The environmentalism of the rich

A growing body of literature on critical sustainability highlights how ecological transitions in sustainable systems can unintentionally perpetuate exclusion and reinforce racialized and gendered disparities.

Sustainable, but for whom?

Most of the sustainable practices are predominantly designed and written for Western democracies, which possess economies, political systems as well as national identities and cultures that are completely alien to many regions of the world. Anantharaman’s (2023) case study in Bengaluru (India) demonstrates how, in Western democracies, there is a call for citizen and community involvement of a sustainable lifestyle, whereas in India, the state engages the elite and Indian middle classes in governmental community participation programs while making it difficult for working-class groups to do so. Green consumption appears to be controlled and driven by social status limitations within a very uneven and rigid class/caste system in India, in addition to state restraints.

(We/They) adopt an “performative environmentalism”

The term “performative environmentalism” was coined by sociologist Jessica Gullion (2015), based on Erving Goffman’s performance theories, to describe the emotions of anger, fear, and suffering that activists and citizens of Texas have shown in displays in response to the region’s pollution situation, thereby gaining recognition for their environmental claims. Anantharaman (2023; 2022) reinterprets the concept of “performative environmentalism” in a different way. She describes it as an interactive, cultural process in which ordinary, non-expert individuals develop ecological legitimacy by everyday actions that are ethical in the social environment in which they live. We are not referring to prospective actors such as governments, but rather to social classes, persons who, motivated by a real feeling infused with common meanings, stabilize environmentalist behaviours tempered by status pressures functioning within a rigid class hierarchy. While this order is not intended to maintain status, it does produce inequalities in the sense that what is recognized and validated as an environmental practice is culturally mediated, depending on the class position of those performing it, the social context, and the appearance of the practice itself (Anantharaman, 2022).

The dual function of bicycle use

The bicycle is a good example of a “green” mode of transportation, yet it has diverse meanings in India based on socioeconomic status. For the middle class, riding a bicycle implies voluntary adherence to an eco-friendly culture and disassociation from practices that harm the environment. This argument is not aligned with that of the working-class group. In Bengaluru (India), street merchants use bicycles as their primary mode of transportation to collect plastic, going from house to house to swap plastic buckets for paper and glass garbage. Middle-class bikers create “defensive distinctions” to distance themselves from impoverished and working-class cyclists, as well as the immoral and materialistic middle classes. They set themselves out by donning sport fashionable clothing, bike smart helmets, and phosphorescent waistcoats (Anantharaman, 2023).

The origin of desiring to live in a “green and clean” city

This desire to stand out as environmental citizens is linked to the desire to live in “clean and green” cities (Anantharaman, 2023), which are characterized by green areas and clean and orderly streets, and where everything that does not fit with sustainable and ecological system is considered a threat to the order and healthiness imposed by the dominant social group. According to Anantharaman (2023), this mindset that regards cleanliness as the embodiment of beauty and purity has distant origins. The ecological and sustainable view of “natural beauty” is based on white supremacy and imperialism, which sees “others” (non-white, impoverished, barbarian, etc.) as enemies of nature. The prevailing logic of “beauty” is these wide green landscapes, characterized by well-organized vegetation, as commonly shown in artistic artworks. Not just that. “Cleanness” has also been associated with modernism. Only countries that can dispose of rubbish can call themselves modern. Cyclist-friendly roads, electric modes of transportation, green parks, and green energy-powered infrastructures are just a few of the factors used to measure a city’s sustainability, all of which are aimed to produce zero waste. However, due to the difficulty in totally eradicating urban and industrial waste, it is frequently collected and disposed of in areas “remote” from those frequented by dominant socioeconomic groups. The similar approach might be taken with refugees and migrants who are kept in receiving centres in provinces remote from metropolitan areas while their status is determined. Or, more specifically, the transportation of European garbage to Southern countries, such as Italy, which sends its plastic waste to Turkey and Eastern Europe, ferrous waste to India and South-East Asia, and electrical and automobile waste to Africa (La Repubblica inquiry, 2021). Finally, adopting “clean and green” politics creates a power dynamic among socioeconomic classes. The middle classes frequently relieve themselves of responsibility for urban environmental deterioration, shifting blame for pollution and rubbish to the urban poor and the many industrial sectors that employ them. As if refugees, migrants, women immigrant, and displaced people were the ones primarily responsible for urban ruin. Instead, it is frequently the latter who take on the hard duty of cleaning the city to keep it “clean and green” every day.