Environmentalism in the United States

Changing Conceptions of Activism

Elizabeth Bomberg, David Schlosberg

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781317996149
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Environmentalism – defined here as activism aimed at protecting the environment or improving its condition – is undergoing significant change in the United States. Under attack from the current administration and direct questioning from its own ranks, environmentalism in the US is at a crossroads. This special issue will explore the changing patterns of and challenges to environmentalism in the contemporary US. More specifically, it will examine the following dynamics:

· the re-conceptualisation of core ideas and strategies defining US environmentalism;

· questions of identity and relations with other advocacy groups (including labour, global justice and women's groups);

· institutional change (especially the shift away from regulatory policies and approaches);

· the expanding arenas of activism, to both above and below the state;

· environmentalists' response to Bush administration policies and priorities.

This book was previously published as a special issue of Environmental Politics.

Perspectives on American environmentalism

David Schlosberg and Elizabeth Bomberg

Environmentalism – defined broadly here as activism aimed at protecting the environment or improving its condition – is facing significant challenges in the United States (US). Confronted with new, enormous environmental risks, facing fierce opposition from a two term Bush administration, and accused – from within its own ranks – of a death-like lack of vision, stagnation and shortsightedness, modern US environmentalism appears to be in rough if not fatal condition. This book explores the challenges to environmentalism in the contemporary US. It suggests that for a corpse, the American environmental movement has been quite energetic the past few years. From the growth of state and local groups, to the development of a variety of alliances and approaches, to critiques of the federal government's lack of policies and competence, to participation on the international stage, environmentalism in the US remains very much alive, active, and vibrant. Clearly, American environmentalism is not dead, nor does it need to be put down in order for something else to take its place. The grandiose claim to the contrary made by political public relations specialists Shellenberger and Nordhaus (2004), while spurring a much-needed era of reflection, was simply myopic. We thank them not for killing off environmentalism, but for prodding us to rethink it (if not always in the way that they insist we should).

In any event, American environmentalism has never been a single entity, and could not be put to death so easily. Importantly, the ‘environmental movement’ to which we refer includes not only the professional, mainstream interest groups focused on national environmental policy, but also the multitude of additional groups, organisations, and networks – from mainstream to environmental justice to radical environmentalisms – at the local, state, regional, and global level. It is an incredibly varied set of networks of people and organisations with a variety of origins, ideas, discourses, structures, strategies and tactics.¹ These ideas, structures, and tactics are constantly reviewed, rethought and revised in their particular contexts, as individuals, organisations, and larger networked movements take stock of goals and accomplishments – or the lack thereof. That process continues. Certainly, as many critics have noted for years, some of the larger mainstream environmental groups, based in Washington, DC and focused on the regulatory arena, tend to lose sight of the big picture, and the interests and passions of various parts of the public. That neglect is illustrated most recently by their attempt to address climate change with a concentration on measuring parts-per-million of various pollutants. But focusing on a singular weakness to declare that an entire movement should die is like pushing someone with a cough into the grave. More fruitful, surely, is to reflect, analyse and reconceptualise the status quo and the development of new tactics, strategies and priorities. That is precisely the aim of this set of essays.

Through this set of reflections, critiques and perspectives, we find American environmentalism(s) that are, indeed, as limited as those traditionally the subject of criticism. But we also find parts of the movement that are flexible, attentive to context, innovative, and unpredictable, and which have developed surprising and important forms, discourses, and alliances. Environmentalism in the US is subject to tremendous challenges – including a federal political system that is not only adversarial, partisan, and fragmented, but also – at times – corrupt and incompetent by design. US environmentalism also faces the difficulty of articulating a message that is more thoroughly engaging and able to move beyond its key constituency of traditional environmental activists. And it faces its own unwillingness to acknowledge and incorporate the wide diversity of discourses that could help build and sustain broad cooperation and alliances across its differences. The message gained through these essays is that these challenges can be attacked and surmounted, but only through new conceptualisations and framings, new alliances and arenas, and new forms of movement agency. Our authors present examples of these innovative ways of reflecting and acting already occurring throughout American environmentalism.

This volume will thus not be a lament for the loss of a movement, and it will not be a call to a singular strategy to ‘break through’ to a perceived ideal form of environmentalism. Instead we reflect on a variety of conceptions of, and strategies for, environmentalisms in the American context. Unlike Shellenberger and Nordhaus, we look beyond the adversarial battleground of interest group politics based in Washington, DC; this set of reflections attempts to be much more inclusive in its recognition of the richness of environmentalism in the US. Importantly, the authors here examine the social and political context of American environmentalisms, as well as the variety of discourses that make up the movement and frame environmental issues in diverse ways. Climate change and how to respond will be a recurring theme, but the authors here also address a range of environmental issues and movement groups, from collaborative lands management, to environmental justice, to industrial and energy policy, to groups struggling with radical tactics in the post-9/11 era.

Although intentionally wide-ranging, the essays here all explore three key themes in environmental activism and organisation in the United States. Central is the conceptualisation of environmentalism itself – either proposed or occurring – including discourses, strategies, priorities and, especially, issue framing. The best thing to come out of the ‘Death of …’ argument is further discussion of how the environmental movement in the US frames both the issues at hand and their own discursive responses to them. Second, our authors touch on a changing environmental mobilization and expanding arenas of activism, from the traditional adversarial interest group politics, to collaborative environmental initiatives, to new alliances, to the rethinking of radical strategies. Finally, our contributors discuss the development and refinement of new forms of agency outside of the mainstream institutional structures. We briefly lay out the broad themes here, before introducing each piece individually.

Conceptualisation

How environmentalists frame their message, what discourses they engage, and how salient this language is to the general public is a central concern of this collection. Phil Brick and Gregg Cawley argue eloquently for the recognition of the fundamental importance of framing and discourse. They demonstrate that the environmental movement needs to recognise that the way ideas are framed is key in developing both issue salience and the possibility of new positions and alliances. In addition, it is not just the substance of the frame but also the way that frames are communicated that is crucial. John Meyer, for example, analyses how the environmental movement embodies different discursive attitudes – some paternalistic and others more populist. He also shows how the way the ideas and frames are communicated by environmental groups can impact their salience with the public. Both contributions examine not just the rationale for, but also the tools necessary to expand public involvement and coalition building to achieve environmental goals.

Also analysing the salience of frames, David Schlosberg and Sara Rinfret discuss what recent shifts in public discourse have enabled conceptions of ecological modernisation (EM), long popular in Europe, to finally become engaging in the American context. Noting the clear limitations to the EM frame, especially its lack of attention to consumption and the public good, their aim is to examine what allowed the discourse to take root in the US. Giovanna Di Chiro reminds us that, in communities most impacted by environmental and social injustices, salience comes with a connection to everyday life and the struggle for functioning communities.

One of the framing insights to emerge through these essays as a whole is a recognition that multiple frames are valid, and can be engaged – and engaging – simultaneously. As Bill Chaloupka argues, we need to be open to what he calls ‘multinaturalism’, or the varied conceptions of the relationship between nature, science and politics. Such a pluralist conception comes from understanding the mixed and contradictory relationship between environmentalism and modernist discourse. A central lesson of this volume is that the ongoing conceptualisation and development of issue frames and discourses, as well as their analysis, remain central to both the environmental movement and its examiners.

Mobilisation

Shellenberger and Nordhaus (2004) argue that the working model of DC-based organisations – participating as interest groups in adversarial negotiations on policies – is to blame for the lack of success of American environmentalism and its failure to mobilise and engage the wider public.² However, there are many forms of, and groups within, American environmentalism that have long embraced tactics, strategies, and frames outside of the Beltway mentality and practice. The diverse forms, and targets, of mobilisation in the US context is examined throughout this collection. A number of our contributors discuss political mobilisation at various levels, from the local, to the state and regional, and international – all in addition to, or beyond, the focus at the federal level. In American environmentalism, as in American politics more generally, the arena of action is broad and deep. Meyer discusses the richness and success of collaborative environmental groups in the Western US, and, similarly, Brick and Cawley discuss the importance of local and regional groups in implementing biodiversity plans at a time when the Bush administration's agenda at the national level made the ‘conservation ledger appear rather depressing’. Gary Bryner's piece suggests that environmental groups' success on climate change (such as it is) is found almost entirely at state or local levels. Di Chiro explores parts of the environmental justice movement that thoroughly engage political, economic, and social life at the local level, and Vanderheiden discusses the role of ecotage in mostly local practices and decisions. Finally, Di Chiro, Vanderheiden, and Schlosberg/Rinfret discuss alliances – both actual and discursive – that reach beyond American borders.

The point here is that environmental mobilisation in the US is about more than just federal-level action, and it remains rich, active, and very much alive in a variety of arenas.

Agency

Recent – and not so recent – critics of the environmental movement in the US have lambasted the bias, the lack of creativity, and the professionalism (as opposed to impassioned amateurism) in the mainstream environmental groups (Shellenberger and Nordhaus 2004, Gottlieb 2005). In essence, they argue environmental groups have become like any other institutionalised interest group, defined by structure and devoid of independent agency. Others, however, have pointed out that there is much more to environmental activism than this type of rote professional and institutionalised participation. In this collection, Chaloupka explains the need to move beyond the political structures and frames brought to us by liberal modernisation, away from ledger and interest group politics and the resentment it engenders, and away from the single-minded task of bringing other aspects and structures of modernism – legalism and science – into a liberal political process. Taking on the limits of modern liberal politics from a different angle, Di Chiro argues that environmental justice, for example, is not about policy adversarialism, but rather a different sort of agency focused on the social reproduction of communities, and the ability of individuals to participate in, and contribute to, this functioning.³ The adversary is not simply the politician on the other side of the aisle, or the lobbyist arguing against you, but more broadly those institutionalised practices that threaten the everyday life of the community.

Many of the authors here discuss the development, and importance, of coalitions and alliances themselves as an important form of political activism and agency. For Brick and Cawley, the formation of such alliances is the result of the development of salient frames; for Meyer, they are the product of a populist and participatory politics that is not single-mindedly focused on influencing federal institutions. And for Schlosberg and Rinfret, alliance building on an issue like climate change is a way to strengthen and expand the discussion of policies beyond weak managerialist responses and into stronger and more thoroughly reflexive politics.

Still, while the resentment of, and move beyond, standard liberal institutional politics is both necessary and occurring, Gary Bryner's essay reminds us of the power of institutional structures (especially interest group politics and the adversarialism in engenders) to shape agency. Thus, as much as our contributors discuss the limits of existing federal policy-making structures and practices, engagement with those structures and practices is still very much a necessary part of the political life of movements.

Outline of the book

We start with three papers tracking the (re)conceptualization of core ideas and strategies defining US environmentalism. Phil Brick and Gregg Cawley's essay on ‘Producing political climate change: the hidden life of US environmentalism’ is, as the authors note, not about movement revitalisation through more engaging tactics, nor is it about coalition building to expand relationships and links. Instead, they focus on the way that the environmental movement frames issues in ways that enable the public to interpret current events in an environmental way, and in a way that brings support. Beyond the ledger model of who gets what, this approach, they argue, captures most of the actual work that movements do.

Brick and Cawley address the importance of ideas, arguing that movements have members by virtue of the fit of ideas. Here, they follow the work of Tesh (2000) on the influence of environmental movements on conceptions of science. The hidden life of a movement is in ideas, consciousness, values, and individual behaviour, as well as the creation of what Brick and Cawley call a ‘discursive commons’. Movements need to ‘focus on revising ideas and meanings as a way to make new/different positions possible’.

This focus on ideas and meanings is linked to the development of coalitions and alliances. Such relationships don't just happen, but are, following Hajer (1995) discursively constructed. Social movements ‘thrive in the context of discursive openings’; creativity is key. Brick and Cawley call for the development of mutually attractive ideas before coalitions are possible. In essence, discursive creativity leads to a discursive commons, which then enables coalition building. (This process is also inherent in the later essays by Di Chiro on environmental justice and social reproduction, as well as in the Schlosberg/ Rinfret discussion of what was required for ecological modernisation to take hold in the US.)

Coming full circle, the argument of Brick and Cawley is that creative, commons-building discourse(s) then reshape policy discourse and impact ledger politics. Environmental frames have the potential to lead to ‘conversion’ actions. Brick and Cawley discuss the environmental movements' use of the terms biodiversity and climate change – both of which have been increasingly successful. Climate change, for example, is a ‘discursive bridge’ which connects a range of ideas and events. Certainly, the growth of these discursive frames comes at the same time as frustrating losses in the realm of adversarial ledger politics, at least at the federal level; but such frames lay the groundwork for broader change in both public discourse and later policies. It should also be noted that the framework certainly has impacted state and local policies, in a way that has moved beyond the party...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• 1 Perspectives on American environmentalism
• 2 Producing political climate change: the hidden life of US environmentalism
• 3 Populism, paternalism and the state of environmentalism in the US
• 4 The environmentalist: ‘what is to be done?’
• 5 Ecological modernisation, American style
• 6 Living environmentalisms: coalition politics, social reproduction, and environmental justice
• 7 Radical environmentalism in an age of antiterrorism
• 8 Failure and opportunity: environmental groups in US climate change policy
• 9 US environmentalism in comparative perspective
• Index