International Conservation and

Development

ENV 298.58

Feb. 17 – Discourses and Narratives

Environmental Discourses

• What is discourse?

“A discourse is a shared way of apprehending the world. Embedded in language, it enables those who subscribe to it to interpret bits of information and put them into coherent stories or accounts” (Dryzek, p.8).

Environmental Discourses• Why is it useful to think about

discourse?– Frames problems and solutions, identifies

actors and their roles, informs policy

• Where do we see evidence of environmental discourses?– Governments– Industry– NGOs– Media– Academia

Dryzek’s “Checklist of Elements for the Analysis of Discourse”

1. Basic entities recognized or constructed

2. Assumptions about natural relationships

3. Agents and their motives

4. Key metaphors and other rhetorical devices

Dryzek’s “Checklist of Items for Assessing the Effects of Discourses”

• Politics associated with the discourse

• Effect on policies of governments

• Effect on institutions

• Arguments of critics

• Flaws revealed by evidence and argument

Discourse I: Survivalism

• Problem – “freedom in the commons brings ruin to all” (Hardin 1968)

• Solutions:– Central authority (strong state) to protect private

property, enforce population controls

• ‘Original Sources’– Thomas Malthus (1766-1834)– Garret Hardin and the “Tragedy of the Commons”

(1968)

• Famous Example: “The Limits to Growth” (1972)

Discourse Checklist: Survivalism1) Basic entities recognized or

constructed► Finite natural resources ► “Population” in the aggregate

(a number, not individual people)► Elites – in government; experts

Discourse Checklist: Survivalism2) Assumptions about natural

relationships► Hierarchy – elites manage and control

the masses (population)

3) Agents and their motives► Elites have agency – they choose how

to manage► Populations do not have agency – they

are acted upon

Discourse Checklist: Survivalism

‘the population bomb’

‘spaceship earth’

‘the cancerous growth of population’

The lily pond

4) Key metaphors and other rhetorical devices

Effects of Survivalism

• Politics associated with the discourse– Pressure groups – ZPG; Worldwatch Institute

• Effect on policies of governments– China’s one child policy– India – forced sterilization

• Effect on institutions– Indirect - need for coordinated global action,

e.g. multi-lateral environmental agreements

Effects of Survivalism

• Arguments of critics– Religious (e.g. Catholics) – Racist (e.g. Sierra Club scandal)– Feminist– Injust– ‘the Promethean response’

• Flaws revealed by evidence and argument– World has not yet exploded– Consumption vs. population

Recap: Doing Discourse Analysis1) Identify Elements of Analysis:

Basic entities recognized or constructed

Assumptions about natural relationships

Agents and their motives Key metaphors and other rhetorical

devices

Recap: Doing Discourse Analysis2) Identify Effects:

Politics associated with the discourse Effect on policies of governments Effect on institutions Arguments of critics Flaws revealed by evidence and

argument

Discourses – Take Home Message• The ‘culprit(s)’ and solutions vary

according to how we define problems

• Discourse Practice(people don’t always do what they say)

Discourse or Narrative?

• Some use them interchangeably• Different philosophical positions• Narratives more specific stories,

instead of broader set of ideas

The ‘gist’ of Roe: what is a narrative?

• Story with beginning, middle, and end

• Defines the problem and its source, required action, and outcome

• Allows for decision making in the face of uncertainty

The ‘gist’ of Roe: problems with narratives

• Sometimes they are wrong

• Become institutionalized

• Resilient in the face of challenge, even evidence of fault

• Requires a compelling counter-narrative to dislodge a narrative

“Second Nature” (film)

• What is the dominant narrative analyzed in the film? Make note of:– Problem/solution – Actors (agents) and their motives– Assumptions about relationships– Metaphors – Links to policy/practice– Arguments of critics– Flaws revealed by evidence and

argument