ABSTRACT

Ecological dimensions of Karl Marx's thought have recently generated vigorous debates about their meaning, adequacy and relevance. The nexus between ecological Marxism (EM) and ecological economics (EE) has largely fuelled these debates. Since the late 1980s, both schools have developed as diverse and fragmented movements. Undoubtedly, their respective evolution has been influenced by the gradual changes in their relations. Although dealing with the same general object of study—human relations with Nature—EM–EE's relationships have shifted from antagonism to a growing recognition of the need for a meaningful dialogue. Burkett (2006: 6), for example, wants to demonstrate that “Marxist class analysis can help answer many of the questions raised by ecological economists, [and] at the same time that the substantive agenda of ecological economics can enrich the materialist dimension of Marxism”. Spash and Ryan (2012: 1097–8) stress that “there certainly seems more to unite than divide those concerned about the impacts […] from the current economic system” and that “[s]ynthesising neo-Marxism and ecological economics can be seen as following up with theory the call for a Red-Green alliance”.