Environmental issues are based on the math of human capitalism, where material effects are not really considered beyond the consumer. Because of our choice of materials, much of what we create doesn’t have a counterpart to return it to a natural cycle of consumption. It would seem like we either need to use materials that can be cycled back or come up with new ways to allow nature to consume the things we create. For a lot of things, though, it may be too late. The only recourse is finding ways to re-use the material products that can’t be cycled.

I think the potential value of RCT in this case is to better understand their path of discovery to their insights about women, and try to apply the same to the ecosystem. The power differential is there, although the methods will likely be very different.

Thinking about the value in networks is, I think, an important concept for sustainability. In permaculture design, for example, useful connections and links between elements are the keys to a productive system. The yields or products of every organism should match with the needs of other organisms, which is how nature achieves zero-waste. Such systemic thinking of course applies just as well to the social. I am really interested to hear your ideas for bringing relational-cultural theory to bear on some SIDRG projects…