This text is part of the special Acfas Congress notebook
Northvolt and the destruction of wetlands, TransCanada and its oil pipeline project, the LNG Quebec gas pipeline… Environmental controversies follow one another and are increasing in the country, as elsewhere in the world. As part of 91e Acfas Congress, a conference entitled Crossed perspectives on environmental controversies: from their emergence to their political and social impacts will examine the incidence and evolution of these increasingly polarized conflicts.
Environmental controversies arise when groups of people express disagreement about how society should protect the environment. For example, when civil society opposes large industries and the consequences of their projects, as was the case with the Horne Foundry and its harmful arsenic emissions for the environment and humans in Rouyn-Noranda.
These tensions are not new. “The concept of controversy emerged in the 1960s, when people realized the consequences of certain disasters such as oil spills in the ocean,” explains Olivier Turbide, professor at UQAM and co-leader of the conference. It was the spark plug for ecological awareness. » Beginning in the 1970s, and gradually continuing through to the present, a greater awareness of the climate crisis set in, as journalistic coverage and scientific evidence accumulated.
Polarization of the debates
Today, we are seeing an increase in these controversies and a polarization of debates, whether in the environment or in many other areas. On one side are the supporters of a more economic and technological solution to the climate crisis, with industrial development as a driver of the ecological transition. “This is the current government discourse,” underlines Olivier Turbide.
On the other hand, there are voices proposing to redefine growth and our relationship to consumption to promote human well-being and health, while respecting nature and biodiversity. These two visions seem irreconcilable, since the first attempts to perpetuate a system that the second wishes to overthrow.
The value given to the living is another driver of tensions, according to the professor. Still marginal, the idea of preserving natural habitats, regardless of the effects on humans, is gaining ground. “Faced with this, governments tend to protect living things as long as this allows them to maintain a certain way of life or well-being,” he explains. Nature is therefore not protected as such, but exploited for the benefit of humans. »
Elaborate strategies
According to Alice Friser, professor at the University of Quebec in Outaouais (UQO) and participant in the Acfas conference, one and the same controversy can follow different trajectories. The media thus play a central role, but journalistic investigations, however qualitative they may be, will not have the same resonance depending on the knowledge and concerns of the public regarding the subject, at the time of publication. The credibility of the whistleblowers and the leaders of the mobilization also plays a role in the way in which the public will take up or not the issues raised.
Finally, the strategies mobilized by people seeking to avoid or minimize controversy will also influence the course of things. “While public controversy is a healthy phenomenon, potentially conducive to learning and progress, it can be very costly financially and reputationally and prove disastrous for the organizations involved,” she emphasizes.
Rather than questioning their practices or reviewing their raison d’être to better respond to the needs and values of society, most organizations prefer to deny or combat criticism, use manipulation such as greenwashing and lobbying, according to the professor. “When controversy grows and it becomes difficult to move away from it, organizations instead adopt compliance strategies, often symbolic, and reactive strategies by responding to public demands, partially or fully,” adds Professor Friser.
A turning point
One thing is certain, the environment is no longer a risk like any other: it now embodies a fundamental criterion in the approval, or not, of a project, observes Olivier Turbide. In their speeches, industries and governments are now appropriating vocabulary, such as carbon neutrality, energy transition, reduction of GHGs. The question remains whether this speech is authentic or not.
Which is far from being an easy task, especially when organizations resort toastroturfing. Also called “similitantism” or planned popular disinformation, this propaganda technique consists of creating a movement from scratch to influence public opinion on social networks, websites, and in demonstrations. “The idea is to simulate supporters and support for the environmental dimension of the project,” explains Professor Turbide. These people are completely fake, they are sometimes robots, or people paid to pretend to support this or that project. »
Thus, the instigated doubt “opens the door to cynicism and disengagement on civic and democratic levels, which are very damaging for our societies,” he explains. The monitoring work of citizens, associations and journalists remains important to continue to uncover these strategies. One of the solutions to the polarization of debates is also found in dialogue and the presence of listening spaces such as the Office of Public Hearings on the Environment (BAPE), according to the professor.
This content was produced by the Special Publications team at Duty, relating to marketing. The writing of the Duty did not take part.