Environmental Conflict Management

Tracy Lee Clarke, Tarla Rai Peterson

• Verlag: SAGE Publications, Inc
• Jahr: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781483324951
• Auflage: 1
• Thema: Lingue e linguistica
• Thema: Studi sulla comunicazione

A step-by-step guide connecting theory to practice

Environmental Conflict Management introduces students to the research and practice of environmental conflict and provides a step-by-step process for engaging stakeholders and other interested parties in the management of environmental disputes. In each chapter, authors Dr. Tracylee Clarke and Dr. Tarla Rai Peterson first introduce a specific concept or process step and then provide exercises, worksheets, role-plays, and brief case studies so students can directly apply what they are learning. The appendix includes six additional extended case studies for further analysis. In addition to providing practical steps for understanding and managing conflict, the text identifies the most relevant laws and policies to help students make more informed decisions. Students will develop techniques for public involvement and community outreach, strategies for effective meeting management, approaches to negotiating options and methodologies for communicating concerns and working through differences, and outlines for implementing and evaluating strategies for sustaining positive community relations.

Chapter 1 Introduction to Environmental Conflict Management

Environmental conflict is among the greatest challenges facing humanity in the 21st century (Peterson & Feldpausch-Parker, 2013). As society has become increasingly aware of environmental issues, the challenge of structuring appropriate decision-making processes and public participation opportunities becomes a central concern for many natural resource agencies, industries, interest groups, and the general public. These conflicts range from relatively simple and localized disputes to highly complex and international disputes. For example, in Uppsala, Sweden, most people look forward to the balmy weather and long days of June. Although residents enjoy many different plants, birch trees are special. The municipality has responded to public desire for a rich supply of birch branches for spring bouquets, wreaths, and hair adornments by planting rows of the trees along many streets. On the other hand, many people suffer from allergic reactions to birch pollen in the spring and claim there are too many birches. The municipality has responded to conflicts over what to do about the trees by publishing regular reports of pollen levels and reminding people that the inconvenience will only last a few weeks.

In the United States, confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) illustrate a more complex environmental conflict. These operations tend to move to areas with lax environmental regulation, which is not the same thing as lack of environmental regulation (Sullivan, Vasavada, & Smith, 2000). The lax enforcement situation may have resulted from minimal efforts, lack of institutional capabilities, or lack of financial resources to enforce the law. Whatever the reasons, community members usually have not perceived a need for environmental regulation. But when local residents start noticing unpleasant smells, conflict arises between those who push for stricter enforcement (on the grounds that enforcement will push the CAFO to relocate and stop degrading the community’s quality of life) and those who prefer to continue as in the past (on the grounds that the threat of stricter enforcement will push the CAFO to relocate, thus damaging the community’s economy). Although this environmental conflict is deeply important to both the CAFO owners/operators and to community members, it is relatively straightforward compared to conflicts over climate change policy. First, there is the question of whether anthropogenic climate change is even occurring. Despite strong empirical evidence that has produced agreement among scientists, there are still individuals who choose to ignore the evidence, and claim that the phenomenon is something that “liberals” have manufactured. Even if a policy maker is able to ignore the small but well-funded group of naysayers, conflict remains. Some people believe that a rapidly warming planet is not something that requires public policy changes. They remain at odds with people who believe a rapidly warming planet presents problems that require a public policy response. Even if we reach agreement that dealing with the results of anthropogenic climate change requires public policy responses that does not mean there is agreement regarding what kind of policy would be most useful, who should coordinate it, or what its specific goals should be (Carvalho & Peterson, 2012). All three of these examples, as well as many conflicts that fall someplace in between them in terms of complexity, indicate that environmental conflict touches our lives, both in the personal and public realms.

Conflict and Communication

Let’s start by defining conflict as a communication process (Oetzel & Ting-Toomey, 2013) that includes “incompatibilities, an expressed struggle, and interdependence among two or more parties” (Putnam, 2013, p. 5). We agree with a common assumption among communication scholars that social interaction is fundamental to conflict. Even if we start with the idea that communication is central to conflict, there are numerous ways to theorize and practice conflict management. For a wide variety of approaches to the ways human communication contributes to conflict, we recommend books such as John Oetzel and Stella Ting-Toomey’s The SAGE Handbook of Conflict Communication (2013).

One aspect of conflict that is especially relevant to environmental conflict is the relationship between values and policy. Environmental conflict puts people, who would not otherwise meet, in direct contact and often into situations where they are competing for the same resource (Peterson & Feldpausch-Parker, 2013). For example, people who live on the headwaters of a creek may not even be aware of other people who live miles downstream and since they are unaware of the downstream residents, they are unlikely to consider the needs of those distant people. At the same time, the runoff from upstream lawns, golf courses, and car washes directly impacts those who live downstream. Even if both groups of people share common values, conflicts are likely to occur when attempting to translate those values into environmental policy (Layzer, 2012). Because we are especially interested in conflicts that not only relate directly to values (Peterson, Peterson, Peterson, Lopez, & Silvy, 2002) but also require decisions about policy, we will focus on conflicts that demonstrate an “expressed disagreement among people who see incompatible goals and potential interference in achieving these goals” (Peterson et al., 2002, p. 947). This definition emphasizes the importance of communication (expressed disagreement), pluralistic desires (incompatible goals), and perceived threats (interference) from other participants who may seek different benefits from a particular environment.

Although conflict can contribute to creative alternatives for difficult situations, people tend to fear and avoid it. We recognize that, if it is not handled properly, conflict can damage social relationships and even lead to physical violence. Although there are many negative aspects of conflict, we suggest that more effective conflict management can be achieved if participants realize that conflict also has productive dimensions. It can promote communication between diverse groups of people, encourage problem solving, and stimulate positive change.

The final point we need to introduce is the idea that conflict is a normal part of human interaction. One of the most important contributions that early communication researchers made to conflict studies was to question the assumption that conflict was an aberration, or an abnormality (Putnam, 2013). They suggested that, rather than an interruption of normal interaction, conflict is the norm whenever people work or play together. People who are responsible for developing and implementing environmental policy live with perpetual conflict. Although some are more comfortable with this reality than others, all of them can benefit from more effective conflict management and resolution.

Environmental Conflict: What Makes it Special?

Environmental conflict will never cease to exist, but it can be productively managed and the productive management of environmental conflict is the focus of this book. Environmental conflict refers to a long-term division between groups with different beliefs about the proper relationships between human society and the natural environment. It refers to conflict concerning environmental elements, meaning the interconnected biophysical, economic, political, and social systems encompassing both natural and human systems (Dukes, 2004). There are numerous ways of categorizing environmental conflicts. For example, in their book, The Promise and Performance of Environmental Conflict Resolution, O’Leary and Bingham (2003) classify environmental conflicts as upstream, midstream, or downstream. Upstream environmental conflicts involve planning or policy making and may involve creating and implementing governmental policy at the national, regional, state, or local level and are often larger in scope. Midstream environmental conflicts are more site-specific and involve administrative permitting for actions impacting the environment. Downstream environmental conflicts are often about compliance and enforcement, and most often involve the ways that people use land, allocate or distribute natural resources, or site industrial facilities. Typically downstream conflicts involve the prevention or cleanup of pollution. Others have classified environmental conflict by referencing the scope of the dispute from formal decisions to recommendations, site specific conflicts to policy level disputes (O’Leary, Durant, Fiorino, & Weiland, 1999).

We suggest that, whatever classification system makes sense to you, there are several characteristics that make environmental conflict distinctive. These factors add to the complexity of environmental mediation and management and must be understood if conflict is to be addressed in an appropriate and timely manner.

Complex Interdisciplinary Issues

Environmental conflict rarely deals with one issue but often addresses multiple, overlapping issues. Working through these issues can complicate a process and make finding a solution challenging (Daniels & Walker, 2001; MacNaughton & Martin, 2002; O’Leary, 1995; O’Leary & Bingham, 2003). Further, the interdisciplinary and interdependent nature of environmental issues adds to the complexity of a given conflict (Dewulf, Francois, Paul-Wostl, & Taillieu, 2007; Jeffrey, 2003; Ravnborg & Westermann, 2000; Speth, 2004). Single disciplines are ill equipped to deal with issues that are both technically and socially complex, and also interdependent. For example, a conflict over a proposed timber sale is not just about harvesting a particular board-foot quantity. It includes issues of forest health, fire management, worker safety, vegetation, habitat, soils, recreation, visual quality, economic development, and viability. In order to address this issue, an interdisciplinary insight from a variety of fields is needed. Likewise, in a conflict concerning the relicensing of hydroelectric facilities by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in Bear River Idaho, environmental issues included meeting demands of energy production; the passage of anadromous fish; the movement of sediment and gravels critical to fish spawning; water quality including turbidity and temperature; riparian health; terrestrial health, including the free movement of wildlife across 40 miles of canals; and water flow impacting recreational use. Each issue is dependent on the other and a solution must adequately address each concern.

Multiple Parties With Different Identities, Values, and Goals

Given the complex context of environmental issues, there will always be a myriad of government, public, and private interests with a stake in environmental conflicts. They often involve government officials at the local, county, state, and/or federal level; public interests represented by environmental advocates, community residents, interest groups; and private interests such as industry or commercial; and academic interests such as scientists, researchers, or technical consultants. Environmental negotiations are characterized by multiple parties, or stakeholders, most of whom have competing interests, goals, and values (Crowfoot & Wondolleck, 1990; MacNaughton & Martin, 2002; O’Leary & Bingham, 2003), or what Dietz and Stern (2008) refer to as ways of knowing. Varying ways of knowing or worldviews in regards to a proper relationship with the environment can cause conflict among interested parties (Elias, 2008, 2012). In fact, Crowfoot and Wondolleck (1990) identify the different values placed on our natural resources (intrinsic value or resource) as the root cause of most environmental conflict. Often these values and interests get pitted against each other and environmental conflict intensifies. For example, in the spotted owl controversy in the Northwest, the issue quickly became one of people (economy) versus owls (environment). Because of the underlying, fundamental values held by each side, the debate became extremely polarized and difficult to resolve in an effective manner.

In addition to differing values, the personalities or decision-making styles of participants may also influence the environmental conflict. Daniels and Walker (2001) discuss the various styles of decision making and argue that these differences can vastly impact how a conflict is perceived and approached. For example, a resource manager from one agency may have an open decision-making format, which welcomes comments and shared decision-making with others. Another resource manager may prefer hierarchical decision making where one person makes the final decision. Understanding various approaches is the key to understanding the conflict situation.

The perceived personal identity of the parties and its relation to an environmental issue can also influence a particular environmental conflict (Clarke, 2008; Rothman, 1997). Rothman (1997) argues that although most environmental conflicts appear at first glance to be primarily resource based, they are almost always identity based. These identity conflicts occur when people’s essential identities, as expressed and maintained by their primary group affiliations, are threatened or frustrated. People feel they lose face when they perceive that their identity claims are being challenged or ignored and this impacts their approach to a given conflict or issue. For example, during a conflict concerning wetland mitigation in northern Utah, a member of a local Nongovernmental Organization (NGO) who had dedicated his life to a particular field felt threatened and personally attacked when the proposed solution did not take into account his years of service.

Diverse Cultures

It is important to understand that environmental conflict is often characterized by the varying cultures of participants. As environmental issues bring together various people, different cultures are often represented at the table of negotiation. These cultures have not only possibly different values regarding environmental issues but different communicative approaches and patterns of interaction as well (MacNaughton & Martin, 2002). “Environmental and natural resource conflicts emerge from differences in values and worldviews and conflicting interests influenced by culture. Culture is most often defined by ethnicity; however, culture can also be characterized in different ways, such as the culture of ranchers in a particular region. For example, Peterson and Horton (1995) argue the conflict over the golden-cheeked warbler habitat is replete with missed opportunities for understanding the cultural perspectives of Texas ranchers and landowners. Understanding the cultural ways of local stakeholders could have enhanced the constructive management of environmental disputes regarding the warbler (Peterson & Horton, 1995).

Validating cultural knowledge is an important part of understanding culture. Traditional knowledge (both indigenous and local) should be respected as much as formal scientific knowledge. Voices from local communities deserve to be heard and their understanding of an issue should be considered along with those of scientists (Lejano, Ingram, & Ingram, 2013). Sometimes, this contributes important environmental information. For example, for years Sami reindeer herders in Sweden tried unsuccessfully to persuade biologists that wolverines were killing reindeer by first leaping onto their backs and that this justified the Sami practice of killing the endangered wolverines. Biologists maintained that it was not possible for wolverines to perform this acrobatic feat, until a field researcher observed it for himself. In another case, coastal villagers in El Salvador tried unsuccessfully to persuade sea turtle researchers that some turtles spent their entire lives in close proximity to their nesting sites, rather than swimming countless miles in between nesting seasons; they claimed to recognize some of the “local” turtles. When researchers were able to fit a small number of turtles with transmitters, they learned that the villagers were correct, which led to revisions in management priorities. How to validate and include cultural knowledge without ignoring formally recognized scientific knowledge is one of the most difficult challenges associated with environmental conflict management.

Considering Culture

Addressing the Material, Symbolic, and Relational Dimensions of Environmental Conflict

In their book Conflict Across Cultures: A Unique Experience of Bridging Difference, LeBaron and Pillay (2006) outline the three dimensions of conflict: material, symbolic, and relational. The material dimension is the concrete issues or the “...