P.R. (1974). Ark II: Social responses to environmental imperatives . San Francisco: Freeman.
28.
Rosa, E.A. and Richter, L.2008. Durkheim on the environment: Ex Libris or Ex Cathedra? Introduction to inaugural lecture to a course in social science, 1887-1888 . Organization & Environment, 21, 182-187.
29.
Schnaiberg, A. (1980). The environment: From surplus to scarcity. New York: Oxford University Press.
30.
Steffen, W., Crutzen, P.J., & McNeill, J.R. (2007). The Anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature? Ambio, 36, 614-621.
31.
York, R., Rosa, E.A., & Dietz, T. (2003). Footprints on the earth: The environmental consequences of modernity. American Sociological Review, 68, 279-300.
