(De)legitimating extractivism: the shifting politics of social licence

ABSTRACT

Most scholarly accounts of social licence define it as a public relations strategy to legitimate resource development. In Canadian pipeline politics, however, it has had the opposite effect, crystallizing widespread concerns about industry capture of regulatory processes and affirming the democratic rights of local communities. This assessment of the concept’s critical, counter-hegemonic potential to challenge the policies, practices and logic of state-sponsored extractivist development situates social licence as a key discursive battleground in the struggle between politicization (which accents agonistic confrontation between competing alternative futures) and de-politicization (which defuses conflict and builds consensus around the perception of common interests). Frame analysis of news media and advocacy group texts is used to investigate how opponents of a pipeline project bridged the idea of social licence with movement frames concerning identity, injustice and democratic agency to transform the concept from a public relations term meant to enable corporate activity into a critical trope used to constrain it.     

Petroleum and hazardous chemical spills in Newark Bay, New Jersey, USA from 1982 to 1991

Newark Bay, New Jersey, is particularly vulnerable to ecological damage from petroleum and chemical spills, as a result of the enclosed nature and shallow depth of the bay, the high frequency of shipping traffic, and the numerous chemical and petroleum transfer terminals located alongs its shores. To evaluate the potential impacts to the natural resources of this coastal estuarine ecosystem, chemical and petroleum accidents reported to the US Coast Guard (USCG) between 1982 and 1991 were compiled to determine the frequency and volume of these incidents in Newark Bay and in each of its major tributaries. Records obtained from the USCG National Response Center's computerized database indicated that more than 1453 accidental incidents, resulting in the release of more than 18 million US gallons of hazardous materials and petroleum products, occurred throughout Newark Bay during this period of time. The bulk of the materials released to the aquatic environment consisted of petroleum products, specifically No. 6 Fuel Oil (103 spills, 12 829 272 US gal) and gasoline (207 spills, 48 816 US gal). The majority of the reported incidents occurred in the Arthur Kill and its tributaries, as well as in the Kill Van Kull and the Passaic River. The results of this study indicated that the accidental discharge of petroleum and hazardous chemicals represents a significant source of chemical pollution in Newark Bay. Based on the frequency of spills and the volume of materials released to the aquatic environment, it is likely that these events are having a deleterious effect on the Newark Bay ecosystem.     

“Ethereal Carbon”: legitimizing liquefied natural gas in British Columbia

ABSTRACT

This paper examines the provincial government of British Columbia's recent proposal of building a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) industry, in which natural gas extracted through hydraulic fracturing will be liquefied and then exported to Asian markets. Drawing upon the growing literature on energopower, petro-state, and petro-culture, selected texts and images from “LNG in BC”—the project's official branding website—were analyzed through a multimodal critical discourse analysis. The results reveal two primary strategies of legitimation: the first emphasizes the economic benefits of LNG development in terms of employment and taxation revenues; the second defines LNG as a means of strengthening B.C.’s environmental leadership. The second narrative depends heavily upon the symbolic values of natural gas, contrasting its “clean” appearance (as a colorless and odorless gas) with the material density and “toxic sensuality” of other “dirty” fossil fuels (such as coal, oil, and bitumen). The website also presents a linear and simplified “storyline” of the generation of LNG which emphasizes the simple, “clean” process of liquefaction to distract attention from the ecological and health risks of hydraulic fracturing.     

Climate Hypocrisies: A Comparative Study of News Discourse

This paper conducts a comparative study of how the idea of hypocrisy was invoked in media coverage of climate change in 12 newspapers from four countries (Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) between 2005 and 2015. It develops the concepts, and explores the characteristics, of three distinct types of climate hypocrisy: personalized (which attacks the moral character of individuals based on inconsistencies between their stated beliefs and behavior); institutional-analytic (which identifies contradictions between institutional rhetoric and ongoing policies and practices); and reflexive (which develops sympathetic accounts of the struggles individuals face in reconciling the tension between values and actions). It explores how these types are used to undermine the credibility of climate advocates as well as to argue for more aggressive climate action, and maps out key features of climate hypocrisy discourse including ideological attributes, targeted actors and behaviors, affective intensity, and regional variations. It outlines a number of surprising key findings, such as (i) hypocrisy discourses are more frequently invoked by “progressives” supporting climate change action than by “conservatives” resisting climate change action, and (ii) while both groups use hypocrisy discourse, they tend to use very different types of hypocrisy discourses which each likely have very different impacts on climate change discourse.