Ecofeminism as Environmental Ethics: Development,
Knowledge, and Survival in Vandana Shiva’s Staying Alive
Arup Kumar Mondal,
Assistant
Professor,
Department of
English,
Nabagram Hiralal
Paul College,
Nabagram, Konnagar,
Hooghly, West Bengal.
Abstract: The escalating ecological crises of the contemporary
world have compelled scholars within environmental humanities to critically
reassess dominant models of development and human–nature relations. Ecofeminism,
as an interdisciplinary theoretical framework, offers a powerful lens to
interrogate the intertwined exploitation of nature and marginalized human
communities under patriarchal and capitalist systems. This article presents a
critical and theoretically grounded reading of Vandana Shiva’s Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and
Development, positioning the text as a foundational intervention in
postcolonial ecofeminist discourse. Drawing upon ecofeminist philosophy,
environmental humanities, and postcolonial theory, the study examines Shiva’s
critique of reductionist science, Western developmentalism, and capitalist
patriarchy, while foregrounding women’s subsistence knowledge and
biodiversity-based practices as alternative ecological epistemologies. The article
argues that Shiva articulates an ethics of survival rooted in ecological
plurality, care, and sustainability, challenging anthropocentric and
extractivist paradigms. Despite critical debates surrounding essentialism in
ecofeminism, Staying Alive
remains a vital text for reimagining environmentally just and ethically
sustainable futures.
Keywords: Ecofeminism; Environmental Humanities; Vandana Shiva;
Sustainable Development; Gender and Ecology
Environmental crisis has become one of the most urgent
and defining conditions of the contemporary world. Climate change, biodiversity
loss, deforestation, soil depletion, water scarcity, and environmental
pollution have reached levels that threaten not only ecological balance but
also the material and cultural foundations of human societies. These crises
have increasingly revealed the inadequacy of dominant models of development
that prioritise economic growth, technological control, and market expansion
while marginalising ethical, cultural, and ecological considerations. As
environmental degradation intensifies, it has become evident that ecological
problems cannot be addressed solely through scientific innovation or policy
intervention; they demand a fundamental rethinking of the epistemological and
ideological frameworks that shape human relationships with nature.
In response to this situation, ecocriticism and
environmental humanities have emerged as significant interdisciplinary fields
that seek to understand environmental crises as complex cultural, historical,
and political phenomena. Environmental humanities emphasise that ecological
degradation is inseparable from systems of power, colonial histories,
capitalist economies, and dominant narratives of progress. Rather than treating
nature as an external object to be managed, this field foregrounds relational,
ethical, and justice-oriented perspectives on the environment.
Ecofeminism occupies a central position within this
interdisciplinary turn. By foregrounding gender as a crucial analytical
category, ecofeminism reveals how the domination of nature and the
subordination of women are interconnected processes produced by patriarchal
structures of power. Vandana Shiva’s Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and
Development stands as one of the most influential texts articulating this
insight from a postcolonial perspective. Written in the context of
development-induced ecological destruction in India, the text challenges
Western scientific rationality, capitalist development models, and epistemic
hierarchies that marginalise women’s ecological knowledge.
This article offers a theoretically dense and critically
engaged reading of Staying Alive, situating Shiva’s ecofeminism within
the broader framework of environmental humanities. It argues that Shiva’s work
goes beyond critique to articulate an ethics of survival grounded in
subsistence, biodiversity, and epistemic plurality. By engaging closely with
Shiva’s arguments alongside key ecofeminist and environmental humanities scholars,
the paper demonstrates the enduring relevance of Staying Alive for
contemporary debates on sustainability, environmental justice, and ethical
coexistence between humans and nature.
Ecofeminism emerged in the late twentieth century from
the convergence of feminist and environmental movements that recognised the
structural connections between social oppression and ecological destruction.
Early ecofeminist thinkers challenged the assumption that environmental issues
could be addressed without interrogating gendered power relations. Françoise
d’Eaubonne’s foundational insight that patriarchal societies simultaneously
exploit women and the natural world laid the groundwork for ecofeminist theory
(d’Eaubonne 13). Her argument foregrounded reproduction, ecology, and survival
as central political concerns rather than marginal issues.
Subsequent ecofeminist philosophers such as Karen J.
Warren and Val Plumwood developed this insight by examining the conceptual and
philosophical foundations of domination. Warren identifies “logic of
domination” as a central mechanism through which hierarchical
dualisms—man/woman, culture/nature, reason/emotion—are naturalised and
justified (Warren 46). Plumwood further critiques Western rationalism for
constructing nature and women as passive, inferior, and available for
exploitation, thereby legitimising ecological destruction and social
marginalisation (Plumwood 19).
Environmental humanities have expanded these critiques by
situating ecological crises within broader cultural and historical contexts.
Scholars in this field argue that environmental problems are not merely
technical failures but crises of meaning, imagination, and ethics. Dominant
narratives of progress, rooted in Enlightenment rationality and capitalist
expansion, frame nature as a resource to be mastered and controlled.
Ecofeminism contributes to this interdisciplinary project by exposing how these
narratives are gendered and by foregrounding alternative epistemologies rooted
in care, relationality, and sustainability.
Shiva’s ecofeminism is distinctive in its postcolonial
orientation. While much Western ecofeminist theory operates at the level of
philosophical abstraction, Staying Alive emerges from the lived
realities of ecological struggle in the Global South. This grounding enables
Shiva to expose how colonial histories and contemporary forms of global
capitalism intensify ecological degradation and social inequality, making her
work particularly relevant to environmental humanities.
A central argument in Staying Alive is Shiva’s
critique of modern science as a form of reductionist epistemology. Shiva
contends that dominant scientific rationality fragments complex ecological
systems into isolated parts that can be measured, controlled, and exploited.
This fragmentation, she argues, undermines the integrity of living systems and
obscures their interdependence (Shiva 22). Reductionist science thus becomes an
instrument of ecological violence rather than a neutral means of understanding
nature.
Vandana Shiva’s critique of modern science is grounded in
her rejection of reductionism as a dominant epistemological framework. She
argues that Western scientific rationality fragments ecological systems in ways
that legitimize control and exploitation rather than sustainability. As Shiva
observes, “Reductionist science is a source of violence against nature and
women insofar as it subjugates and dispossesses both” (Staying Alive
23). This statement encapsulates her central ecofeminist claim that
epistemology itself can become a mechanism of ecological and social domination.
By privileging abstraction and efficiency, reductionist science marginalizes
holistic and relational ways of knowing that have historically sustained
ecological balance.
Shiva further challenges the neutrality claimed by modern
development discourse by exposing its gendered and colonial foundations. She
asserts that “development has been a project of erasing women’s knowledge and
replacing it with a homogenized, centralized system of expertise” (Staying
Alive 10). This critique situates development not as a universal process of
progress but as a historically situated ideology that delegitimizes indigenous
and subsistence-based knowledge systems, particularly those maintained by
women. From an environmental humanities perspective, this argument foregrounds
the ethical consequences of epistemic hierarchies that privilege Western
scientific knowledge over local ecological wisdom.
Central to Shiva’s ecofeminism is her redefinition of
productivity and value. She explicitly rejects the market-driven notion that
equates production with profit, arguing instead that subsistence economies
sustain life itself. As she famously writes, “Women’s work in subsistence
economies produces life, not commodities” (Staying Alive 41). This
formulation radically disrupts dominant economic paradigms by foregrounding
care, reproduction, and ecological continuity as forms of productive labour.
Such a reconceptualization aligns ecofeminism with broader environmental
humanities efforts to rethink sustainability beyond economic growth models.
Shiva also critiques capitalist patriarchy for rendering
women’s ecological labour invisible. She notes that “the destruction of nature
and the marginalization of women are not accidental outcomes of development but
its essential features” (Staying Alive 5). This assertion underscores
her argument that environmental degradation and gender oppression are
structurally intertwined rather than coincidental. Development, in this sense,
emerges as a system that thrives on dispossession—of land, of biodiversity, and
of women’s agency.
Shiva articulates an alternative ecological ethic rooted
in survival rather than domination. Reflecting on grassroots environmental
movements, she emphasizes that “ecological movements led by women are movements
for the recovery of the feminine principle in nature and society” (Staying
Alive 38). While this claim has been critiqued for its potential
essentialism, it can also be read as a strategic political intervention that
highlights women’s historical roles in sustaining ecological life. Within
environmental humanities, such movements are increasingly understood as sites
where ethical, cultural, and ecological knowledge converge.
Shiva challenges the assumption that modern science is
universal, objective, and value-free. Instead, she situates scientific
knowledge within specific historical and cultural contexts shaped by
patriarchal and capitalist interests. By privileging quantification,
efficiency, and control, reductionist science aligns itself with development
models that prioritise economic growth over ecological sustainability.
Large-scale industrial projects, such as monoculture agriculture and dam
construction, exemplify this epistemological orientation.
From the perspective of environmental humanities, Shiva’s
critique highlights the ethical dimensions of knowledge production. Scientific
practices are embedded in power relations that determine which forms of
knowledge are legitimised and which are dismissed as unscientific or irrational.
Indigenous and subsistence-based knowledge systems, often maintained by women,
are marginalised because they do not conform to dominant scientific paradigms.
In Staying Alive, Shiva foregrounds women’s
ecological knowledge as a counter-epistemology rooted in lived experience,
observation, and care. This knowledge is holistic rather than fragmentary,
relational rather than instrumental. By valorising such epistemologies, Shiva
calls for a reorientation of knowledge itself—away from mastery and toward
responsibility, reciprocity, and ecological continuity.
Shiva’s critique of reductionist science is inseparable
from her critique of development as a form of capitalist patriarchy. She
rejects the dominant narrative that equates development with progress, arguing
instead that development often produces what she terms “maldevelopment”—a
process that undermines ecological balance and social justice (Shiva 5).
Development projects frequently displace subsistence economies, disrupt local
ecosystems, and concentrate power and resources in the hands of elites.
Industrial agriculture provides a particularly revealing
example of this process. The replacement of diverse cropping systems with
monocultures dependent on chemical fertilisers and pesticides leads to soil
degradation, loss of biodiversity, and increased vulnerability to ecological
shocks. Shiva argues that such practices disproportionately affect women, who
traditionally play central roles in seed preservation, food production, and
resource management.
Capitalist patriarchy renders women’s labour invisible by
defining productivity in terms of market exchange. Subsistence work, which
sustains life and ecological continuity, is excluded from economic valuation.
Maria Mies reinforces this critique by demonstrating how capitalist
accumulation depends upon the exploitation of unpaid reproductive and
subsistence labour, much of which is performed by women (Mies and Shiva 14).
Environmental humanities scholarship underscores the
significance of these critiques by revealing how economic systems shape
environmental outcomes. Shiva’s analysis exposes development as a culturally
and ethically charged project that privileges certain lives and landscapes
while sacrificing others in the name of progress.
One of the most important contributions of Staying
Alive lies in its revaluation of subsistence practices as sophisticated
forms of ecological rationality. Shiva challenges the assumption that
subsistence economies are inefficient or backward, arguing instead that they are
oriented toward sustainability, resilience, and survival. Her assertion that
“women’s work in subsistence economies produces life, not commodities” disrupts
dominant economic frameworks that equate value with profit (Shiva 41).
Subsistence knowledge is embedded in specific ecological
contexts and cultural traditions. Practices such as seed saving, mixed
cropping, and sustainable forestry reflect a deep understanding of ecological
interdependence and long-term sustainability. By maintaining biodiversity,
subsistence practices enhance resilience to environmental change and reduce
dependence on external inputs.
Critics have raised concerns that ecofeminist
celebrations of women’s ecological roles risk essentialism. Bina Agarwal
cautions that such narratives may romanticise women’s relationship with nature
and obscure inequalities related to class, caste, and region (Agarwal 121).
These critiques are crucial for preventing reductive interpretations of
ecofeminism.
However, Shiva’s work can be read as emphasising
historical and material conditions rather than biological determinism. Her
focus on women’s ecological knowledge arises from their social positioning
within subsistence economies, not from an inherent or universal feminine
essence. In this sense, Staying Alive articulates a contextual,
political ecofeminism grounded in lived realities.
Ecofeminism in Staying Alive is inseparable from
ecological resistance movements. Shiva draws upon struggles such as the Chipko
movement to illustrate how women’s collective action challenges environmental
destruction and corporate exploitation. These movements exemplify what she
describes as a politics of survival, grounded in the defence of life-sustaining
resources against extractivist development.
Such forms of resistance challenge dominant notions of
power by prioritising care, responsibility, and interdependence. From an
environmental humanities perspective, these movements represent alternative
narratives of human–nature relationships that resist commodification and control.
They also demonstrate how ecological ethics emerge from lived experiences
rather than abstract theoretical constructs.
By linking theory to praxis, Shiva situates ecofeminism
within everyday struggles for environmental justice. Staying Alive thus bridges
academic critique and grassroots activism, reinforcing the idea that ecological
thought must remain connected to material realities and social movements.
Within contemporary environmental humanities, Shiva’s
work continues to resonate in debates on sustainability, decolonisation, and
ecological justice. Her critique of genetic engineering, intellectual property
regimes, and corporate control over seeds anticipates current concerns about
biopiracy, food sovereignty, and ecological autonomy.
Environmental humanities scholars argue that sustainable
futures require epistemic plurality and ethical transformation. Shiva’s
ecofeminism contributes to this discourse by challenging anthropocentric and
Eurocentric models of sustainability that prioritise technological fixes over
social justice. Her emphasis on biodiversity and local knowledge offers an
alternative vision of sustainability grounded in coexistence rather than
domination.
By situating ecofeminism within environmental humanities,
Staying Alive expands the scope of ecological thought beyond
disciplinary boundaries. It invites dialogue between science, ethics, cultural
studies, sociology, and grassroots movements, reinforcing the interdisciplinary
ethos that defines environmental humanities.
Staying Alive
remains a foundational text in ecofeminist and environmental humanities
scholarship. Vandana Shiva’s critique of reductionist science and capitalist
patriarchy exposes the structural roots of ecological and social injustice. By
revaluing subsistence practices and biodiversity, she articulates an ethics of
survival that challenges dominant models of development and progress.
While debates surrounding essentialism continue to shape
ecofeminist theory, Shiva’s work offers a powerful framework for understanding
contemporary ecological crises. In an era marked by environmental precarity, Staying
Alive urges a reimagining of human–nature relationships grounded in care,
responsibility, and ecological plurality. As such, ecofeminism, as articulated
by Shiva, remains an indispensable perspective within environmental humanities
and a vital resource for envisioning just and sustainable futures.
Works Cited
Agarwal, Bina. “The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India.” Feminist Studies, vol. 18, no. 1, 1992, pp. 119–158.
d’Eaubonne, Françoise. Feminism or Death. Translated by Betsy Wing, Verso, 1974.
Mies, Maria, and Vandana Shiva. Ecofeminism. Zed Books, 1993.
Plumwood, Val. Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. Routledge, 1993.
Shiva, Vandana. Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development. Zed Books, 1988.
Warren, Karen J. Ecofeminist Philosophy: A Western Perspective on What It Is and Why It Matters. Rowman & Littlefield, 2000.