Is There Something Distinctive about Environmental Social Movements - Essay Example

?Currently, a trend has emerged where people across the globe are more concerned about their activities and the effects they have on the environment.Many groups that advocate for “green living” have gained many grounds in sensitizing the public on the need to be more courteous in dealing with environmental matters. Consequently, economic and industrial activities are gradually shifting to a line with the growing trends in adopting environmental friendly technologies that ensure environmental sustainability. These include reducing the amounts of pollutants to the environment, using environmental friendly and biodegradable materials and reducing dumping of wastes through recycling. Today, many people are enjoying clean water, protected forests, catchment areas and fresh air even in industrial areas that were previously under heavy pollution all thanks to the environmental activism. It follows that environmentalism today has gained much success in encouraging people to adopt more environmental friendly products, methods and reducing dumping of wastes in the environment in advocating for “green living”. In the last two decades, many organizations and activism groups have spent millions of dollars in fighting against global warming in industrial and economic activities (Shellenberger & Nordhaus, 2010). As a result, environmentalism has become a common topic in forming political ideologies to support different efforts and goals towards “saving the world” (Goodwin & Jasper, 2003). With these dynamics and the great success that environmentalism has achieved today, the report will investigate the unique aspects of social environmentalist groups and their approach to environmentalism. The paper will include examining how different social movements in developed and developing world have managed to advocate for environmentalism. It is vital to investigate the approaches used by both the past and current environmentalists, in understanding how their different approaches influenced environmentalism and the role of class and political processes in informing discussions of different social green movements. Class in the current society has the capacity to mobilise political resources and constructing an environmental discourse that may lead to success of their ideologies. The report will also analyse environmentalism by comparing social environment movements and their performance (Ray, 2009). Using distinct cases in both developing and developed countries, the report will indicate some major differences that characterise green social movements and their approach towards environmentalism. Generally, the report will show that there are greatly varying social movements across the globe mainly driven by social, political, academic or other interests towards environmentalism. Class and cognitive knowledge Class and cognitive knowledge are two aspects that have manifested in environmentalism, especially in developing countries. Knowledge has great relation to both economic and social class of people and since the aspect of class is critical in determining how different people will mobilise political resources, it affects how people construct knowledge about environmental issues (Forsyth, 2001). This means that in both developing and developed countries, the reality of having different classes of people with different powers to mobilise political decisions may result in individualised socialism, where different people interpret environmentalism depending on individual benefits. However, there are growing academic activities across the globe in consolidating a united front towards environmentalism. The first argument in the academic cycles is that environmentalism has to be a continued process that includes all despite their political ideologies in facilitating the growth of green social movements (Forsyth, 2001). Another approach is that most academicians view environmentalism as a global problem, and that the threat will have equal effects to all despite their social of political standing. Bostrom (2010) further suggests that environmental social groups in some cases use cognitive practices in influencing others to join the social movements. Thus, the groups are viewed as liberal but necessary political entities that aid in developing of social societies (Mcadam & Snow, 2010). Considering the example of Thailand, social movements have increased their penetration in the society over a few recent years by recruiting a wide range of political, social and economic actors in the country, while still challenging the development patterns based on individualism and maintenance of the status quo in the society (Scales & Cooper, 2012). In the case of Thailand as seen from the social movements, they have a unique approach in that while they do support the political class, they are still an opposing force that challenges development trends that do not adhere to environmentalism. Globalization is responsible for the sprouting of numerous social movements globally to challenge development trends in both developed and developing world. Globalisation is responsible for the increased social movements that cannot be classified into any class, but affect all equally across the globe. The result is that environmentalism is more equivocal in the social movements of our time in response to globalisation forces (Tilly, 2004). This explains the view of some academicians that environmentalism issues are global in nature and pose an equal danger to the society in general. In other words, social movements in this case become distinctive in trying to solve a problem that was the same in the past as it is in the present, though in different approaches, all which are opposed to the nature of developments in the society (Goodwin & Jasper, 2003). In response to these developments and problems, environmentalism resurgence is marked explicitly in global terms. For instance, considering the effects of the Rio UN conference of 1992 that sounded an alarm over the continued ozone depletion, social environmental movements were formed towards curbing global warming. Social movements have assumed different approaches to environmentalism that can be understood using several theories. These are the theory on mobilisation of resources, the theory on collective behaviour and the new communal movements (Axtmann, 2003). The collective approach theory by Talcott Parson is one of the oldest theories. The theory tries to explain changes in societal structures and the way that these changes result to social movements in challenging inequality in the society. The collective behaviour theory on the other hand is a liberal or revolutionary movement that results from social changes, such as from the effects of urbanization. For example, Nixon (2011) in his “slow violence theory” explains that while hard-capitalism ignores the severe effects it has on the environment, poor people are outraged in that the ecosystems on which they depend on for life sustenance are gradually being depleted through capitalism. The poor continuously suffer at the hands of those wielding considerable political influence. Encroachment into areas that sustain their lives results in increased social conflicts that emanate from continued deprivation of their economical and life sustaining methods by capitalist developments. Porrit (1984) explains that ecologists should not be taken to mean the same as environmentalism since the former is not a political ideology. The resource mobilisation theory is the most recent one and the basis on which to approach the political process. In this approach, the success of different movements is realised due to the ingenious tactics used to form political alliances among political players that create more successful and powerful social movements (Scales & Cooper, 2012). The distinctiveness in this case is that social movements deal with several events at the same period. Most current movements view social movements as indicating and at the same time dealing with cases of environmental issues in the modern society (Goodwin & Jasper, 2003). The earlier social movements were mainly based on division of labour from industries and the need to have equal distribution of resources. On the contrary, the new social movements mainly manifest in a society that result to pressuring a hardened government that controls their affairs and the increasing development of technologies in the post-industrial societies (Ray, 2009). The new social movements are not driven by material gains, in that they do not get their resources from parties and organisations. Consequently, the new social movements are created from areas of socialism, cultural reproduction of different cultures and social interaction. Therefore, most action identity movements and new social movements are much similar in that they act as an increasing opposition to social order, governance and administration. They are created in opposition to an administration with no regard to the identity of a society in an era where most social movements in post-industrial societies are becoming more elaborate than being described by either lower or upper class in the society (Goodwin & Jasper, 2013). New social movements are continuously being associated with certain social movements such as the feminist movement, gay rights, racial and environmental movements. The action identity social movements are a more complex form of social movements, though there are increasing concerns on whether the movements should be looked at as the current agents of change in the society, or an organization that advocates for activism (Tilly, 2004). In addition, most researchers have asserted that there is a growing link between the nature of social movements and developments in the society. The earlier movements were formed on the premise of conflict between property owners and the working class. On the contrary, the new movements show variations regarding social identity and the conflict of balancing between an effective civil society, and effects of social and political orders (Snow, Soule & Kriesi, 2007). For instance the 21st century, anarchism has embraced a strict ideology that the current environmental degradation is a manifestation of the destructive nature of capitalism and industrialism; the increasing will to power and develop degrades the essence of both people and nature (Curran, 2007). Due to increased educational levels and a radical tradition, the current environmentalism does not attract people similar to other social groups related to traditional radicalism, but most individuals are inspired by its promises that exalt humanity more than development, which is the principle idea behind environmentalism (Curran, 2007). Similarly, to achieve this end environmentalists do not rely on a single channel, but will use all available alliances and links to advocate for different issues. However, there are remarkable divisions and conflict comparing social movements in western and non-western countries based on their interests and the tactics employed in environmentalism, meaning that it is hard to have the same pattern manifesting across the varying geographical areas (Porta & Rucht, 2002). Democratic vs authoritarian movements Most green social movements are unique in that they have been blamed for exerting authoritativeness and unrealistic demands that may have no basis on the whims of reality. Many researchers agree that the environmental crisis in the current society is critical and no measures can be enough to solve the crisis urgently. This has further alienated the philosophy of “living a Green life” from the values held by pluralists and which are mostly linked to a democratic society (Dobson, 2007). Most green-political advocates have been on the receiving end due to their different approaches. Questions are asked on whether the new approach can actually be used to make the world better than the ones used by earlier liberals and socialists (Barry, 1996). For example, though there is an agreement on the danger of overpopulation to global resources as advocated in environmentalism, it is not practical that an urgent measure may be taken to deal with this issue. This leads to a perception that environmental social movements do make demands that are not compatible with democratic principles and do not balance the advocacy of such needs and the resulting outcomes to societal values (Dobson, 1999). While the earlier social movements were advocating for equal mobilisation of resources and equality in the society, which were practical and achievable goals, the current environmentalist movements use authoritative designs to call for impractical demands. The “green theory of value” concept as held in environmental authoritarianism is also a problem in that the concept considers something to be of value only when the item comes from natural processes than through an artificial process (Dobson, 1999). These assertions make anti-green campaigners to perceive green campaigns as being based on lies in the mentality of green thinking (Dobson, 1999). Moreover, most green environmentalists tend to value protests in dealing with the state. One criticism against these protests is that they portray environmental social movements in a negative light while dealing with the government in that all their activities may be construed to be against the state. For instance, when many green activists based in Manchester dressed as aliens and staged a mock protest as aliens on tourism in the area to see how Christmas shoppers curiously bought goods for happiness, they were making a political point (Doherty, 2001). The aim was to show how people are spending more on what they do not really need, which leads to over exploitation of resources to make such items disregarding the effects of such production to the environment. This authoritarian approach used by most green social movements is contrary to social democracy. Most green social movements are criticized on this basis. Activism in developing countries Social movements in Europe and North America have reshaped environmental science in a way that may not be conceived in other regions. Some researchers and activists have also contributed to this addition by forming judgments and collecting data that would change the face of activism today (Ruggiero & Montagne, 2008). On the other hand, the alliances made between middle class Non-governmental organisations and grassroots organisations in Philippines were more driven by NGO fears, shelving any poverty related issues in formulating environmental policies. The western mode of environmentalism has had a huge effect on the social movements in developing countries in Africa and other regions. The result is that the issue of addressing poverty related issues and issues related to women empowerment necessary in ensuring improved quality of life in the society are shelved from discussions. Similar discussions were rejected in India for being inclined towards imperialism in addressing how developing nations have to appear, contrary to how the Indian women would have wanted to be addressed (Forsyrth, 2001). Thailand is one of the best examples of developing countries that have a good history of social environmental movements such as the green agenda. Before the 1980s, the Society for the Conservation of National Treasures in Thailand was responsible for preserving the wildlife and the ancient ruins. The group consisted of educated people mostly in the urban areas and charismatic leaders only (Goodwin & Jasper, 2003). This made all the succeeding social movements to embrace the green concept in that they were all formed based on these concerns. In countries such as Nigeria and Indonesia, most social movements do not take the required shape for being intertwined with the political actors who pretend to protect the environment and the social groups living around these resources (Mcadam & Snow, 2010). In most of these areas, most social groups are formed towards protecting deforestation and depletion of natural resources around their areas, with poor people being the losers in such environmental conflicts. Most factories in developing countries do not treat their wastes before disposal leading to increasing social groups to be formed against such factories, though most of these groups are weaker due to lack of structures and political support, compared to social groups in developed countries (Forsyrth, 2001). Environmental Citizenship One remarkable aspect of environmental citizenship is trying to change the attitude of citizens towards adopting certain environmental friendly behaviours that are in line with the environmentalism ideology. Most developed countries have made great strides in implementing this strategy, which is incorporated in social-political cycles, and has succeeded in changing behaviours considerably. Direct action in UK social groups that involved unrests and mass protests was a success in changing the environment around the people and in making the government to act (Doherty & Paterson, 2000). Today, U.K leads in environmental citizenship by encouraging people to develop environmental concerns in their behaviours. This is achieved by financial incentives and penalties to those who do not adhere to these policies (Dobson, 2006). In Durham, people are encouraged to cycle, but not to drive through high parking charges in the old town (Dobson & Bell, 2006). However, most green movements have remarked that these incentives do not facilitate deliberation among the people to allow the required transformation to take place at a deeper level (Jackson, 2005). On the other hand, Ireland leads in encouraging the use of recyclable bags in changing the attitude of people from littering the environment. This has resulted in drastic reductions in the use of plastic bags by more than 90%; more than a billion paper bags are saved from entering the environment every year (Dobson, 2006). This is a unique environmentalism approach with both social and political goodwill. Across most developed countries in Western Europe, despite increased media reporting that has led to a decline in environmental pollution, social groups continue to increase their protests calling for environmental sustainability in economic and industrial sectors (Rootes, 2003). The difference between these social groups and those in developing countries is that while these protests are tolerated and are effective in pushing the political class to adapt policies, in most developing countries, such protests are not tolerated and face serious resistance from the political class. This makes environmentalism in developed countries more grounded and have more effects compared to developing countries. Consequently, in the former the poor continue to suffer due to deliberate “slow violence” perpetrated by many companies some of which are based in developed countries (Nixon, 2011). In the US, a different perspective has emerged over the last one decade, while environmental sociology was launched based on increasing evidence of degradation and to understand the forces that lead to such degradation (Yearley, 2005). The Bush administration worsened the degradation history with slight abatement policies being put in place by Clinton after many years of degradation (Redclift & Voodgate, 2011). This was caused by dismantling of the country’s environmental protection policies and preventing any environmental policy to have an effect on the country as seen in refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Bush is also blamed for misusing science in accelerating the degradation process. As a result, US was described as “a powerful engine of environmental destructions” (Redclift & Voodgate, 2011). Consequently, environmentalism in US has been greeted with increasing skepticism though the Obama administration has shown willingness to reverse this trend in reviving a green agenda that is in line with ecological modernisation in the country (Redclift & Voodgate, 2011). However, there is need for US scholars to change their Ecological modernisation theory (EMT) if this end will be achieved. Environmentalism has shown to vary depending on geographical region, class and the economic development of a country, with more development countries having more profound environmental social movements. However, all green social movements are formed to advocate for similar ideologies in protecting the environment, though there are increasing criticism regarding practicality of demands from these groups. All the same, environmentalism is a powerful force to influence both social and political decisions as viewed in environmental citizenship across Europe. These factors make social movements distinctive from each other across the globe mainly based on how they approach the environmental issue. References Axtmann, R. 2003. Understanding democratic Politics: An Introduction. London: Sage Curran, G. 2006. 21st Century Dissent: Anarchism, Anti-globalization and Environmentalism Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Bostrom, M. 2004. “Cognitive Practices and Collective Identities within a Heterogeneous Social Movement” Social Movement Studies, 3(1), pp 73-88 Dobson A, & Bell, D. (eds). 2006. Environmental Citizenship. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. Dobson, A. (ed.) 1999. Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice Oxford: Oxford University Press Dobson, A. 2007. “Environmental Citizenship: Towards Sustainable Development.” Sustainable Development, 15, pp276-285. Dobson, A. 2007. Green Political Thought 4th Edition London: Routledge . Doherty, B. & Paterson, M. 2000. Direct Action in British Environmentalism. London: Routledge Doherty, B. 2001. Ideas and Actions in the Green Movement London: Routledge Available as an Dobson, A. and Bell, D. (eds) (2006) Environmental Citizenship Cambridge, MA: MIT Press Forsyth, T. 2001. Environmental Social Movements in Thailand: How important is class? Asian Journal of Social Sciences, 29 (1), pp. 35-51 Goodwin, J. & Jasper, J.M. 2003. The Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts. Oxford : Blackwell. Jackson, T. 2005. Motivating Sustainable Consumption. London: Sustainable Development Research Network Mcadam D. & Snow, D.A. 2010. Readings on social Movements: Origin, Dynamism, and Outcomes 2nd edition. NY: Oxford University Press. Nixon, R. 2011. Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. London: Harvard University Press. Porrit, J. 1984. Political Ecologism. London: SAGE. Porta, D. & Rucht, D. 2002. “The Dynamics of Environmental Campaigns.” Mobilization, 7(1), pp 1-14 Ray, B. 2009.Diffeernt Types of History. Delhi: Pearson Longman. Redclift, M.R. & Voodgate, G. 2010. The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Rootes, C. (ed.) 2003. Environmental Protest in Western Europe Oxford: Oxford University Press Ruggiero, V. & Montagana, N. 2008. Social Movements: A Reader. London: Routledge. Scales, T.L. & Cooper, H.S. 2012. Social Environments and Human Behavior. Belmont, CA: Cole Publishing. Shellenberger, M. & Nordhaus, T. 2010. The Death of Environmentalism. [online] Available at: [Accessed 17 August, 2013] Snow, D.A., Soule, S.A & Kriesi, H. 2007. The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Oxford: Blackwell. Tilly, C. 2004. Social Movements, 1768-2004. Boulder: Paradigm Yearley, S. 2005. Cultures of Environmentalism: Empirical Studies in Environmental Sociology Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Read More