Narratives,Rhetorical Genres,and Environmental Conflict: Responses to Schwarze's “Environmental Melodrama”

The appearance of Steven Schwarze's essay, “Environmental Melodrama” (Schwarze, 2006) as the lead article in a recent issue of The Quarterly Journal of Speech marks an important moment of recognition for environmental communication scholarship. Schwarze's essay demonstrates how studies of environmental rhetoric can contribute to rhetorical theory more generally, while addressing practical questions regarding the rhetorical aspects of environmental conflict. The contributors to this forum respond to Schwarze's arguments, drawing in part upon their own case studies of rhetorical action and narrative in environmental conflict.     

Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency: Constructing “Certainty” as Rebuttal

Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency was the first Supreme Court opinion generated specifically as a response to the issue of anthropogenic CO₂ emissions, alleging that Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) failure to regulate is leading to environmental harms for plaintiffs. This essay examines the majority opinion of Justice Stevens and his use of presumption and burden of proof, within a logic of problematic integration, to construct “certainty” as a rebuttal to and rejection of the “uncertainty” offered by EPA. I examine how this strategically constructed rebuttal to “uncertainty” functions as a declarative act of “certainty,” advancing a proposition whose scientific, legal, or political acceptance could function as a tipping point away from the claims of “uncertainty” used by opponents on this contentious issue. Because of the court's influence, the implications of their “certainty” extend beyond the case and into the broader discussion of climate change science and environmental communication.     

Towards an umbrella science of sustainability

Sustainability research has gained scholarly attention since the 1980s as the new science investigating the changes in social, environmental and economic systems and their impacts on the future of planetary life support systems. Whilst broad literature on sustainability has expanded significantly over the past decades, academic literature developing sustainability as a distinct science has received little attention. After more than two decades of sustainability research, the time has come for us to begin asking reflective questions about what sort of science we call sustainability science. How has the broader research on sustainability contributed to developing sustainability science as a unique discipline within the past two decades? How has the label science promoted or hindered the interdisciplinary project of integrating the natural and social sciences as well as arts and humanities in addressing human nature problems? I argue in this review paper that special efforts need to be made towards the building and positioning of sustainability as an umbrella science for global sustainability research. The benefits of the new sustainability science advocated for in this paper are that; a) it offers a universal definition of sustainability that accounts for both the needs of life and the capacity of planetary life support systems to provide for those needs and b) proposes ways of bridging gaps among different research traditions, facilitating cross disciplinary communication and addressing the challenge of multiple meanings and definitions of concepts facing sustainability research today.     

Pedagogy for Sustainability Science: Case-Based Approaches for Interdisciplinary Instruction

Sustainability science represents a fundamental shift in the nature of research on environmental problems, calling for specialists to expand beyond their disciplinary perspectives in order to cooperate together to understand and address systemic problems. This shift demands a corresponding shift in education in order to equip students with the skills, theories, and methods they need to address contemporary challenges. We argue that case studies are a productive pedagogical approach to teaching about sustainability and teaching for sustainability. Case-based approaches equip students to encounter complexity, manage uncertainty, and generate innovative strategies. In laying out of the pedagogical challenges inherent in sustainability education, we highlight opportunities and demands for environmental communication scholars to contribute to the emerging discipline of sustainability science.     

FORUM Communicative Action in Response to a Nuclear Crisis: Representations of Fukushima across Communication Contexts

The 2011 disaster at Japan's Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant poses important questions for environmental communication scholarship and practice. This forum examines questions that were emerging one month into the Fukushima crisis, when a panel examined its implications as part of North Carolina State University's second annual research symposium on Communication, Rhetoric, and Digital Media (details available at http://crdm.chass.ncsu.edu/symposium2011/). Expanding those initial analyses, we identify implications across the contexts of environmental communication, expert-public engagement, public discourses of nuclear energy, uses of new media, risk and crisis communication, and organizational and institutional communication. The first essay (Kinsella) addresses some implications of Fukushima from the perspectives of constitutive communication theory, risk analysis, and risk communication. The second essay (Ionescu) examines an effort to foster dialog between technical experts and a concerned public audience, made by a nuclear energy institute in Germany. The third essay (Binder) explores uses of Twitter by people in the USA as a tool for following the rapidly evolving events at Fukushima. The final essay (Kittle Autry and Kelly) analyzes public discourse surrounding a proposed merger of two US energy companies with substantial nuclear operations, before and after the onset of the Fukushima disaster.     

Towards a Paradigmatic Shift in Sustainability Studies: A Systematic Review of Peer Reviewed Literature and Future Agenda Setting to Consider Environmental (Un)sustainability of Digital Communication

The materiality of digital communication inflicts substantial environmental damage: the extraction of resources needed to produce digital devices; the toxicity of e-waste; and the rapidly increasing energy demands required to sustain data generated by digital communication. This damage, however, is paradoxically under-theorized in scholarship on environmental sustainability. Despite the existing critique of the “techno-fix” approach in sustainability studies, digitization – and digital communication in particular – continue to be celebrated as the tool for environmental sustainability; an approach we coin “digital solutionism.” The article presents the first systematic review of the literature to map the implicit assumptions about the relationships between digital communications and environmental sustainability, in order to examine how digital solutionism manifests, and why it persists. We propose a concept matrix that identifies the key blind spots with regards to environmental damages of the digital, and call for a paradigmatic shift in environmental sustainability studies. An agenda for future research is put forward that advocates for the following: (1) a systematic account of material damages of devices, platforms and data systems adopted into sustainability research and practice, resulting in changes in both research framing and methodological foundations; (2) a reconceptualization and denaturalization of the digital itself as a promising solution; (3) a theoretical dialogue between sustainability studies and environmental communication. (4) an expansion of environmental communication as a field, from focusing on the communication aspect of environmental change to include the environmental footprint of communication itself.     

A Climate for Change: Millennials,Science and the Humanities

The rise and pervasiveness of post-truth and alternative facts posit fundamental questions for the current epistemic authority of scientific knowledge. In conjunction, complex and multi-scalar problems of the likes of climate change call for research that transcends traditional disciplinary silos, upon which much of that authority was built. As such, we call for a greater involvement of the humanities in environmental research and communication. We suggest that young researchers wishing to pursue academic careers (including ourselves) may be well-equipped to reconfigure and reconcile science and the humanities within the context of their PhDs and beyond – taking a frontline position in the constant struggle to overcome longstanding antagonisms between the scholarship of fact-finding and that of meaning-making. We do so by exploring examples – within academia and beyond – where those collisions have been successful, including the works of a millennial scientist/artist and a dystopian video game.     

Public Participation as Participatory Communication in Environmental Policy Decision-Making: From Concepts to Structured Conversations

This essay attempts to distinguish between traditional notions of public participation and participatory communication, particularly as currently practiced in non-US settings. In addition, specific tools for facilitating participatory communication are identified and discussed. The essay is based on the author's extensive experience as a conflict mediator and public participation consultant and scholar. For the past 15 years, the author has served as a consultant on matters of environmental conflict resolution, public participation, and community-based collaboration for federal and state agencies and NGOs, including the USDA Forest Service, the USDI Bureau of Land Management, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, and the Nature Conservancy.     

Sustainability classifications in engineering: discipline and approach

In order to discuss how to advance sustainability in engineering, it is necessary to be clear as to what exactly is the science of sustainability. The linkage between sustainability philosophy and scientific principles has, in some ways, been acknowledged in the wider literature. Moreover, the recent scholarship on sustainability in international literature has focused on providing definitions, policies and methods, though from an engineering perspective, there is an obvious need for clarity on how the engineering and science community can integrate the science of sustainability into practice. Prima facie, this article provides an overview of the development of sustainability science through a textual analysis to collate the underlying discourse and ideology cited in literature. While the number one sustainability challenge is to mitigate climate change, compiling a definition genesis of sustainability will assist the engineering community in gaining an understanding in the underlying philosophical frames. The aim of this paper is to analyse sustainability information in the print press, journals, periodicals and textbooks since publication patterns contribute to our understanding of the cognitive aspects of scholarly knowledge development.     

Risk communication and sustainability science: lessons from the field

Sustainability science aims to help societies across the globe address the increased environmental and health crises and risks that range from poverty to climate change to health pandemics. With the increased magnitude and frequency of these large-scale risks to different societies, scientists and institutions have increasingly recognized the need for improved communication and collaboration among researchers, governments, businesses, and communities. This article argues that risk communication has fundamentally important contributions to make to sustainability science’s mission to create use-inspired, “actionable science” that can lead to solutions. Risk communication research can advance the mission of sustainability science to engage a wide range of stakeholders. This kind of engagement is especially important in the context of addressing sustainability problems that are characterized by high levels of uncertainty and complexity. We introduce three core tenets of risk communication research that are fundamental to advancing sustainability science. Risk communication specifically offers an increased understanding of how system feedbacks, human perceptions, and levels of uncertainty influence the study and design of solutions within social ecological systems.     

Environmental Communication: Why This Crisis Discipline Should Facilitate Environmental Democracy

The authors concur with Cox's claim that environmental communication (EC), like conservation biology, is a crisis discipline. Cox's proposed tenets for EC challenge the scientific norm of objectivity that has guided science for centuries, suggesting that today's environmental crisis requires us to travel a different path. The authors take Cox's essay as provocation to radically challenge magical notions of scientific objectivity. They briefly review Platonic contributions to the myth of scientific objectivity and then advocate a nondualistic perspective toward the relationship between humans and nature. They then suggest how this perspective both expands upon and diverges from Cox's vision of political and ethical engagement among EC scholars.     

Heidegger and Being at the Hanford Reservation: Standing Reserve,Enframing, and Environmental Communication Theory

This essay examines the potential of Heidegger's phenomenology as a foundation for environmental communication theory, emphasizing his critiques of modern science, technology, humanism, and metaphysics. A phenomenological approach to environmental communication provides resources for recognizing metaphysical assumptions that endanger both humans and nature. The Hanford nuclear reservation serves as an illustrative text, exemplifying Heidegger's reading of nuclear energy as a culmination of both Western metaphysics and the instrumental stance that he calls “enframing.” In Heidegger's view, the ordering and control accomplished through enframing obscures the mutually constitutive relationship between humans and nature, and in doing so, diminishes the possibilities for authentic human existence. The chapter examines how both representational and constitutive models of communication contribute to those conditions, and adopts a set of concepts from Heidegger's phenomenology as a foundation for an alternative, “bounded constitutive” model.     

Crisis,Coherence, and the Promise of Critical Rhetoric

This essay responds to the keynote address by Cox by discussing the ways in which critical rhetoric is implicated in environmental communication (EC) as a crisis discipline, as well as the ways in which EC, so positioned, is implicated within a broader coherentist epistemology. Issues of exigency, representation, and sustainability are considered, along with an examination of the concepts of nominalism and doxa as they relate to the enterprise of EC research. The critical cultural politics embedded in much EC scholarship are also addressed in terms of their intersections with the increasingly unscrupulous abuse of language within antienvironmental administrative rhetorics.     

Promoting integration and cooperation for sustainability views from the symposium held at UNESCO headquarters September 19, 2013

This public symposium explored ways to integrate knowledge about and strengthen cooperation on complex and interconnected global sustainability issues. (The symposium was organized by the United Nations University (UNU), The University of Tokyo Integrated Research System for Sustainability Science (IR3S), as well as UNESCO. Co-organizers were the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology-Japan (MEXT) and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). Participants included representatives from key institutes and UNESCO’s programs in the areas of water, ocean and ecological sciences as well as social and natural sciences, UNESCO Member states, scholars and policymakers. The symposium program and list of speakers is attached. See also www.isp.unu.edu). The central question put to symposium deliberations was one that many policy- and decision-makers as well as academic scholars struggle with today: how can we overcome barriers to action that will put societies around the world on a path to a more stable and sustainable future? This article examines the presentations made during the symposium and draws upon them to explore opportunities for sustainability scientists to help meet this challenge. The paper is divided into three parts: Part I provides a brief introduction that places the symposium in context of current debates on sustainability science and discusses (a) the role of UNESCO and (b) the relevance of sustainability science to policy- and decision-making for sustainable development. Part II examines three steps that can be taken now to overcome barriers to sustainability and the role of sustainability science in each (a) building societal and environmental resilience; (b) increasing collaboration across geographical and disciplinary boundaries as well as between scientists and decision-makers; and (c) enhancing education for sustainable development (ESD). The paper concludes with a review of why these keys are essential and steps that can be taken in the future to facilitate their widespread application at multiple scales.     

Measurement and Meaning in Environmental Communication Studies: A Response to Kassing,Johnson, Kloeber,and Wentzel

This essay represents an invited editorial response to Kassing, Johnson, Kloeber, and Wentzel's “Development and Validation of the Environmental Communication Scale” in Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture. Kassing and his associates use an apt review of the status of the environmental communication field as the basis for developing a protocol and instrument to measure the actual practice of engaging environmental subject matter in daily life. Although their factor analytic work is laudable in its intent, their approach to empirically exploring environmental communication in action further institutionalizes a number of conceptual and methodological shortcomings in our discipline. In particular, what researchers and respondents think constitutes “environmental” content per se poses a significant barrier to using the proposed tool in applied settings. After critiquing the Kassing et al. work in terms of a number of issues related to the validity and reliability of their research, I conclude by suggesting that the research may provide a needed springboard for exploring the dynamics of interpersonal settings that mediate important dialog and action regarding the environment.     

The contribution of the sciences,technology and innovation to sustainable development: the application of sustainability science from the perspective of UNESCO’s experience

The contribution of scientific knowledge and innovation to sustainability is demonstrated. Theory, discoveries, programmes and activities in both the natural as well as social sciences fields have greatly helped with the environmental, economic and social challenges of the past and current centuries, especially in the past 50 years or so. Nowadays, we increasingly realize the intimate link between science and society, and the need not only for science to inform policy but also to address requests by governments and the multiple stakeholders confronted with the challenge to achieve sustainable development. Current barriers to how science is conceived and related education is delivered hamper true interdisciplinarity, and the emerging field of sustainability science attempts inter alia to clarify how ‘a new generation of science’ can be designed so as to promote more integrated thinking to tackle complex societal issues. At the international level, and more specifically in the context of the United Nations, the practice of science has always entailed the need to solve problems such as climate change, ozone depletion, disaster risk, lack of food security, biodiversity loss, social instability and ineffective governance—to cite a few. In this regard, science in an intergovernmental context is by definition science that has to assist with the struggle for sustainability. Yet, a higher level of integration and cross-fertilization among disciplines as well as of participation among concerned stakeholders in the design and implementation of science-based programmes and activities carried out by the United Nations (and, in this article, the specific case of its Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization—UNESCO—is presented) seems to be needed. The debate on sustainability science carried out in the academic circle and the experience of UNESCO in this area can be mutually supportive in further elucidating how, practically, the approach of sustainability science can enhance the achievement of sustainable development at multiple scales.     

Exploring Environmentalism amidst the Clamor of Networks: A Social Network Analysis of Utah Environmental Organizations

Dwelling in a world awash in multiple environmental crises while science and social theory erode the last vestiges of the subject of humanism, it makes sense to imagine our world beyond the lens of humanism and turn to diverse methodologies in order to explore what is going on and how to promote changes that nurture ecological sustainability. In this essay we take on this task in relation to environmental communication. In what follows we explore the contours of the age after humanism, what we term the Age of the Animate Earth. In the wake of the theoretical and actual deconstruction of the subject, we offer networks as a key unit of analysis. From this perspective, we suggest social network analysis (SNA) as one viable method for doing environmental communication studies and perform this move through a SNA of Utah environmental groups.     

Coevolving Ostrom’s social–ecological systems (SES) framework and sustainability science: four key co-benefits

Research on social–ecological systems (SES) is scattered across many disciplines and perspectives. As a result, much of the knowledge generated between different communities is not comparable, mutually aggregate or easily communicated to nonspecialists despite common goals to use academic knowledge for advancing sustainability. This article proposes a conceptual pathway to address this challenge through outlining how the SES research contributions of sustainability science and researchers using Elinor Ostrom’s diagnostic SES framework (SESF) can integrate and co-benefit from explicitly interlinking their development. From a review of the literature, I outline four key co-benefits from their potential to interlink in the following themes: (1) coevolving SES knowledge types, (2) guiding primary research and assessing sustainability, (3) building a boundary object for transdisciplinary sustainability science, and (4) facilitating comparative analysis. The origins of the SESF include seminal empirical work on common property theory, self-organization, and coupled SES interactions. The SESF now serves as a template for diagnosing sustainability challenges and theorizing explanatory relationships on SES components, interactions, and outcomes within and across case studies. Simultaneously, sustainability science has proposed transdisciplinary research agendas, sustainability knowledge types, knowledge coproduction, and sustainability assessment tools to advance transformative change processes. Key challenges for achieving co-beneficial developments in both communities are discussed in relation to each of the four themes. Evident pathways for advancing SES research are also presented along with a guideline for designing SES research within this co-aligned vision.     

Climate Communications: Conflicts and Opportunities

The occasion for this forum was sparked by a front-page story in the New York Times by John M. Broder entitled, “Seeking to Save the Planet, with a Thesaurus” (May 1, 2009, p. A11). The article focused on the non-profit EcoAmerica's report, “Climate and Energy Truths: Our Common Future,” which shares research on communication approaches to engaging climate change and energy issues. The Broder article included commentary from Robert J. Brulle, Professor of Sociology and Environmental Science at Drexel University. In response, George P. Lakoff, Professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at UC-Berkeley, published an essay in The Huffington Post, “Why Environmental Understanding, or ‘Framing,’ Matters: An Evaluation of the EcoAmerica Summary Report” (May 19, 2009). The discussion about this report and differing approaches to environmental communication continued on blogs, in emails, and through various other forums. The editorial leadership team of this journal thought such prominent attention to environmental communication in the nexus of so many disciplines and professional investments was exciting. We are pleased the following scholars and practitioners are willing to elaborate on the stakes of this discussion in this forum.     

Social-ecological system resonance: a theoretical framework for brokering sustainable solutions

Sustainability science is a solution-oriented discipline. Yet, there are few theory-rich discussions about how this orientation structures the efforts of sustainability science. We argue that Niklas Luhmann’s social system theory, which explains how societies communicate problems, conceptualize solutions, and identify pathways towards implementation of solutions, is valuable in explaining the general structure of sustainability science. From Luhmann, we focus on two key concepts. First, his notion of resonance offers us a way to account for how sustainability science has attended and responded to environmental risks. As a product of resonance, we reveal solution-oriented research as the strategic coordination of capacities, resources, and information. Second, Luhmann’s interests in self-organizing processes explain how sustainability science can simultaneously advance multiple innovations. The value logic that supports this multiplicity of self-organizing activities as a recognition that human and natural systems are complex coupled and mutually influencing. To give form to this theoretical framework, we offer case evidence of renewable energy policy formation in Texas. Although the state’s wealth is rooted in a fossil-fuel heritage, Texas generates more electricity from wind than any US state. It is politically antagonistic towards climate-change policy, yet the state’s reception of wind energy technology illustrates how social and environmental systems can be strategically aligned to generate solutions that address diverse needs simultaneously. This case demonstrates that isolating climate change—as politicians do as a separate and discrete problem—is incapable of achieving sustainable solutions, and resonance offers researchers a framework for conceptualizing, designing, and communicating meaningfully integrated actions.