The West European environmental movement

Book Chapter

Reference

The West European environmental movement

VAN DER HEIJDEN, Anton, KOOPMANS, Ruud, GIUGNI, Marco

VAN DER HEIJDEN, Anton, KOOPMANS, Ruud, GIUGNI, Marco. The West European

environmental movement. In: Matthias Finger. The Green movement worldwide . Greenwich : JAI Press, 1992. p. 1-40

Available at:

http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:112898

Disclaimer: layout of this document may differ from the published version.

1 / 1

THE _WEST EUROPEAN

ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT

Hein-Anton van der Heijderç Ruud _Koopmans,

and Marco G. Giugni

INTRODUCTION

Research in Socid Movements, Conllicts and _Change Supplement 2, pages l-411.

Copyright @ lg9D by JAI ^press Inc.

AI rights ofreproduction in any form reserved.

ISBN: 1-5593&53t)-t

This paper _deals

with

an analysis of the environmental _movement

in

western

Europe. First, it is

necessary

to define our conceptualization of

^the

environmental movement.

we

prefer _the term ..environmental

movement.

to

"green movement,'since _the latter term bears too strong _an identification

with

the green parties which have eSeleed in many west Euripean

c;;,ri",

during the

last

15 years. Green parties have

both

a smaller and a wider scope than the rest of the environmental movement. Their scbp" is smau",

* ii"y æ"*"Iv

do

not

represent the environmental movement as a whole but

just

_a (more

or

less

radical) part of it, and wider as most

green

parties are not just environmental parties but generally constitute a tànshtion of

other components

of the "new

sociar movement

sector" (Mccarthy ard zard,

1976:1224),such _as the peace movement and the women's movement, into party

2

^{H.-A. VAN DER} HEUDEN RUUD KOOPMANS, and MARCO G' GIUGM politics. Moreover, several west European countries either do not have a green

pu*y ut all or

^have

had

one

only

^{since recently, whereas} they have

had

a flourishing environmental ^movement

for

many years'

Second]we include in the environmental movement the traditional conservation associations as well as the more political/radical environmental and ^ecological organizations, which were founded

in

many West European countries around

19i0. Rucht

⁽¹⁹⁸⁹⁾

and Riidig

^(1988:

2940) make a distinction

^between conservatiOnism, environmentalism,

and

"ecologiSm'

in the

environmental movement. Conservationism refers to the protection of nature for aesthetic, ethical, and/or religious reasons. Environmentalism is deffred by Rucht ^as: "a pragmatic attitude to

ih. pr"r"*ation

or improvement of the human environment in a very broad sense, focusing on the exploitation of natural resources, problems of noise, pollution of air, soil and water, healthy food, etc.'Ecologism, finally, ^"goes

far

'UeyonA

a

certain range

of

environmental problems

and their

corresponding poti"i"r. This concept implies a holistic vision of a decentralized, democratic and àgalitarian society,

è^irti"g in

^harmony

with

nature" (Rucht, 1989).

In

order to label the whole movement, several authors (e.g. Rûdig, 1988) prefer the terms ..ecolory movement'and "ecologism," while others (e.g., JamiSon, Eyerman, and Cramer; 1991) use the terms'environmental movement" and "environmentalism'"

We share this last point of view as we regard the holistic vision, which ^is inherent to ecologism, as an exponent of the way of thinking characteristic to the 1970s, whereas the term ooenvironmentalism'in

our

view corresponds much better to

recrnt problem definitions in

^Western

^Europe' Within the

environmental movemânts

of the West

European countries,

the three different

^branches

conservationism, environmentalism, and ecologism are more

or

less connected'

For a

clear understanding

of the

environmental movement as

a

whole,

it

is neæssary to understand each of these three branches'

The

third

element of our conceptualization ^{of the} environmental movement is that we consider the antinuclear movement to ^{be a} part of the environmental movement.

In

some studies (e.g., van

Noort,

^1988), the antinuclear movement is indeed conceived of as a separate new social movement; according

to

most scholars, however, the linkages with the environmental movement ^{are so} strong that the two movements can hardly be separated

from

each other.

Finally, besides many differences, a number of similarities also exists between the environmental movement ^and the green

political

parties.

Although

^green

parties are not considered as a part of the environmental movement in ^the strict

^r"rr",

*"

nevertheless pay attention

to

these parties as

far

^as necessary

for

a better understanding of the environmental ^movement'

The paper

is

structured as

follows. In

the second section, we discuss the

pr..onâitions

^{which enabled the} environmental movement to emerge- We deal

with

^general preconditions

to

be

found all

over Western Europe, including ecological

probl"tttt

and cultural changes. In the

third

section, we describe the devetàpment of the environmental ^movement

in

^{'Western Europe}

from

^about

TheWest Europmn Enpironmental

Muoernent

₃

1970 onward.

which

were the. most

important

issues

for

the

west

European environmental movement and in which àifferent political-ideological _contexts,

in which different

discourses, have these _issuËs been

uro,rg;i ;pt which

strategies

did

the

west

European environmental _{movement use}

to

realize its aims

throughout

the years, how

did

its rerationship

to nationJ

gàvernments develop, and

to

what extent was

it

successful?

which

are the

molt

important organizations

within

the

west

European environmental movement and what are their distinctive features? Besidesà number of similarities, the development of the several environmentar movements

in

the

west

European countries atso shows a number of interesting differences.

In

our opinion, the country-specific trajectories of development are determined to a targi extent _by country-specific

political preconditions, summarized in the term ..political

opportunity

structure."'we _assume that generar preconditions _{such as} ecorogicai probrems

and cultural

change

do not have a direct impact on the .ir"rg.n".

"na

development _{of the} movement, but rather that their impact is indirectl mediated and

modified by

changes

in political opportunitier. tni, propositiln will

be elaborated and tested

in

the

fourth ,""tion _which

_can be conceived

of

as a country-specilic, empirically more detailed elaboration

of

the broad lines

of development sketched previously. Ilere generar characteristics of

the environmental movement

in four

different countries (France, Germany, the Netherlands,

and switzerland) are

discussed,

as well as

country-speci{ic trajectories of development.

The data in this section was gathered in the context _{of a} comparative _research project on five new social movements in these four countries, tËe environmental movement being one of them. Among other reasons, these

four

countries _were chosen because of their

di{rent

political opportunity structures; together, they give

a clear

impression

of the

different

ïays in which th"'"";;;;;;

movement in Western Europe has developed in interaction with different political systems. The subjects we discuss include the impact of the political oppôrtunity

sJructuf

on the strategies of

mobilization-forlnshnce

_{thË question as to wtry}

the environmental _movement in some countries has developed much more radical strategies

of

mobilization than

in

others.

we

also arra\y)e the in{luence

of

the different political opportunity structures in the four countries on the achievements

of

their environmental movements.

In

the concluding section, we discuss the prospects of the environmental movement

in

a

westeÀ

Europe which is ori its way towards _{a greater} political unity.

PRECONDIIIONS _FOR THE EMERGENCE OF

THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT -

IN WESTERN EUROPE

Since

around

1970, environmentar probrems have gained _a prominent _place in the political arena. The European^year

for

the

pràtectio.

_{of Nut}

rr"

(1970),

4

^{H.-A VAN DER} HEUDEN RUUD KOOPMANS, and MARCO G. GIUGNI the warning cry

of

the

Club of

Rome (1972), and the

UN

conference on the environment

in

Stockholm (1972), among other things, all contributed to this development.

As

has been pointed

out

often

in

^studies

on political

agenda-

building, before a certain situation

evolves

into a social problem, four

conditions have to be met (Cobb and Elder, 1972;Cobb, Ross, and Ross, 1976;

van der

Eijk

and

Kok,

1975;

Hall, Land,

Parker and

Webb,

1975;

van

der Heijden, 1986; Kingdon, 1984; Leroy and de Geest, 1985; Nelson, 1978, 1984):

l.

^The problem situation has

to

be made visible socially;

2.

The problem must get a broader, more ^general context and meaning;

3. ^{Broad public interest,}

consciousness

and

atrlr'areness

have to

^be

mobilized; and

4.

^{Before a problem becomes both a potitical and a} policy problem,

it

has

to

^pass through a number of

political

fîlters and selection mechanisms.

L

Problems never arise overnight;

they

are socially defined constructs.

What we call environmental problems today were not defrned as such before 1965. This does

not

mean, however, that these problems

did not

exist before 1965. Three elements have played a role in the process of the social awakening

to the problem situation: environmental

catastrophes,

publications

by scientists, and the actions

of

the environmental ^movement.

In

1967, the

first

major accident with a supertanker occurred: the Torrey Canyon. The television pictures of oil-stained coasts shocked the world: for the first time, people could

see the unintended effects of the transportation

of oil in

supertankers, one

of

the fundamentals of our economic growth. Later environmental catastrophes such as

the dioxine

disaster

in

^Seveso

in

¹⁹⁷⁶

and the explosion of

the Chernobyl nuclear

plant l0

^years later had a similar effect.

Second, publications by scientists have contributed to the social awakening

to

environmental problems.

Four

titles have

to

be mentioned

in

particular.

As early as 1962, Rachel Carson published her

book

Silent Spring'

in

which she called attention to the negative effects of the usage of

DDT

and pesticides in general.

In

The costs of Economic Growth (1967), E. Mishan criticized ^the pursuit

of

economic

growth at

any price.

In

connection

with

environmental problems, Mishan introduced the terms "external effects" and "social costs."

In

The Population Bomb (1968), P.

Ehrlich found

a connection between the exponential

growth of

the

world population

and

all

kinds

of

environmental problems.

Finally, in

^view

of

five basic

variables-population,

capital, food, natural resources, and

poltution-the first report of

^the

Club of

Rome,

The

^,

Limits to

Growth (Meàdows, 1972), sketched a global ecological model

for

ⁱ

use in predicting the further development of the "ecosystem earth." According to this report,

continuingtofollowexisting

scenarios would lead to

catastrophe:

i

in

the early

2lst

century, the earth

would

be ruined

by

overpopulation,

food

ⁱ

shortages, depletion of natural resources and pollution.

The Wæt European Emtironmental

Mooerneùt

₅

As well as actual catastrophes and the publications of scientists, the actions

:j.î:_t:r*:ntal or'anizatiàns

_{also puvËà an imporrant}

-L iirlu""ring

rhe envlronmental problems. _Such actions as the protests

of

Greenpeace against seal hunting and radioactive _{waste disposal} in ihe seas,

."";"i;ï;

existence of environmental _problems

to

a broad public.

2' As soon

as

a problem situation

has been made socialry visible; the

problem should obtain a broader, more

generar,

context and

meaning;

environmental problems are by no means accidentar coincidences or isorated events'

To

be considered.as _a social and

political p.ouù., unînui.on,o.nr"t

nr-o.bfe1 has

to

be positioned

in a

morË generar scientific, ideorogical _and

political

_context;

ft -r1

^become

^{part of}

"'dir"ou.r".

^Rachel carson,s book

not only dealt with DDT, but

also described ecologicar

"y"r", "rro "rr"in reactions' and

hence

provided a frame of

reference

and a

scheme

of interpretation

also relevant

for other

"nui.on-"ntal

^problems.

^The

^global

ecological model _{of the}

club

of Rome was a cybernetic model, ir,

*t i"t irotut"a

categories such as

food production

and

poirution *"r"

u"-i'.,g

"onnectea

for

the

first time. In The

càsts

of Economii àro*th, _Mishan

_broke

_down

_the

consensus

on

the

desirability of

economic

growth at

any price uno thereby paved the way

for both

Schumacher's philoisophy or

"ttioli.rtsmail,,

and a

critical Marxist

environmental

theory.

Schumacher

(rg73)

perceived smar- scale, self-sufficient communities as an arternative

ro.

" g.o*tfi-oi.ït"o _*orra

which would

become

increasingly intolerabre. criticar Marxist

scholars

:::T*i:d .the capitalisr econoiric structure as the main

cause

of

all envronmental problems (e.g.,

Gorz,

1977, Jânicke, l97g).

3' A third

necessary

cotrditio'for

_u

ptu""

on the public _{and the}

political

agenda

is the creation and mobilizaiion of a broad p"iri"-

interest, consciousness

and awareness. Besides the environmenîal

_movement, governments _{also can} play an important _role

in

this mobilization. _in-tgZO,

,t

"

American government _{*ur_}

9tr..

of the organize^

"r ^{u ùig}

"un,p^uig,

*rri.t

cumulated

in Earrh Day (April 22); akJ in

1970,

rrt. Ëoropi*'

councir

:rcullr"-d the ^European year for the protection of Nature. The

rg72 Stockholm conference on the Environment _{was an}

initiative

of an (umbrella) governmental institution: _the

uN.

In many cases, these supranatiorraiinitiatives subsequently spread

to

national levels,

for

exampre, the ^..tree planting _days,, which were organized

in

several countries. The effect of

trr"r"

"'uÀpuigns una of the actions

of

the environmentut

*our*.rrt

is

demonstru*à-uvî-".ou, public opinion

surveys-on

the

development

of

environmental _awareness

in

different countries.

In

all developea western countries, the same trend can be observed:.

a strong

increase

of

environmental _awareness

from _about

1965

onward (Albrechts, 1975; Buttel and _{Humphrey, l9g2;} Brrùn",

tgZZ;

McBnvoy,1972).

Several authors _have linked this increase

in

environmental _awareness to the emergence of so-called postmarerialistic _values. According ,o

I;Fh;;

_eg77),

6

^{H.-A VAN DER} HEUDEN RUUD KOOPMANS, ^ANd MARCO G. GIUGNI individuals and societies are able to direct their attention

to

other than merely material needs as soon as they have reached a certain level

of

welfare. Such a situation,

in

which the developed Western societies found themselves

from

the middle

of the

^{1960s onward, leads}

to

^new

political,

cultural, ethical, and esthetic aims. According to several authors, the new middle class and the new social movements are the most

important

^bearers

of

these postmaterialistic values (e.g., Brand, 1985; Cohen, 1985; Cotgrove and

Dufl

^{1981; Kriesi, 1986;}

Offe,

1985;

for critical

^notes

on

Inglehart's

work from an

environmental perspective, see Lowe and

Riidig,

1986: 517 ff.).

The

protection of

the environment undoubtedly constitutes one

of

these postmaterialistic values. Unlike much public opinion, howevet, there appears to be a relative stability of attitudes toward environmental protection. Downs'

"issue-attention

cycle," in which the

increase

and decline of interest in

environmental problems shows a cyclical course (Downs, 1972), does not seem applicable.

Drawing on more

comprehensive survey

data,

collected

on

a nationwide basis and

requiring

respondents

to

make trade-offs rather than merely identify ^problems, Mitchell ^(1979, 1984) and Lowe and Morrison (1984) have shown

that

environmental attitudes are

much more

stable

and

have remained widespread (Lowe and

Rûdig,

1986: 514).

Environmental consciousness and awareness

do,

however,

not

necessarily imply readiness for cnvironmental action. Ester (1979, 1980) demonstrates that the concept of environmental consciousness has three different dimensions: a cognitive ("knowledge

about')

and an affective ("involvement

in')

dimension, together constituting an "environmental attitude"; ^and a readiness

for action-

the extent to which individuals are prepared to make sacrifices or to undertake action

for the solution of

environmental problems,

that is, a

^readiness

for

,,environmental behavior." According

to

Ester, many public opinion polls do not offer a clear picture as to which of the three dimensions is at stake (Ester,

1979, l98o).

4.

^{To get a} place on the public and

political

agenda,

it

is necessary to

first

pass through a number

of political

^filters and selection mechanisms ^{(see also}

Hajer,

1991).

The fact that around

1970

many

countries created separate

ministerial

departments

for environmental problems, clearly proved that

environmental problems have been recognized as a serious social and

political

problem.

At

^{the EEC level,} environmental problems have been dealt

with

by

the

General

Directorate for the Environment

^since

the

1970s.

At

United Nations level, the so-called United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) was initiated

in

1972. Clearly, the existence

of

an environmental department at the national or the international political level is a necessary,

ifnot

sufficient, mechanism

to

handle environmental demands effectively.

In

this respect, the political opportunity structure is of

vital

importance.

The West European Enoironmental Moaement

Issues

DEVXTOPME _MOVEMENT NT _9F- THE ENVIRONME NTAL IN WEStÊNNI- E-UIOFÈ "*

with

regard

to the

issues

important to _{the west}

_European environmentar movemenr berween ₁₉₇₀ and 1990, three distinct periods

iu"

L"-âirrirguished (see also

Riidig,

re88: 28 ff-).

During

rrr.

iirr, yd;;i;;;;";""rn

protest, the years around the pubrication of"the

crub of Ro*. ,rooit,

uiærrtion

*u,

f9cu1e{

mainly

_{on the}

population

_{explosion and the}

pollution of

water and

air'

Subsequenrly,

from th;

mid-I970s

until

the earry rôg0s,

,"Àào""

against nuclear energy was

the most important

_issue.

Around

19g2,

a third

issue emerged: environmenral _problems became defi ned

*ui"t ;; ;-Ëù' ^p-blems,

while sustainable deveropment and ecologicar

modernizatio;; ih"

economy also became

important

iisues.

The new environmenlal movement, which

in

most west European _countries came

into

being around 1970, was not clearly _separated

from

other new social movements

that

emerged

d:ring this period; together with the

women,s movement and the

third-world *ouem"rri, it

constituted a broad .,countercul_

tural"

undercurrent

that

covered almost

aI

action

goas

or the

iut. Doo,

_1"r.

Tellegen, 1983:r8). During its first

y"ur., tr* n"*

environmental movement was ch.aycærized

by a

large degree

of

"orrr"rrrur.

Environmental problems _had achieved their place o1 the-

pàtti"a

agenda just recently and the environmental movement _seemed

to

be able

to

convince the worrd of its aims.

In

many west European countries, the years around r9Z2werea period ofvisionary _rong-term plans,

in which the

state

was

credited

with

large possibilities

to

influence developments in society. By that time, the environmental movement was too new to be afflicted _by internal conllicts on lssues and strategies.

within

lheriovemenr, the opinion that economic growth _{should be} stoppea prevailed. The inJruentiar

"Blueprint

for

Survivar,"a paper published

bf

the British branch of Friends

of

the Earth, _{sketched a} modefof so"i"ty

it

whicli notions of naturalness and small_

scale production played an

important

_role.

In

this period, the environmentar movement critically _analyzed prevairing mentarity:

"uiu"r ût.

""orro*i" g''wth,

competition,,consumption,

and

welfare

,"."

"riti"ir"C ,n*ùV us-ih"y *"r"

considered

the most important

causes

of environm"rrti i.our.*s.

^The

environmentar movement

did not

engage

much in the actual

contents

of

environmental poritics and

environm"nà-poti"y;

_{its most}

i*portuoirole

_{in this} period _was to raise

consciousnes.. ^'

The

Nuclear

Energy

Conflict

Since the

first

oil crisis

in

1973, resistance to nucrear energy has become the major issue of the

west

European

"rrrri.orr*àrrtal ^movement. Although many

8

^{H.-4. VAN DER} HEUDEN RUUD KOOPMANS, and MARCO G' GIUGNI rilest European countries already had detailed programs

for

the construction of new nuclear plants, the

oil

crisis made

it

all the more cleax how vulnerable these countries were because

their

continued economic

growth

was largely dependent

on oil from the Middle East.

Hence,

nuclear programs

^were considered

more

necessary

than ever. At the

same

time,

however, these programs constituted

a

breaking

point

between

the

existing

order

^{and the} environmental movement, which questioned such an

unlimited

continuation of economic growth.

In many west European countries, resistance against nuclear energy emerged during the first half of the 1970s; the most substantial confrontations took ^place uround the end

of that

decade. The way

in

which the

conllict took

shape

in different

countries was

strongly

determined

by their political opportunity

structure.

In

the

fourth

section we

will

^pursue

this

matter

in

^greater

deptt;

here we confine

our

attention

to

some general features

of

the nuclear energy conflict in Western Europe (more detailed elaborations can ^be found

in Diani

and

van der

^Heijden,

in

press;

Flam, in

^press;

Kitschelt,

1984;

Nelkin

^and

Pollak,

1977; Rûdig, 1990).

Actors

Although new environmental organizations were founded at the beginning

of the l9i0s in

many West European countries, the nuclear ^energy conflict

was fought mainly by ^people who did not belong to the institutional

environmental movement. Among the existing organizations, only Friends

of

the Earth

took

sides in the conflict;

in

Great Britain,

it

even took the initiative

in

the

fight

^against nuclear power.

In

^{general, however,}

it

was chiefly ^new organizations that organized the public resistance; the struggle against nuclear

"n"tgy

^wÉrs

to

be their exclusive issue.

In

some countries (France, Germany),

ttr. *ofli"t

^emerged at the local level,

with

local and regional organizations playing the most important role (Breisach and Wyhl

in

Germany, Fessenheim

in

France).

In

France, the conJlict

did not

^lead

to

the

foundation of

^{a strong}

national

umbrella organization;

in most

other countries, however, ^separate national organizations opposing nuclear energy were founded during the ^1970s,

for example, the National Power Group Stop Kalkar (LLSK) in

^the

Netherlands ^(1973);

Ama in Norway 097$; Initiative of Austrian

Nuclear Power

Plants opponents (IÔAG) in Austria

^(1976);

Action Stop

^Nuclear Energy

(ASK) in

Sweden (1976); United

Action

Group Stop Nuclear ^Energy

(VAKS) in Belgium Q97$; CCSE in Italy

(1978);

and the

Anti-Nuclear Campaign

(ANC) in

Great

Britain

^{(1978) (Flam,}

in

press).

Framæ

Both individuals

and organizations may have

quite different

^reasons

for

opposing the construction

of

new nuclear plants-because they fear harm

to

their communities; _because they _{are anxiorm}

that

nuclear technorogy

wilr

be used

for military

purposes; _because

tr,ev'no .ruciiË;.rr, ïlo .*p.nriu.,

and _so

forth.

According ro

Dianiii" _oriJrl,

_we can distinguii-h _seven different ways

in

which resistance

against,;";;;;

ffiX'#:îïïif; fï;,ffi'î:i'ff ^{iJfl ff} ff;#,::'"'î#,::T:

r' A "localist"

defi"nllion,

In

this definition,.a _nucrear

plant

is considered

a threat ro the life ol the

locat

^;;ri-ilrir'

its

dimensions

and

technical requirements deeplv affect

traJitir""TTiiirrlJ ;Ë;il#] û'o."ou"r, tr,.

managements of such pranrs exceed uv

i"rirt.

"o.p"iËn"", ;;;;*..,

of rocal authorities,

2' An "antitechnorolical" o.nrir-ià'r.' since

_thus implying _u

oruJ" ,JO,i"ri""

_{of their} satisfactory _autonomv-Évaruations

of

possible consequencer

oi

"""ia"rrir-lr.^j*mg, ^{and key}

probrems such as

TÏ:ïtiilïte

disposal are

stitl-uil;;ô

_nucrear technoùgy is

srll

rargery

3' An "antiindustrial" definition.

_Nucrear

power fits

perfectly

into

the

dominating philosophy of th" -i"d;rr'r#

"*. The protèction of

naturar resources _as welr as neople's rights to

h;;

and safety are discarded on beharf

!|"ï1;-t"ti"g "o"""r' f" d;;;;uiËii'aurt.iar

_expansion

and economic

4' An "antiauthoritarian" definition. In. order to prevent risks from

accidents and/ or sabotage, nucrear

po*", ,.qorr"s

increased sociar contror and cenrralization of power,-if-not

th; ;ifi;*ir",i",

_{of society.}

l;

^An. ..anticapitalist,,

a.n"iii"rr-r"îrrii

asrhemajor'"'pJn'"orth";;i-t"uk;ffirïi;ïrffi

i"îîi:àîffi:

to the crisis they have

under'*;;i; "irii',:orherefore

it

must be rejected.

6'

A "pacifist" definition. _The growth

ofi'p.a""ful,,

nuclea. power strongry depends

on

develonments

in .aràrar, -on'nrr"t.u,

\ryeapons, and vice versa.

Supporring nuctear planrs th.;;i;r;";

devetopment of _{rhe most} terrifying

*."*;':ir#i::#:porting ^further

r,"t;"1"iijlji,îÏ;,--y*;:ffi .ilïoLuchon.ideorogicargrounds,but

,t"ti i,

""îffi;î r'.ïî;i:,H:i:,ïf#ust

^{be rejectea}

ul"""i.

"rtheract

nor economical (Diani, in press).

During the first

phase

of the conflict

(1971-1976),

the

predominant antrnuclear

definition,of

_the

,ru"l"u, rrT""l"

_most

_west

European countries was

of

an "anrirechnorogicar"

;"**;;1"i.

tecrrnotogy

wal

considered ro be largerv unreriabre'

I";"rv ;;;;; ,î"î"iir*t

_norogical

definition of

the rssue was

articulated in combination witrr

a rocalist

definition, particularry

tn France and Norway where peopr., ;;

-the basis of strong localist/

regionalist

rradirions.

_fËared

" ,i;#;.0'""rt",' _of

_locar

autonJmy in

the case of nuclear power supplv.

p;ili;ôiriL".-"rrr,

the anticapitalist _and

The _West European Emtironmmtal _Mooement

9

! 1:

;

t:

t:

t,ri

i.

t:

r.t h k â"

È

L

1l E

tr

10

^{H.-A. VAN} DER HEIJDEN, RUUD KOOPMANS, and MARCO G' GIUGNI The West European Enaironmental Moaement

antiauthoritarian definitions

^{also played an}

important

role

in this

^phase

of

the conflict.

In

^rhe second phase (1976-1981), as the

conflict

moved

from

the local

to the national level, the anticapitalist, the antiauthoritarian, and

pacifist delinitions of the issue became increasingly important in several countries' The

e**n-p"fi

^ical ecology groups,

for

instance, saw nuclear power as

part of

a more general problem (of which

it

was at the same time symbolic): the loss of a human scale and the growth of a technocracy which, according to ^its critics, was represented

by a powerful

^{apparatus set}

up by the

^state,

capital'

^and science.

In this

perspective,

antinuclear opposition was directed

^against ..electrofascism." Following the disasters in

Harrisbutg(|979)

^and, seven years later, Chernobyl (1986), in ttre t98Os the rationalizing definition ^{gained weight.}

i{uclear power was regarded as neither safe nor economical.

Conflicts

Strategies

As regards the available strategies, the antinuclear movement ^has exhausted the whole spectrum of strategies and action repertoires ^(see

Diani

and van der Heijden,

in

^press;

Rûdig,

1990)'

In

^general,

in

most countries the dominant action-repertoire

in

the

first

^phase

of

the conflict (the period

until

1976) was

of

^a relatively moderate nature. The action orientations ^were instrumentally based and the general strategy was power-oriented whereas the specilic strategy was oriented either

to

conventional

political

participation (e'g', Great Britain, Sweden) and/ or to political pressure (e.g., France, Germany, the Netherlands,

Austria). The corresponding forms of action included participation in

committees, enquiries, and governmental bodies (Great Britain), lobbying ^and education (Sweden), and demonstrations (almost all countries). In some cases, most prominent$ in France and Germany, expressive forms of action like tent

"u*p,

^could already be observed

in

this period.

In

this phase of the conflict, most actions

took

place at the local level'

In the second phase

ofthe conflict

(1976-1981), strategies and actions grew

more

expressive

and radical. In

several countries

(France,

Germany, the Netherlands,

Austria),

^the action orientations were no longer

instrumentally

based

but

became

increasingly

expressive, whereas

the general

^strategy became more

identity-oriented. Malville in

France, Gorleben

in

Germany,

Dodewaard in the Netherlands, and zwentendorf in ^Austria

^became

powerful

symbols

of the

nuclear

industrial complex,

^symbols

which

were

iought vigorously. In most countries, site occupations, road

blockade

actions, and tent

camps

took place. As far

^as

^the

^absolute

^{number of} participants is concerned, the movement was strongest in

^Germany

icorl"ùen,

1979: 100,000 demonstrators;

Brokdorf, l98l:

more than 100,000) and France

(Malville,

1976: 60,000 participants)'

In all

countries'

poritical conflicts have divided the

_{movement. Three} differenr kinds _of

poliri""t";"d;;i _i" our"*ro,

I _iïïli li:i: i: î.:î:ilïj"o"x"l !Ir"ce,

^Germany)?

- (Italy, Austria, S;ô?îrd

udu movement

or a Marxist,

_{small one?}

3.

Should _{there be}

* i".iii"tiàur _o,

Norway, _Great Britain)?

:-.-*' -'

grassroots approach? (Netherlands, In France _{and Gr}

Ë,î:':rffi *f ài*riliiîi:::#"::î'#iiii:rffi :ïr"ï;ï"i;

unions continued

to;;;; #,-::;,,::T]:ry

promising; _ail major parties _anà

campaigns".d;;::ïei""L,l;ffiti."T:ïT.îîffi;il?*ff

ïHl{

shourd be

estabrished,

rb;il;'îr"i"

", ^{the energy oi} ""otogirt, *a

Ëii'îf i:{#u;i*':1xm:*li't'p'"r"'"aiî*à*îi,horwithin

candidares

r' <i..ii"r dFîil; ,ififfi,1::iJA:::lf:H,ïï _,î

considerabre differences _and

split-offs.ô., à" o* rrura,,r".e w".r

peopte who preferred to keep the,movemJnt u, u ro.ur urrni., _where its actions-would _have

the

srrongest possible

i*p;;';; ini"lii., _{n"ld, muny}

_others

deemed

it

necessary to exrend the môvement

iiiàtn"

"mcial

political institutions. _Some factions decided to

ors3i'9^,1-a;;;;;;il i*."rq ogticipated in

erecrions, at

firsr

at the locat tevàt

in

tg77

(;iatn;;;",

der Heijden,

in

press).

Results

To what extent did the environmentar

mo.vement succeed in preventing the

construction of new

1u-c]ear^pù;ï;"i;y,4r-6

nuclear

pi;;;,

were

in

:ly,iirË{;îll"-i*"iiffi i*i1î."îr'ocaredi;;;l^,i"îi'"u,o0.u,,

Et.':ïFr,iî",,..î"Ë:dl{Ëii,:t,ll;:lï,'"'",.ffi xr*lr#hx

1,"_1"1i*"i';;"â*î,ixîI';ïf,;y::jil;*.H'ry;m:Tir,.1ililT

to

74.570

in

France.

A frn;;;;"i";ï;; _E'rope

is shown

in

Tabte r.

Because

of lack of

space,- we can

"xurnio"

neither the

exbnt ,o *rri"h _,h"

:Ë"l'iffi ïl1î"l:îi::,ï:î:î:',",'ffiï'"ou,*ryhavebeen,,"l",srui.,

the exrent

to

which

th";;;;"5.i,":ï-:r"

^reasons

^for

^the differences

in

:"îl*:'r'"'ili""i",,J.Ë'ï',ïi"Ti;ï:îî'"i:ffi,î;;**,i**S"î"lî;

sources, the _existence or _u n.r"tÉu,

i;ilr"xïrd

the momenr at which _nuclear

11

I

I I t

i i

l.

t:

I

1i Iq:

t

tlt1 Irt r,

$

t2

H.-A VAN DER HEUDEN RUUD KOOPMANS, and MARCO G. GIUGNI Table

l.

Nuclear Plants

in

Western Europe

The Wæt European Enoironmental Mwement

l' ffi:nrt conservation associations and

associations

for bird

2.

National _branches

of

Friends of the Earth;

3.

Greenpeace;

I

National umbrella organizations: and

5. rhe worrd wirdtif" È-;;;;."ni",#ïf**ol.

Below _we give _a short description ofthese five types oforganizations.

need

internationalsorutions. Mgv

environmentar actions which

took

prace

in the

I980s rherefore

had an i"Ër*ri""a .n"ru"t"r. rri"ïî;" ro

grobal environmentar nroblems,

]"f ^ffiiiiorr.ua ^bv the pubrication of

the Brundtrand

noàrt' in which

,r,.-

ron"Ër. of sustainabb'r;;;i"p-ent

etaborated'

co-par?g^r^g;; ffi;TJonro

compared

,o orr,".

new sociarwas movements

in the lgg''s, ,rt.

""ui-"ïentar

mâverne","

i""L"

srrongry

institutionariz"o tr,-1n" rôsil J;.'ir,î'*uup..

"i-i;r'";,i"rcrear

^wing.

"Spontaneous" environmentar actions

iln

?1"":

^{less and tarr, uno the .,face,,}

*'l;;:'";*"*f f m:ffi fÏ"|";":ru*xiffi ^,ffi *iï;ïssiona,ized

Organizational Structure

Initia'y' _the

environmentar movement

in. North western Europe

_(the Scandinavian

countries, Cr"ut nrit"in,.m" ,o*

countries,

Ge.many,

_und

France) consisted of a

ffastgroîiô;'ù;-erate.of

_{acrion groups}

ar the rocal

;lid#:ii fl;r;' ^-.h':l ;#';;;ï;ed _with

_specirilc

"iui,.on*"n,"r

orænizations.

i;;;,liili #ff;r,:r;#r^:11- " ;;;;'ii .,"tion"i

early days comptied

*i f, ,t"'J"n;;1"':;"tttronmental

^movement

^of

^the

ffi

^{t ut" "}

^u', rni",""ti

"., N"î*",iï A:Hil,î:iSLlIJ _{Tfï îfi4;}

::ËË!:il3i riîi#îï;,îlîiï _{fi: ï;*',nct}

themse,ves exc,usive,y to social movem.ot.

th"

";;;::;-:':'-tuE_envlronmental

movement, the

urlan

,r,",",*'tiàî;ffi ,iiliiiji:'#Ë1"'ff.-;ffi::Jff _Tïîil.,f

:ffJ

movement

of

1972 and

its

"ou'Lrp"î;;ï"r.

Iarer lies

in

the

fact

thar

in

19-72 the rocar and

r"eionut.orgun;ïu*rï"il

uv fartrre

mosii-ioî".r,

_o.r.r,

whereas the environmentar

niovem*t

"i'r". ^o'"r, *;;; *îrï'iu.oo.un

;i:ilÏiïÂiïîîl:"""uuzedandù,itîtio.,uuzedchaiacte..l.r^nro,-"r,, mov€ment,nui,,ry";;:iiiiiïjlllffd".'s:^_"::ïi"""1r,i"i'thlpresent

At the beginninsor the

rgsos,

uy i;##:l#fiTiili"#iiï?,#:Ï

'E'uropean environmentut

,oou"**i

"""rirrr ir

nve types of organizations:

13

France Belgium Sweden Switzerland Spain Finland Germany Great Britain Netherlands

Share in National hoduction of Number Electricity (Vo)

'74.5 60. I 45.9 42.6 35.9 35.0 33. I t9.7 4.9

Under

Construction ClosedDown 56

7 12 5 9 4 26 37 2

7 I I

6

6

I Italy 4

10 7

Source: IAEA, Vienna.

programs were started (for a more detailed account, see Flam, in press; Rtidig, 1990).

For

many West European countries,

it

is justifred

to

conclude that the antinuclear movement,

by

its actions, has managed

to

prevent (new) nuclear

plants from being buitt (e.g., Austria, Germany, Italy, the

Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland).

At

the beginning of this section, we distinguished three different ^periods

in

the development of the West European environmental movement between 1970 and 1990. We have elaborated on the second period, which was characterized

by

resistance against nuclear energy;

we

conclude

this

section

with

some remarks on the issues of the third period, the 1980s. In the early 1980s, resistance against nuclear energy waned;

in many

countries,

the

noninstitutionalized section

of the

environmental movement

to a

large extent collapsed.

Many

activists switched

from

opposing nuclear energy to opposing nuclear weapons

in the period of

mass demonstrations

in

several West European ^countries against the deployment of Cruise missiles.

Within

the institutionalized ^section

of

the environmental movement, resistance against capitalist society as the structural cause

of

environmental problems ^weakened more and more. One

of

the main reasons

for this

phenomenon was,

of

^course, the dominance

of the neoliberal, politico-economical discourse. Instead of pleading for

alternatives

to the existing capitalist industrial

^society,

the

environmental movements in several countries now opted to support ecological modernization of the industrial production

within that

^society

(Huber,

1982, 1985).

The

1980s also displayed a thematic

shift from national to

international environmental problems. The destruction

of

the ozone layer caused

by

CFC emissions,

the growth of the

Sahara desert,

the

greenhouse effect, and the destruction of the

tropical

rainforest are global environmental ^problems that

i

:

i

I t i

!

t.

I t:

!l f-

i:

L:

FJ

$ tt

t

r I I

F

t

L4

^{H.-A VAN DER} HEIIDEN, RUUD KOOPMANS' ^and MARCO G' GIUGNI Traditional Consmsation Associatbns and Associnhons for Bird Protection

At

the end

of the

^1960s,

traditional

conservation associations completely dominated ^the field of the environmental ^movement

in

western Europe'

Like

iheir counterparts

in

the

united

^{States, many of these} organizations ^grerw up around the

turn

of the century.

In

^{the United States,} the Sierra Club ^(nature conservation) was

founded in tgsz, the National Audubon

^Society

(bird protection)inlgl5andtheNationalParksAssociationinlglg.TheFrench

Fédération Française ^Jes Societes de Protection ^de

la

Nature

(FFSPN)

^was founded as early as 1857. The

Dutch

conservation association was founded

inlg05,theswedishoneinlg0g,andtheBelgianoneinlg^10'TheGerman andtheDutchurro"iution,fortirOprotectionwerebothfoundedinlS99'

the French one

in

^1912.

Traditionalnature-conservationactivitiesingeneralwerepromptedbya

feeling

of

concern, which individuals and groups

-most^of

^{them belonging} to the

bourgeoisie-

^had

with

the esthetic ànd recreative functions of nature'

In

contrast

to

the new environmental organizations

which

^{emerged around} 1970,

the old conservation

associations

often had a rather traditional

organizationat structure,

*iift ^u"

^executive committee and ^{a general} council

ofmembersmeetingo,'".uy"",.Thewayinwhichtheyactedwasinfactrather

apotitical; they ^were mainly concerned

with

^the acquisition and management

ofwildlifeareasandwithlobbying'Inmanycountriesin^WesternE:t:'p?

many traditional conservation assoCiations and associations for bird protectron have continued

to

exist and

in

several cases have experienced a-new heyday

duringthelgS0sandearlylggOs.Betweenlg80andlgg2,forinstance' membershipinthelargestDutchconservationassociationincreasedfrom

235,000 to 700,000; meriuerst ip in the German association for bird protection increased

from

?5,000

to

140,000'

Both types of organizations ^{are mass} organizations; ^the largest conservation

associations in ^{western Europe are the} vereniging tot ^Behoud

^van

Natuurmonumenten

in Nederhnà

^(700,000 members) and the Royal ^Society

for Nature conr"*uiio' in Greai Britain

(200'000 members)'

The

^largest associations

fo,

UirO

f,Je"tion

^ate

^{the Royal}

^Society

^lor

tfg..nJgtection

of

Birds in Great Britainig00,o00 members), the Deutscher Bund

fiir

vogelschutz

in

Germany (140,000

À"-U"tt),

^{and the}

^Dutch

Vereniging

tot

Bescherming van vogels ^(70,000

,rrÀu".r1.

lr,iany of the

traditional

associations, like many

umbrellaorganizations'belongtothelnternationalUnionfortheConservation

of Nature ut A

Nut,r.ui R"'ot'i""' ^(IUCN)'

^{which was founded}

ⁱⁿ

^1948'

^Fifty-

seven Governmenrs,

i-zi p"ùir insiitutions,

^{292 national and 23} international orgunirurions particifate in this

union,

^which represents ¹¹⁴ countries (Gorter' 1gg6: 6g-6g).

n"ri"Jii.-rggôs,

^the

traditionat

conservation associations and

the

associatiorN ^ro?

-

iirJ frorr"tion in most wesr European

^countries

broadened their view frôm conservationism in the strict ^{sense to}

The West European Enoironmcntal

Mooernent

₁₅

environmentalism- In this way, the distance between the traditional

associations and the new organizations _{has been} slightly reduced. However, important differences

in

action strategies still exist.

Friends of the Earth

Some

of the new

environmentar organizations,

which in most

western countries were

founded around

1970, ivere sprit-offs

of traditional

groups.

Friends

of the Earth, for

instance, was

founded in the late

1960s

by

the

American David _Bower, a former

executive

officiar of the

conseryation association

the

Sierra

club,-who quit

his

job

_as

_the

_Sierra

club

refused to share his views on the. necessity

of

a struggË against

"""bJr;;ù:

^ ^Frgm

^the

^early

^{r970s on,}

^national

^bràiches

^of

^Friends

^of

the Earth were founded

in many western

as

weil

as

non-western

countries,

for

example,

Britain

(1970), France

_(4ry, ^de la terre,

1970), Sweden (1971), _Germany (BUND, founded 1975;

FoE

member since t9g9;, the Netherlands (vereniging Milieudefensie,lgT2), _and

Italy'(Amici

della

Teira,

1976).À,

fi"rà"r,

^Friends

of the Earth comprises-26 national organizations, not onry in western Europe but also

in

countries

like Austraria,ùrazir,

Mexico, Thailand, and Malaysia.

Most national

branches are subdivided

into local

chapters,

particularly in

Germany

and Britain, which

have several

hundred .rtup,"rr. ôi

^averag€,

membership

in west

European

national

branches

of

Friends

of the

Earth numbers in the _tens of tho_usands (the Dutch branch, for instance, has 27,000), but

in

the second

parr of the

t9d0s

the British

branch

;;;dil;

develop tnto an organization of more than 200,000 members. _Between

î929

ana 19g9, the German

BUND

also expanded,

from

57,000

to

1g0,000 members. The totar membership

of all west

European Friends of the Earth branches amounts to an estimated

half-million.

Friends

of the

Earth.has_played an

important role in

the nuclear energy conflict

in

many countries.

In the

1970s, the struggre against nuclear energy constituted

the major

issue

for

Friends

of the Earth,

whereas international pollution

(cFC's, tropical

rain forests) and

-at

^{the same}

^time-

the creation of the so-called green consumer were their focar issues

in the

rgsà;.

In

many countries,

FoE initiated

consumer actions,

in

which consumers were invited to boycott products

harmful to

the

enviro.r*"nt

(e.g., spray

"urrri, *

^{well as}

producer actions,

in

which producers were urged

to foilàw

more ecologicaly sound production methods (e.g., beer crates w]thout

"aa*irr*;.

- ---

Greutpeace

comparable

to

the role

David

Bower played

in

the foundation

of

Friends

of the Earth is the role of the canadiÀ ôavid McTugg i

^wrro rounaea Greenpeace'

on

an ocean sailing tnp

in

rgT2,McTaggart _was confronted

with

French

atomic

tèsts

in tne eacric, for _{which a}

rarge ocean area

had

been

16

^{H.-A VAN} DER HEUDEN, RUUD KOOPMANS' and MARCO G' GIUGNI declared inaccessible. McTaggart defied the ban and thus succeeded in delaying

the

tests (Tellegen,

lqa3::i-J8). In

Greenpeace,

the

^green

and the

^peace movement

originally

cooperated,

but now

Greenpeace has developed

into

a solely

enviro.t-"tttut

orgànization. The

first national

^branch

of

Greenpeace was iounded

in

Canada;-in 1983, Western Europe had six national ^branches:

Denmark, Germany, Great Britain, ^{France, the} Netherlands' and Switzerland'

By

1987, Belgium,

Luxembourg, Austria, Spain, and

^Sweden had joined

Cr.".rp"u""

In-ternational, and

bitween

^{1987 and 1991, Ireland and Portugal}

also joined the club.

- it

"

Gr."rrpeace

formula is best

characterized

by a

tendency toward

anonymous

^{^heroism,}

largely apolitical .behavior' active PR-policies'

nonviolence, and modern management'

In its first

^years' Greenpeace was a rather

romantic and

ideatistic

ùganization. Its first,

central theme, which upp.uf"O to ^people of all ages, was the preservation of seals' Soon' Greenpeace

"*puna"A it, u"tiuiti", toirâad"r

^{issues such as the}

pollution of

^the

North Sâ

^{and the dumping of} radioactive waste in the ^sea. Greenpeace has committed itself to five worldwide issue campaigns: ^a) disarmament campaigns; b) toxics

"urnpuigrrr; c) antinuclear

"u,,,puigtt*; ^d)

wildlife

campaigns; and e) Antarctic

"u*p"Ë"r. ^Âttnougtr

Gre"npàa"e

is mainly

concerned

with lobbying

^and

research activities, the

organiàtion

^{owes its} public reputation chiefly to heroic, spectacular

actions which strongly

^appeal.

to

^people's

imaginations'

^On

ii"qu"n,

occasions, Greenpeace divérs

jump

in rhe water in

front

^{of ships}

that

are trying to dump nucleaiwaste; Greenpeace volunteers also chain themselves

to

oruirr-plp.s or plug them up.

Both

ai the national and at the international levels, the àrganizatiônal structure

of

Greenpeace is strongly hierarchic' ^and indeeâ

.ro* ùu^ ^little

resemblance

to

the SPIN-model of ^the environmental movement

in

the early 1970s. Each national office must pay more lhan ^20%o of its annual income

to

"ou",

supranational ^expenses.

In

Germany. criticism of the extremely centralized structure ^led to a significant split off

in

1981, which resulted

in the foundation of a

new organization

known

^as

Robin Wood' G.".np"u""owesitsenormoussuccessmainlytoitssophisticatedmedia

strategies,

in

which market research, merchandising, and media analysis play a crueial role.

In

1989, a market research survey

in

Great Britain showed

that

Greenpeace had a..name recognition',

of

gl%oamongst the general public. The

totalnumberofGreenpeacecontributorsinWesternEuropeamountstoan estimated

2,500,000.

The three largest country orellfzalons ^are

^the

Netherlands (g:O,OOO), Germany (600,0ô0;, and the United Kingdom ^(380'000)'

N ational Llmbrella Or ganizations

A fourth

^category

of national

organizations which ^{can be}

found in

^many

WestEuropeancountriesaretheumbrellaorganizations,oftenclustersof traditional

conservation associations and new environmental organizations,

The West European Enaironmental

Mooement

₁₇

which. are mainly oriented at influencing

institutional

poritics. Most umbrella organizations do not have many individu*al members bccause they are

primarily

orga.nizations of organizations. In France, however, g50,000 people are---- often

unwillingly

-members of

SSpN,

u,

u

"o.rr"quence

of

their membership

in

a local or regional organization.

In

terms

of

membership figures, the Deutsche Naturschutzring

(DNR)

(German Association for protËctiJn

oriquior.l

claims

l^o

l:'n",*o.1ld's

^largesr national organization on environmental _issues.

DNR

lS an umbrella organization which comprises 94 associations

with

a

total of

somewhat _less than

3-million

individual _members. rhese

figuier,

t

o*.u"r,

oo not reflect

this

organizalion's real impact. The organizations associated with the

DNR differ

widery_in

their orienàtions,

_{and partry pursue} contradictory interests and concerns (e.g., groups wnicn uavocute

tte pr"u"rr,i*

_{of cruelty}

to animals

versus

.groups which

^advocate

hunting) (Rucht, l9g9).

Other umbrella organizations.in

-wefgrn

Europe, most

oiwtrich -é ".g"rizations of

organizations, _inclLrr'e the Stichting

Nutu,r,

en

Milieu in

the Nîtherlands, the Royal society for Nature conservaiion _{in the} united

rirrgào-, _{tle MIGRI} in

Sweden, and the Naturfredening

in

Denmark.

The World Wilàtife Fund

The

world wildlife

Fund

(wwF)

was founded in Zurich

in

1961. At present, it is an international organization wittr urancrres in 2g countries, including most countries in western Europe. In many countries, _the

wwF

is one of the largest

environmental

organizations:

the ôutch branch has

350,000 contributors (1991), the

British

branch 260,000 (199r), the German branch _75,000 (r9g9), the

Italian

branch 60,000 (1987), anà the Épanish branch ro"ooo

iigdri.

^These

figures include members of

ttre'wwF _yor,i,

àrgu., izationcalled

ihe

Rangers.

At present, the total number of members in wesiern Europe

u-o,r.ri,

to more

than

_offices 1,500,000.

_in

The

total

number

of

staff members

who work in

the

v/wF

28 countries amounts

to

1,250.

wwF

is mainly concerned with global problems of nature conservation; its central goals include: enlarging

proticted i..ur,

"n"orrraging sustainable forms

of exploitation,

and pustring

uack

environmentar

pollution. wwF

tries

to

realize these goars through lobbying activities _{at the} nàtional _{and the EC levels,}

and by initiating a

large

number (about 500 a year) of

special projects.

Examples

of

such projects

in

1990

wer., u *udy on rhe

infruence

of

EC agriculture policy on the naturar environment

in

Europe,

rh";;;""Àn

_{of the}

tropical rain forest in the

Xishuangbanna sanctuary

in china, _and

the protection of turtles in the eastern part of the Mediterranean.

rite

èreenpeace,

wwF is an

organization supported

by contributors u"a ,t.""grv

oriented

toward mass communication, media, and marketing. The i'"ii',rities or

contributors _are limited to the annual contribution

puy*"îr, ,*airgiï. _wwF

magazine,

and buying T-shirts and wwF

sramps.

wwF

offices

in all

2g