[Commlist] Call for papers: Environmental Communication: from Yesterday's Roots to Tomorrow's Horizons. For an epistemological construction of a new academic field and practice

 Call for papers: Environmental Communication: from Yesterday's Roots 
to Tomorrow's Horizons. For an epistemological construction of a new 
academic field and practice

Symposium led by the “Communication, Environment, Science and Society” 
Study and Research Group (“GER ComEnSS”)

12-13 December 2024, Université Catholique de l'Ouest,  Angers, France

Numerous reports and resources, on a local (Regional Biodiversity Agency 
in France), national (French Biodiversity Office, Viginature) or global 
(IPCC, IPBES, IUCN, WWF) scale, are now warning of the climate emergency 
and the collapse of biodiversity. We thus observe that "nature is 
declining globally at a rate unprecedented in human history - and [that] 
the rate of species extinction is accelerating, already having serious 
effects on human populations worldwide" (IPBES, 2019, translation ours). 
These sources highlight, among other things, the importance of 
institutions, governance and policies in the proposals for solutions and 
new knowledges:

Effective climate action is made possible by political commitment, 
well-aligned multi-level governance, institutional frameworks, laws, 
policies and strategies, and improved access to finance and technology … 
Climate-resilient development benefits from the diversity of knowledge 
(IPCC, 2023, our translation).

Such sources also underline the importance of the Humanities and Social 
Sciences when it comes to environmental and ecological issues, which are 
closely linked to our relationship with knowledge on this subject and 
its construction in time and space. Similarly, they also echo the media 
coverage and visibility of the many forms of mobilization on these 
issues that are now being grasped by researchers (GER ComEnSS 
Colloquium, 2023).

> From the perspective of Communication and Information Sciences (CIS), 
and more specifically Environmental Communication, the aim of this CFP 
is to try understanding the multiple relationships that science, 
technology, society, their discourses, and their narratives "in the 
complexity of their times and their objects" (Coutellec, 2015, 
translation ours). The aim is to discuss the sciences, but also the 
knowledge that nourishes and constitutes the (multi)disciplinary field 
of Environmental Communication, without forgetting the plural and porous 
nature of this field, which is necessarily underpinned by ethical and 
philosophical reflections.

Numerous scholarly works in French-language CIS have already shown the 
importance of this research dynamics and such current of thought in our 
discipline and its links with other major currents (CPDIRSIC, 2019) 
Thus, the work done by Andrea Catellani, Céline Pascual Espuny, Pudens 
Malibabo Lavu and Béatrice Jalenques Vigouroux (2019), which takes stock 
of the scholarship within the study of Environmental Communication. 
Likewise, in an effort to epistemize Communication and Information 
Sciences, we should also highlight the major contribution of Françoise 
Bernard's initial work, based on the concept of the Anthropocene4, to 
"explore the questions of interrelations" among techniques, cultures, 
sciences and societies extended to nature, and thus to go beyond "the 
categories of anthropocentrism, technocentrism and naturocentrism" 
(Bernard, 2018, our translation).

Although environmental communication originated in the West, a whole 
literature appeared in France in the 1970s (Boillot Grenon, 2015). 
However, we should not forget the precursory texts such as Aldo 
Leopold's A Sand County Almanac published in 1949, Rachel Carson's 
Silent Spring published in 1962 or J. Baird Callicott's collection of 
essays In Defense of the Land Ethic published in 1989. Over the last few 
decades, however, it has become clear that with the rise of discourses 
and narratives on 'environmental' and 'ecological' issues in the public 
arena (Catellani & Errecart, 2023), Environmental Communication is both 
a field of academic research and a burgeoning area of practice (Vigneron 
and Francisco, 1996; Kane, 2016) that needs to be examined. Finally, 
there are other voices that are also becoming increasingly visible in 
the Western media on environmental issues and problems, and which 
intersect with other questions specific to the ethical, political and 
philosophical dynamics of communication. One can cite, for example, the 
publication of Pluriverse. A Post-Development Dictionary in 2019; 
Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development, published in 1988 and 
republished in 2010 or, more recently, Terra Viva: My Life in a 
Biodiversity of Movements, published in 2022 by writer and activist 
Vandana Shiva.

These networks of researchers and thinkers have put into words, images, 
and sounds these new challenges that call for their objects of study to 
be defined or redefined. From this perspective, they invite attention to 
the construction of knowledge, leading to a necessary epistemological 
critique. For example, there is a need to question certain conceptions 
(such as those which oppose Nature and Culture in the West, inherited 
from the Enlightenment (Lévi-Strauss, 1962; Descola, 2005, 2021; Martin, 
2016, 2022; Stépanoff, 2021, 2022). How, then, do the resulting 
concepts, fields, scientific devices and knowledge bring to light the 
reality of a view, a vision of the world, an ecology of relationships, 
subjectivities, and intentionalities? Thus, the challenges facing CIS, 
and in particular, Environmental Communication and the disciplinary 
fields that intersect with them, raise "critical and reflexive 
questions" (Babou, 2017, translation ours) about the substance as well 
as the form of diverse and varied knowledge. In the words of 
anthropologist Nastassja Martin, there is a need "to make two forms 
resonate: the detailed description of situations experienced, and the 
analysis often involving the construction of an intellectual edifice to 
understand them" (Martin, 2021, translation ours).

Beyond a simple investigation of the origins and historical and social 
institutionalization of this field of research, it seems appropriate to 
examine and question, at this stage of its development, the 
epistemological dimension of Environmental Communication, i.e. "the way 
in which scientific knowledge is acquired and validated" (Ibekwe-Sanjuan 
& Durampart, 2018, translation ours). Making explicit the underlying 
epistemological theories developed in works within a discipline thus 
makes it possible to appreciate the knowledge produced, as well as its 
complexities (Ibid.). These elements also resonate with the 
epistemological issues at stake in the transition from the concrete 
object to the scientific object (Davallon, 2004) of "environmental 
communication", i.e. what makes it specific within CIS, while in turn 
nourishing the latter with new "objects" capable of "constructing" new 
practices, dynamics, mediations and knowledge.
As part of this call, we aim to bring together:

… in the same space of reflection, interrogations on knowledges – in 
their diversity – as well as their contexts and manners they are 
inhabited by societies. This questioning of knowledge is accompanied by 
demands for the renewal of epistemologies (Babou 2017, translation ours).

As such, we want to focus on discussions on the foundations, legacies, 
and future of this fertile and relatively recent field of study, but 
also to provide a platform for other voices. How do they provide 
answers, or rather new questions and postures, based on the knowledge 
they have acquired, preserved, and transmitted (whether scientific or 
other). How do they confront the current environmental and ecological 
challenges?
In the light of existing work, it is possible to characterize certain 
salient, almost defining features, of the field of Environmental 
Communication:

- Its interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary scope
- Its ethical imperative
- Its pragmatic dimension
- Its sensory aspect

More specifically, in an attempt to reflect on this design, we feel it 
would be interesting to consider it from a number of perspectives that 
are likely to displace it in order to enrich and deepen it, questioning 
in the process the rationality of the “Moderns” when faced with Nature 
(Babou, 2010). This call for papers will therefore be approached from 
five angles:

1 - Situating Environmental Communication within "ecological thinking":

How does Environmental Communication make sense within the broader 
framework of ecological thinking, which "consists of a fresh 
interpretation of humanity's place within nature, in terms of the limits 
of the biosphere, the finitude of man, and solidarity with all living 
things", bearing in mind that it "proposes a displacement and 
reconfiguration of the frameworks of thought themselves" (Bourg & 
Fragnière, 2014, translation ours)? With this first line of research, we 
wish to place the field of Environmental Communication within 
contemporary ecological thought and to acknowledge our adherence to this 
structuring basis of thought.

2 - Historicizing Environmental Communication: from its American origins 
to contemporary developments

An archaeological investigation of the emergence of Environmental 
Communication in the American context will provide an insight into the 
conditions that made this field of research possible, with its 
scientific, institutional, social, and cultural presuppositions.
Initially stemming from the rhetorical academic tradition, the field of 
American Environmental Communication has now become “a transdisciplinary 
field of investigation” (Cox & Depoe, 2022, p. 13). It is based on 
certain “working hypotheses” which are also “epistemological 
assumptions”, such as the constructionist hypothesis according to which 
social and symbolic processes and environmental processes are mutually 
implicated, or the hypothesis which postulates that representations of 
nature and the environment embody self-interested orientations which 
result from them (Ibid. p. 16). A number of "heuristic questions" have 
also been identified that have given rise to a wide range of themes in 
the field of American Environmental Communication: representations of 
nature and the environment by people from different communities and 
under different social, geographical, and ethnic or indigenous 
conditions; the relationships between communication, values, beliefs, 
and perception of individuals and their environmental behavior (Ibid. p. 
17), to cite just a few important examples.

It should be noted that the dynamic development and heuristic force of 
American Environmental Communication stems from a wide range of 
theoretical and disciplinary traditions, such as critical rhetoric and 
discourse analysis (Peeples J. & Murphy M. 2022); the social sciences 
(Cantrill, 2022), where it is thematized either as a “crisis discipline” 
(Cox, 2007), a “care discipline” (Pezzullo, 2017), or an “environmental 
justice” discipline (Johnson et al. 2022).

The theme of this conference could lead to a comparative understanding 
of the emergence of this field in other contexts (French, European, or 
others).

3 - "Decolonizing" Environmental Communication, particularly from the 
“Global South”:

While the ecological crisis is global, it affects countries, their 
inhabitants (human or non-human), and their territories (mountains, 
forests, waters, etc.) differently. How do authors (from the South, for 
example) work and deal with the ecological issue from their own 
backgrounds, possibly using specific frameworks of thought? It will be 
highly heuristic to look at the so-called “subalternist” current of 
environmentalism (Charbonnier, 2022), such as the Indian 
environmentalism illustrated in Gandhi's avant-garde thinking on 
ecological sobriety (Varieties of Environmentalism. Essays North and 
South, 1997), or Ramachandra Guha's (How Much Should a Person Consume? 
Environmentalism in India and the United States, 2006).

This geographical shift to other countries and other continents will 
also enable us to discover and explore in greater depth certain 
non-Western “ecological thoughts” that will give rise to other 
approaches to Environmental Communication. One example of this is the 
work of the Japanese naturalist Imanishi Kinji, who, in opposition to a 
Western "scientific ecology", argues for the emergence of a genuine 
"natural science", a "sociology of living things" based on fieldwork and 
intuition (Comment la nature fait science, 2022).

One of the problems also raised here is that of legitimacy: "What is to 
be done with the otherness studied, and who is legitimate to translate 
it in the academic field, on the one hand, and in the world, on the 
other?" (Martin, 2021, translation ours).

4 - "Decompartmentalizing" Environmental Communication research:

How can Environmental Communication be enriched when we are aware of the 
extremely complex nature of the environment, marked by "a multiplicity 
of players, fields concerned, issues and also concepts" (Vigneron and 
Francisco, op. cit., translation ours)? What does it mean to adopt "a 
global, cross-disciplinary, and multidisciplinary approach" (Ibid.)? In 
Bruno Latour's pioneering work on the anthropology of science since the 
1990s, he has made an epistemic effort to deal with a "crisis of 
criticism" by trying to articulate "facts, power and discourse" (Latour, 
1997, translation ours) in order to turn them into the "hybrids" that he 
studied in the anthropology of science. This awareness of the need to 
break down disciplinary barriers is a key feature of the approach 
adopted by researchers working on environmental issues in general, and 
Environmental Communication in particular, as described by Schoenfeld, 
who is credited with the initial use of the term “Environmental 
Communication”:

Whatever their roots, are there common denominators between the 
different forms of environmental communication? Yes, they all focus on a 
holistic rather than compartmentalized approach to the 
people-resources-technology system. A fundamental theme of environmental 
communication is therefore interdependence - the fact that everything is 
connected to everything else (Schoenfeld, 1981, translation ours).

This decompartmentalization is also aimed at the interrelations to be 
built between different players, for example, between researchers and 
activists (Kane, 2016).

5 - Finally, imagining and inventing one or more "ecological paradigms" 
to stimulate emulation in environmental communication (its mechanisms, 
mediations, discourses, etc.).

It is highly significant to note that the call for a change of cosmology 
in order to understand the current ecological emergency is echoed by 
another equally pressing call for a change of epistemological paradigm 
in order to understand and inhabit this world. A “compositionist” 
approach (Latour, 2015) and a “relationalist” perspective (2019)9, to 
name but two examples, bear witness to the need to invent a new 
epistemology.

In the more specific context of francophone information and 
communication sciences, François Bernard's proposal to integrate the 
“Anthropocene” into the epistemology of this disciplinary field, or 
Amélie Coulbaut-Lazzarini and Frédéric Couston's proposal to “define 
environmental communication not as a study of anthropocentric 
environmental discourses and practices, but as committed research aimed 
at changing the links between humans and non-humans” (translation ours).

> From this perspective, how can we revisit and renew the key concepts 
that have until now underpinned the epistemological construction of CIS, 
such as "mediation", "device", "system", "circulation", "discourse", 
etc.? What would have to be invented? Would it be relevant and heuristic 
to develop, for example, an “ecological paradigm” (Hoang et al., 2022) 
as an attempt to epistemize the field of communication in general, and 
Environmental Communication in particular?

Practical information

Timetable and procedure for submitting proposals
- 30 September 2024: deadline for submitting proposals for papers
- 15 October 2024: feedback to authors
Format of proposals: Please send a file in Word or PDF format, including 
the following elements:
• An abstract in French or English of between 4,000 and 6,000 characters 
(including spaces), excluding the bibliography.

• An indicative bibliography
• 4 to 6 key words
• A short biography of the author(s)
• Submission of the abstract will be available soon on the platform: 
https://comenss2024.sciencesconf.org (the platform will be ready soon).
• Contact us if needed: (contact.comenss2024 /at/ gmail.com)
• A post-conference publication will follow (details to be announced later).

Scientific Committee:
• François Allard-Huver, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Vincent Carlino, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Andrea Catellani, Université catholique de Louvain
• Céline Cholet, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Amélie Coulbaut-Lazzarini, Université de Grenoble
• Frédéric Couston, Université de Nice Sophia Antipolis - Université 
Côte d'Azur
• Anne Gagnebien, Université de Toulon
• Thomas Hoang, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Emilie Kohlmann, IUT2 Grenoble
• Amina Lasfar, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Claire Mahéo, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Joyce Martin, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Marcy Ovoundaga, Université catholique de l’Ouest • Céline 
Pascual-Espuny, Université Aix Marseille
• Nicole Pignier, Université de Limoges
• Magali Prodhomme, Université catholique de l’Ouest
• Emilie Remond, Université de Poitiers

Organizing Committee:
• _François Allard-Huver, UCO
• _Céline Cholet, UCO
• _Vincent Carlino, UCO
• _Thomas Hoang, UCO
• _Amina Lasfar, UCO
• _Claire Mahéo, UCO
• _Joyce Martin, UCO
• _Magali Prodhomme, UCO

References
Babou I., « L’atelier politique de la nature. Des grands partages à 
l’expérience sensible », Questions de communication, 2017/2 (n° 32), p. 
7-28.
Babou I., Rationalité & nature. Une approche communicationnelle, 
Université Paris-Diderot, Paris VII, 2010.
Bernard F., “Les SIC et l’« Anthropocène » : une rencontre épistémique 
contre nature ?”, Les Cahiers du numérique, 14, 2018, p. 31-66.
Boillot Grenon, F. (2015). L’émergence tardive de la communication de 
l’environnement et du développement durable. Hermès, La Revue, 71, p. 
161-163.
Bourg D., Fragnière A., La pensée écologique, Paris, PUF, 2014.
Callicott J. B., In Defense of Land Ethic: Essays in Environmental 
Philosophy, State University of New York Press, 1989.
Cantrill J. G. “Social science approaches to environment, media, and 
communication” in Anders Hansen & Robert Cox (Eds), The Routledge 
Handbook of Environment and Communication, 2nd edition, Taylor & 
Francis, 2022.
Carson R., Silent Spring, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1962.
Catellani A, Pascual Espuny C., Malibabo Lavu P. et Jalenques Vigouroux 
B., « Les recherches en communication environnementale », Communication, 
Vol. 36/2, 2019.
Charbonnier P., Culture écologique, SL, Presses de Sciences Po, 2022.
CPDIRSIC : Conférence permanente des directeurs·trices des unités de 
recherche en sciences de l’information et de la communication, 
Dynamiques des recherches en sciences de l’information et de la 
communication, 3e édition revue et complétée, 2019
Coulbaut-Lazzarini A., Couston F., « Manifeste pour penser la 
communication environnementale à la lumière des liens 
humains/non-humains », Revue française des sciences de l’information et 
de la communication, 21, 2021.
Coutellec L., La science au pluriel. Essai d’épistémologie pour des 
sciences impliquées, SL, Éditions Quæ, 2015.
Cox, R. (2007), « Nature’s “crisis disciplines”: Does environmental 
communication have an ethical duty ? », Environmental Communication: A 
Journal of Culture and Nature, 1(1), p. 5-20.
Cox R. & Depoe S. “Emergence and growth of the field of environmental 
communication”, in Anders Hansen & Robert Cox (Eds), The Routledge 
Handbook of Environment and Communication, 2nd edition, Taylor & 
Francis, 2022.
D’Almeida N., de Cheveigné S. et Jeanneret Y. (dir.), La Place des NTIC 
dans l’emergence, l’appropriation et le débat autour d’un objet 
environnemental : le cas des rejets polluants, rapport de recherche 
GRIPIC pour le Programme « Concertation, décision, environnement », 
Paris, ministère de l’Environnement et du Développement durable, 2004.
Davallon J., Grandmont G., Schiele B., L’Environnement entre au musée, 
Lyon/Québec, Presses universitaires de Lyon/Musée de la civilisation, 1992.
Descola P., Les formes du visible, Paris, Seuil, 2021.
Descola P., Par-delà nature et culture, Paris, Gallimard, 2005.
Evans Comfort S., Eun Park Y., « On the field of environmental 
communication: A systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature », 
Environmental Communication, 12(7), 2018, p. 862-875.
Hoang A.-N, Mellot S. et Prodhomme M., « Le numérique questionné par 
l’éthique située des écologies politiques », Revue française des 
sciences de l’information et de la communication [En ligne], 25 | 2022, 
mis en ligne le 01 septembre 2022, consulté le 28 juin 2024.
Ibekwe-Sanjuan F., Durampart M., “Le pluralisme épistémologique et 
méthodologique en recherche scientifique”, Les Cahiers du numérique, 14, 
2018, p. 11-30.
Johnson T. N., Dressler K. I., Hernandez N. & Endres D.. “Environmental 
justice. The third pillar of environmental communication research” in 
Anders Hansen & Robert Cox (Eds), The Routledge Handbook of Environment 
and Communication, 2nd edition, Taylor & Francis, 2022.
Jurin R. R., Roush D., Danter K. J., Environmental Communication, second 
édition, Springer, 2010.
Kane O., La communication environnementale. Enjeux, acteurs et 
stratégies, Paris, L’Harmattan, 2016.
Kinji I., Comment la nature fait science. Entretiens, souvenirs et 
intuitions, Traduit du japonais et présenté par Augustin Berque, SL, 
Éditions Wildproject, 2022.
Kothari A., Salleh A., Escobar A.,Demaria F., Acosta A. (dir.), 
Pluriverse. A Post-Development Dictionary, New Delhi, Tulika Books, 2019.
Latour B., “Composer un monde commun”, Études, 2015, p. 69-78.
Latour B., Nous n’avons jamais été modernes, Paris, La découverte, 
1991, 1997.
Leopold A., A Sand County Almanac, New York, Oxford University Press, 1949.
Levi-Strauss C., La pensée sauvage, Paris, Pocket, 1990.
Martin N., « Dire la fragilité des mondes. L’anthropologie ou l’écriture 
du commun », Revue du Crieur, 2021/1 (N° 18), p. 4-19.
Martin N., À l'est des rêves. Réponses Even aux crises systémiques, 
Paris, La Découverte, 2022.
Martin N., Les âmes sauvages. Face à l’Occident, la résistance d’un 
peuple d’Alaska, Paris, La Découverte, 2016.
Peeples J. & Murphy M. “Discourse and rhetorical analysis approaches to 
environment, media, and communication”, in Anders Hansen & Robert Cox 
(Eds), The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication, 2nd 
edition, Taylor & Francis, 2022.
Pezzullo, P. C., & Cox, R. (2017). Environmental communication and the 
public sphere. SAGE Publications.
Ramachandra G., How Much Should a Person Consume? Environmentalism in 
India and the United States, Berkeley (Calif.), University of California 
Press, 2006.
Ramachandra G., Varieties of Environmentalism. Essays North and South 
(avec Joan Martinez Alier), Londres, Routledge, 1997.
Serres M., Relire le relié, coll. “Essais & Documents”, Paris, Éd. Le 
Pommier, 2019.
Theys J., L’Environnement, à la recherche d’une définition, Notes de 
méthode, n° 1, Paris, IFEN éditeur, 1993.
Vandana S., Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development, London, Zed 
Books, 1988.
Vandana S., Terra Viva : My Life in a Biodiversity of Movements, 
Vermont, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2022.
Vigneron J., Franscisco L., La Communication environnementale, Paris, 
Economica, 1996.


---------------
The COMMLIST
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please use it responsibly and wisely.
--
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
--
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ commlist.org)
URL: http://nicocarpentier.net
---------------