
Becoming Ecological: An Expedition into Community Psychology
Kelly's 2006 volume is not a single treatise but a curated intellectual autobiography: thirteen of his own publications from 1968 to 2002, each reintroduced with new commentary explaining the context in which it was written, plus four contemporary essays. The spine is Kelly's ecological metaphor for community psychology—four principles (interdependence, cycling of resources, adaptation, succession) derived from field biology and applied to social settings. The book argues that community psychologists must understand how persons and environments mutually shape each other, and that research methods must be congruent with the culture of a place, requiring trust relationships and self-knowledge.
Key Details
Key Insights — Read in 10 Minutes
What are Kelly's four ecological principles, and how do they guide community psychology practice?
Kelly's four principles, first articulated in his 1968 paper 'Toward an Ecological Conception of Preventive Interventions,' are: (1) interdependence—functions within a social unit are mutually dependent, so interventions must consider repercussions throughout the system; (2) cycling of resources—how human resources are developed and distributed in a community; (3) adaptation—the environment shapes styles of coping and adaptation; and (4) succession—social settings evolve over time, and interventions must account for existing systemic change. These principles, drawn by analogy from field biology, orient the community psychologist toward understanding settings rather than treating individuals in isolation. They are not a formula but a lens: they prompt questions about what a proposed intervention will disrupt, what resources it will cycle, and whether it fits the developmental stage of the setting.
What does Kelly mean by 'ecological thinking,' and what are its four qualities?
In a 2010 article, Kelly distilled ecological thinking into four qualities: first, an emphasis on the interdependencies of persons and social environments; second, research methodologies that are congruent with the culture of place; third, the requirement that community psychologists establish trust relationships; and fourth, the recognition that understanding a community means learning about oneself. This framework makes the ecological perspective as much an epistemology as a method—a way of knowing that refuses to separate the researcher from the researched, or the individual from the setting. The fourth quality is particularly distinctive: self-knowledge is not a preliminary to inquiry but integral to it.
How does Becoming Ecological relate to Kelly's earlier work, and why is it structured as a retrospective?
The volume brings together thirteen of Kelly's publications spanning 1968 to 2002, each preceded by new commentary explaining why the ideas were salient at the time and how they remain timely. This retrospective structure is itself an ecological act: Kelly treats his own intellectual development as embedded in historical and institutional contexts. He introduces the work by connecting his personal experiences—his biography—to his scholarly choices, arguing that lived experience is a legitimate source of theoretical insight. The book concludes with a summing-up section and four new essays on theory, inquiry, practice, and education. The effect is less a compilation than an argument for a particular way of being a community psychologist.
What distinguishes Kelly's ecological approach from George Albee's primary prevention framework in community psychology?
Both Kelly and Albee were founders of community psychology and committed to prevention, but their emphases differ significantly. Albee's framework is fundamentally political and causal: psychopathology arises from toxic social conditions like poverty and exploitation, and prevention requires redistributing power. Kelly's ecological approach is more descriptive and contextual: it focuses on understanding the interdependent relationships between persons and settings, the cycling of resources, and the adaptation of behavior to environmental demands. Where Albee identifies an enemy (exploitation) and a remedy (social change), Kelly offers a lens for reading settings and designing interventions that fit local culture and existing dynamics. The two approaches are complementary but distinct in tone and method.
What role does biography play in Kelly's ecological epistemology?
Biography is not merely background in Kelly's work but a methodological commitment. In Becoming Ecological, he begins each previously published essay with commentary connecting the original context to his own life experience, and the book opens with an autobiographical section titled 'Roots and Varied Soils for Ecological Inquiry'. Edison Trickett's afterword reflects on this, describing how Kelly's ecological perspective was rooted in critical life events and chance encounters with diversity. Kelly's argument, implicit throughout, is that the researcher's positionality is not a contaminant to be controlled but a resource for understanding—that learning about a community and learning about oneself are inseparable activities. This stance challenges conventional positivist assumptions about objectivity in social research.
How does the succession principle apply to community interventions, and why does it matter?
The succession principle holds that social environments, like biological communities, change over time—they have histories and developmental trajectories. For community psychologists, this means assessing the direction and rate of systemic change already occurring in a setting before designing an intervention. An intervention that ignores succession risks being either redundant (duplicating existing change) or disruptive (interfering with natural adaptation). Kelly's research on high school environments with varying rates of student exchange illustrated this: high-exchange settings demanded different coping strategies and produced different patterns of leadership utilization than stable settings. The principle alerts practitioners to the time dimension of settings, which static models of intervention overlook.
Show 1 more insights
What criticisms or limitations of the ecological metaphor should readers keep in mind?
The ecological metaphor has been productive but is not without risks. Drawing analogies from field biology to social settings can obscure crucial differences: human communities have language, culture, and reflexive self-understanding that ecosystems do not. The metaphor can also naturalize existing social arrangements, treating adaptation to present conditions as inherently good when those conditions may be unjust. Kelly himself acknowledged that the implications of the cycling-of-resources principle for social systems were not well explicated. And the insistence on learning about oneself as part of understanding a community, while ethically attractive, offers little guidance on how to handle disagreements between a researcher's self-understanding and a community's norms. The book is best read as an invitation to ecological thinking, not a closed system.
Wealthy Psyche is an intellectual archive. We do not host, distribute, or sell book copies — physical or digital. We provide structured knowledge to help you think better, faster.





