Strategically communicating climate crisis: How ecovillages and cohousing pursue structural change in the built environment | Intellect Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Journal of Alternative & Community Media
  4. Volume 6, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 2634-4726
  • E-ISSN: 2206-5857

Abstract

Climate crisis, fuelled by dominant social, political and economic structures, causes a rift in the Earth’s metabolism. In the built environment, where people live and work, social-ecological communities, such as ecovillages and cohousing, model and pursue alternative, interconnected relations with nature. This study examines five social-ecological communities in the Pacific Northwest of the United States and their use of strategic communication to pursue structural change. Long interviews identified three themes and eight sub-themes through which community members influence the mainstream that surrounds them and enrich their own membership and infrastructure. This study demonstrates that postmodern approaches to strategic communication active on the local level, while in tension with modernist approaches, provide an effective means to respond to climate crisis in the built environment.

© 2021 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/joacm_00089_1
2021-10-01
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Angus, I.. ( 2016), Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System, New York:: New York University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker, T.. ( 2013;), ‘ Ecovillages and capitalism: Creating sustainable communities within an unsustainable context. ’, in J. Lockyer, and J. R. Veteto. (eds), Environmental Anthropology Engaging Ecotopia: Bioregionalism, Permaculture, and Ecovillages, New York:: Berghahn Books;, pp. 285–300.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Calhoun, C.. ( 1992;), ‘ Introduction: Habermas and the public sphere. ’, in C. Calhoun. (ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere: Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;, pp. 1–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Carvalho, A.,, van Wessel, M., and Maeseele, P.. ( 2017;), ‘ Communication practices and political engagement with climate change: A research agenda. ’, Environmental Communication, 11:1, pp. 122–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Dawson, J.. ( 2013;), ‘ From islands to networks: The history and future of the ecovillage movement. ’, in J. Lockyer, and J. R. Veteto. (eds), Environmental Anthropology Engaging Ecotopia: Bioregionalism, Permaculture, and Ecovillages, New York:: Berghahn Books;, pp. 217–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Deetz, S.. ( 2001;), ‘ Conceptual foundations. ’, in F. M. Jablin, and L. L. Putnam. (eds), The New Handbook of Organizational Communication: Advances in Theory, Research, and Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage;, pp. 3–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Dias, M. A.,, Loureiro, C. F. B.,, Chevitarese, L., and Souza, C. D. M. E.. ( 2017;), ‘ The meaning and relevance of ecovillages for the construction of sustainable societal alternatives. ’, Ambiente e Sociedade, 20:3, pp. 79–96.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Dozier, D. M., and Lauzen, M. M.. ( 2000;), ‘ Liberating the intellectual domain from the practice: Public relations, activism, and the role of the scholar. ’, Journal of Public Relations Research, 12:1, pp. 3–22, https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1201_2. Accessed 8 September 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Dunlap, R., and York, R.. ( 2012;), ‘ Environmental sociology. ’, in G. Ritzer. (ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Sociology, Hoboken, NJ:: John Wiley & Sons;, pp. 504–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Ergas, C.. ( 2010;), ‘ A model of sustainable living: Collective identity in an urban ecovillage. ’, Organization and Environment, 23:1, pp. 32–54.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Ergas, C., and Clement, M. T.. ( 2016;), ‘ Ecovillages, restitution, and the political-economic opportunity structure: An urban case study in mitigating the metabolic rift. ’, Critical Sociology, 42:7&8, pp. 1195–211.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Escribano, P.,, Lubbers, M. J., and Molina, J. L.. ( 2020;), ‘ A typology of ecological intentional communities: Environmental sustainability through subsistence and material reproduction. ’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 266, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121803. Accessed 28 August 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Foster, J. B.,, Clark, B., and York, R.. ( 2010), The Ecological Rift: Capitalism’s War on the Earth, New York:: Monthly Review Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Gardiner, M. E.. ( 2006;), ‘ Marxism and the convergence of utopia and the everyday. ’, History of the Human Sciences, 19:3, pp. 1–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Gitlin, T.. ( 1978;), ‘ Media sociology: The dominant paradigm. ’, Theory and Society, 6:2, pp. 205–53, https://www.jstor.org/stable/657009. Accessed 5 March 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) ( 2015;), ‘ GEN ecovillage transition strategy 2015–2020. ’, https://ecovillage.org/wp-content/uploads/drupal_files/files/6_gen_future_strategy.pdf. Accessed 10 September 2020.
  17. Hackett, R. A.. ( 2016;), ‘ Alternative media for global crisis. ’, Journal of Alternative & Community Media, 1:1, pp. 14–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Holtzhausen, D. R.. ( 2000;), ‘ Postmodern values in public relations. ’, Journal of Public Relations Research, 12:1, pp. 94–114.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Holtzhausen, D. R.. ( 2008;), ‘ Strategic communication. ’, in W. Donsbach. (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication, Hoboken, NJ:: John Wiley & Sons;, pp. 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecs106. Accessed 25 August 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Holtzhausen, D. R., and Voto, R.. ( 2002;), ‘ Resistance from the margins: The postmodern public relations practitioner as organizational activist. ’, Journal of Public Relations Research, 14:1, pp. 57–84, https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1401_3. Accessed 26 August 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Holtzhausen, D. R., and Zerfass, A.. ( 2013;), ‘ Strategic communication: Pillars and perspectives of an alternative paradigm. ’, in A. Zerfass,, S. Wehmeie, and L. Rademacher. (eds), Organisationskommunikation und Public Relations, Wiesbaden:: Springer VS;, pp. 73–94.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kopp, J. J.. ( 2009), Eden within Eden: Oregon’s Utopian Heritage, Corvallis, OR:: Oregon State University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Litfin, K.. ( 2009;), ‘ The global ecovillage movement as a holistic knowledge community. ’, in G. Kütting, and R. D. Lipschutz. (eds), Environmental Governance: Power and Knowledge in a Local-Global World, Abingdon:: Routledge;, pp. 124–42.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Merchant, C.. ( 1981), The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, New York:: Harper Collins;.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Pickerill, J., and Maxey, L.. ( 2009;), ‘ Geographies of sustainability: Low impact developments and radical spaces of innovation. ’, Geography Compass, 3:4, pp. 1515–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Schelly, C.. ( 2017), Dwelling in Resistance: Living with Alternative Technologies in America, New Brunswick, NJ:: Rutgers University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Schiffer, S. J.. ( 2018;), ‘ “Glocalized” utopia, community-building, and the limits of imagination. ’, Utopian Studies, 29:1, pp. 67–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Schwandt, T. A., and Gates, E. F.. ( 2018;), ‘ Case study methodology. ’, in N. K. Denzin, and Y. S. Lincoln. (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage;, pp. 341–59.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Shove, E.. ( 2010;), ‘ Beyond the ABC: Climate change policy and theories of social change. ’, Environment and Planning A, 42:6, pp. 1273–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Steffen, W.,, Rockström, J.,, Richardson, K.,, Lenton, T. M.,, Folke, C.,, Liverman, D.,, Summerhayes, C. P.,, Barnosky, A. D.,, Cornell, S. E.,, Crucifix, M.,, Donges, J. F.,, Fetzer, I.,, Lade, S. J.,, Scheffer, M.,, Winkelmann, R., and Schellnhuber, H. J.. ( 2018;), ‘ Trajectories of the Earth system in the Anthropocene. ’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115:3, pp. 8252–59.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Taylor, D. E.. ( 2000;), ‘ The rise of the environmental justice paradigm: Injustice framing and the social construction of environmental discourses. ’, American Behavioral Scientist, 43:4, pp. 508–80.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Temesgen, A. K.. ( 2020;), ‘ Building an island of sustainability in a sea of unsustainability? A study of two ecovillages. ’, Sustainability (Switzerland), 12:24, pp. 1–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) ( n.d.;), ‘ National environmental policy act review process. ’, https://www.epa.gov/nepa/national-environmental-policy-act-review-process#EIS. Accessed 10 September 2020.
  34. Yin, R.. ( 2010), Qualitative Research from Start to Finish, New York:: Guilford Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Zerfass, A.,, Verčič, D.,, Nothhaft, H., and Werder, K. P.. ( 2018;), ‘ Strategic communication: Defining the field and its contribution to research and practice. ’, International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12:4, pp. 487–505, https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1493485. Accessed 26 August 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Macary, Jared T., and Adae, Eric Kwame. ( 2021;), ‘ Strategically communicating climate crisis: How ecovillages and cohousing pursue structural change in the built environment. ’, Journal of Alternative & Community Media, 6:2, pp. 143–60, https://doi.org/10.1386/joacm_00089_1
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/joacm_00089_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): alternative communication; case study method; climate change; cohousing; ecovillages; environmental justice; strategic communication

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error