**Bioregionalism** is a political theory that proposes division of government based on ecological [[Boundaries]] as opposed to arbitrary ones. Central to this [[Philosophy MOC|philosophy]] is the concept of "a terrain of [[Consciousness]]," that we inhabit and evolve in cognitive environments as well as physical ones, and that these environments are intimately connected, if not the same. The theory was popularized (not invented) by [Peter Berg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Berg_(bioregionalist)), who emphasized that the final component of defining a bioregion was through the emergent social and cultural characteristics of the people living within its ecological constraints, determined "through human recognition of the realities of living-in-place."[^1] Such recognition historically formed the spiritual practices of a highly localized [[Community]] ([[all religions have an ecological context]]), and may today take a more intentional form, such as that discussed in [[Ecoregional Druidry]], which uses [[Phenology]] and [[Astrology|astrology]] to develop a personalized [[Mythology]]. [[adult stage theory]] provides a model of psychological evolution in which a [[adult stage theory#Stage 4 Systems, Dualism, Rational|rational stage]] of development entails the recognition of contradictions within a system. One contradiction of American democracy is that regionally similar communities may need to appeal to separate governments to resolve similar issues. Bioregionalism, in contrast, bases policy decisions on ecological contexts. In this regard, it relies on the [[principle of subsidiarity]] for effective governance. A bioregional framework may be an evolution of organizational political psychology, resulting from a transition from a rational to [[adult stage theory#Stage 5 Fluid, Polyism, Post-rational|post-rational]] mode of thinking. [^1]: Berg, P. (1991). Bioregional Cultural Awareness. In _Proceedings of the Symposium on Biodiversity of Northwestern California, Santa Rosa, California_. [full text](https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d00276599c&seq=1) ## Thoughts #### 2023-09-29 Contemplating the corporate model of enclosure and extraction as it relates to the notion of porosity in [[Complex Adaptive Systems]] boundaries, and a similar discussion of porosity in [[Range - David Epstein]]. Perhaps the issue I have with [[Capitalism]] is not the perspective itself but the attached belief of exclusion when it come to land (though mineral rights challenge this). Private [[property]] is not treated as porous, it is treated as hermetically sealed against an undesirable event. How to create porous property rights? This ties into gender debate. > [!quote] Achille Mbembe > The nation-state is contingent: It is not imperative or necessary. It wasn’t always there, and nothing says it will always be there.