The Critical Relevance of Environmental History There may be crises in the humanities elsewhere, but environmental history is a notable exception. A child of the environmental movement, the discipline has, from the outset, been a cry for relevance and action (McNeill 2003; 1987; Worster 1990). It’s practitioners have therefore been able to speak compellingly to the current human and planetary predicament, and they have done so in a variety of ways, reflecting the field’s interdisciplinary roots, which include not only history, but geography, ecology, and earth and planetary sciences. Research in environmental history has made significant contributions to each of these disciplines, and in doing so, has addressed many compelling scientific and policy questions. I would like to argue, however, that the “utility” of the field lies equally in its humanistic roots. With its methodological emphasis on deep historical and ideographic understanding, and its analytical commitment to reflexivity and critical evaluation, it carefully examines the core assumptions underlying scientific postulations, the pronouncement of experts, the policy agendas of nation states as they relate to environment and development, and the claims made by environmentalist advocates. This is the critical relevance of environmental history. Interrogating Crises There are many ways to illustrate the importance of the discipline’s commitment to reflexivity, and this short essay explores two of them. The first of these is the idea of crisis