POLITICAL ECOLOGY, POWER AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
Convened by Ana Watson (University of Calgary), Conny Davidsen (University of Calgary) and Deborah Delgado Pugley (Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru – Peru Node POLLEN)
WELCOME
Despite growing international calls and strong evidence of their crucial roles, indigenous and local communities are still struggling to have voice and impact in environmental governance to secure their livelihoods, rights, and territories. This on-line pre-conference workshop discusses political ecology approach to social movements from different angles including environmental justice, solidarity and peace, decentralization forest governance, and Indigenous rights.
By exploring the case studies from around the world and particularly a Political ecology from the South, the panelists will debate how we can study and unpack the complex linkages between resource governance, territorial governance, grassroot identities and knowledge systems. We invite you to watch the pre-recorded presentations before the live discussion. The live session is an opportunity to engage in participatory dialogue regarding the theoretical and methodological challenges, as well as the main findings of the researchers. Through public engagement and conversations with the authors we will explore together potential emerging themes and approaches to foster inclusive transnational, collaborative and decolonial frameworks. This workshop is a networking opportunity and ethical space.
This event is part of the Asynchronous Workshops series for the POLLEN 2022/2023 4th Biennial Conference of the Political Ecology Network: Political Ecology: North, South, and Beyond. This workshop is co-organized by Dr. Ana Watson and Conny Davidsen from the Geography Department at the University of Calgary, and Dr. Deborah Delgado from the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru (Peru Pollen Node).
PROGRAM
BOOK LAUNCH ( 3 OCTOBER 2022):
Summary
Fighting Global Neo-Extractivism: Fossil-Free Social Movements in South Africa analyzes social struggles over damaging new fossil fuel projects in the Global South with a focus on South Africa, Africa’s biggest fossil fuel emitter.
Fossil fuel extraction in South Africa has reached a new accelerated phase in which the fossil fuel frontier is moving beyond historical ‘sacrifice zones’ into non-traditional spaces, such as conservation parks and middle-class neighbourhoods, and provoking fervent opposition from grassroots activists. This book examines campaigns such as Frack Free South Africa and Save our iMfolozi Wilderness, viewing them as struggles against neo-extractivism driven by the state and industry. Through a series of detailed case studies, it highlights the shaping of mobilisation patterns by prior land use practices and the capacity to mobilize different social groups across race and class. Developing the notion of the fossil fuel frontier as the material and political boundary that activists in South Africa and elsewhere in the world render visible, this volume provides a theoretical framework to understanding global mobilization patterns.
Open Access chapters:
Larry Lohmann works with The Corner House, a Dorset-based solidarity and research organization. He is a founding member of the Durban Group for Climate Justice and chairs the advisory board of the World Rainforest Movement, with which he has been associated for 25 years. He spent much of the 1980s with Thailand’s Project for Ecological Recovery and more recently has been working with social movements in Ecuador and other countries. Among his books are Pulping the South: Industrial Tree Plantations in the Global Paper Economy (1996, with Ricardo Carrere), Carbon Trading: A Critical Conversation on Privatization and Power (2006), Mercados de carbono: La neoliberalizacion del clima (2012), Energy, Work and Finance (2014, with Nicholas Hildyard) and Cadenas de bloques, automatizacion y trabajo: Mecanizando la confianza (2020). His articles have appeared in academic journals in political economy, environment, geography, accounting, Asian studies, law, science studies, socialism, anthropology and development and have been translated into many languages. Most are available at www.thecornerhouse.org.uk
Great to see this up and running, and well done to Ana, Conny and Deborah for pulling this together. I have a comment and question for Jasper. Jasper this was a great taster and I really look forward to reading the book. The five theses on the entrenchment of political power in the minerals-energy complex in South Africa are nicely set out, though the EIA legislation and processes certainly feed into the issue raised on participation in your 4th thesis. The social movement dynamics though seem to be the real focus of the book, and the initial insight here to the claiming making and framing of the Save our Umfolozi Wilderness and MCEJO is intriguing, particular the alignment of conservation and frontline community activism and the framing extension that evolved. I wonder as to your assessment of how we might conceptualise the intersection of social movements and the role of lawfare as a form of advocacy; where in both Xolobeni and Fuleni/Mpukunyoni environmental lawyers have very much taken up the cause. Does this fall within your frame extension, or is this an area you have addressed in the book, or indeed suggest for future research?
Thank you for setting up this excellent workshop to Ana, Conny and Deborah. I am very pleased to be sharing some of the ideas from the book.
Thank you for the insightful question, Adrian. Litigation has played an important role in the Fuleni mining case and the other cases you mention. My sense is that the arguments used to halt the mining applications in court are not limited to saving the wilderness, but crucially revolve around a set of demands from the local constituency. Ideally legal action and socio-environmental mobilization can benefit from each other. The case against mining is more convincing when the constituency stages protests so there is an audible opposition against extraction.
I know that there is a worry that relying too much on legal action might demobilize social movements. From the cases I am aware of I do not think this necessarily is the case. I would indeed be really important to look at the relationship between legal action and social movement action more systematically.
I am happy to discuss this point more during the workshop.
Thanks for an insightful presentation on fossil-free movements in South Africa. I have three questions: 1) Since you have defined fossil- free movements as occurring at various stages of production cycle, I am wondering whether there have been efforts by these communities to refuse consumption as well? 2)Regarding the second phase of claim making, how has the ‘fossil’ under extraction been conceptualized locally?I ask this in reference to Zoe Todd’s concept of ‘fossil-kin’, which refers to the fossil as beings that once lived with and shared territory with humans and other -than humans in the past but have been turned into a weapon by present day extraction measures.3) Lastly, as an extension to the previous question- if i understood rightly, does the word “moral shock” apply to loss of human lives only?
Many thanks for your insightful questions, Gomathy! I am replying to all three below
1) Since you have defined fossil-free movements as occurring at various stages of production cycle, I am wondering whether there have been efforts by these communities to refuse consumption as well?
Generally the carbon footprint of those individuals who have been part of the mobilization against coal is very low. However, at protests they were calling for an end of coal use more generally. In the case of Frack Free South Africa which is more middle-class I identified some prefigurative elements. Activists are promoting ecological farming, localism and biodiversity to refuse fossil fuel intensive practices and fossil fuel use generally.
2)Regarding the second phase of claim making, how has the ‘fossil’ under extraction been conceptualized locally?I ask this in reference to Zoe Todd’s concept of ‘fossil-kin’, which refers to the fossil as beings that once lived with and shared territory with humans and other -than humans in the past but have been turned into a weapon by present day extraction measures.
The fossils below the surface in some instances were seen as an economic opportunity by some community members. Others who were familiar with other mining conflicts saw fossils as a threat to livelihoods. I am not aware people were referring to fossils as former beings. It is certainly an interesting consideration though.
3) Lastly, as an extension to the previous question- if i understood rightly, does the word “moral shock” apply to loss of human lives only?
Moral shocks can also refer to anticipated loss of livelihoods for example. Therefore moral shocks are not limited to loss of human lives.
thank you so much for the response!