Drawing on an ethnographic account of toxic waste protest in post-reunification Germany, the article compares three models of environmental activism (by Douglas and Wildavsky, Melucci and Latour respectively) which problematize the production of knowledge. Insights from social studies of science are used to examine the entanglement of language and matter in environmentalism. The article suggests, however, that unless scholars pay due attention to the way they frame their questions, they are at risk of finding their work irrelevant or impotent. On the other hand, it suggests that to achieve relevance and power, empirical, particularly ethnographic accounts, which emerge out of a meeting between activism and academia, are also required.
Anderson, D. and E. Berglund, eds (forthcoming) Ethnographies of Environmental Under-privilege: Anthropological Encounters with Conservation. Oxford: Berghahn.
2.
Appadurai, A. (1996) Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis and London: Minnesota University Press.
3.
Baerens, M. and U. von Arnswald (1993) Die Müll-Connection: Entsorger und ihre Geschäfte. München: Greenpeace/C.H. Beck.
4.
Barry, A. (1999) ‘Demonstrations: Sites and Sights of Direct Action’, Economy and Society28(1): 75–94.
5.
Berglund, E.K. (1998) Knowing Nature, Knowing Science: An Ethnography of Environmental Activism. Cambridge: White Horse Press.
6.
Berglund, E.K. (forthcoming) ‘Ecopolitics through Ethnography: The Cultures of Finland’s Forest-nature’, in A. Biersack and J.B. Greenberg (eds) Culture/Power/History/Nature: Ecologies for a New Millennium. London and New York: Routledge.
7.
Braun, B. and N. Castree, eds (1998) Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millennium. London and New York: Routledge.
8.
Brosius, P.J. (1999) ‘Analyses and Interventions: Anthropological Engagements with Environmentalism’, Current Anthropology40(3): 277–309.
9.
Castree, N. and B. Braun (1998) ‘The Construction of Nature and the Nature of Construction’, in B. Braun and N. Castree (eds) Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millennium pp. 3–42. London and New York: Routledge.
10.
Cronon, W. (1995) Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature. New York and London: Norton.
11.
Dake, K. (1992) ‘Myths of Nature: Culture and the Social Construction of Risk’, Journal of Social Issues48(4): 21–37.
12.
Descola, P. (1996) ‘Constructing Natures: Symbolic Ecology and Social Practice’, in P. Descola and G. Pálsson (eds) Nature and Society: Anthropological Perspectives. London and New York: Routledge.
13.
Douglas, M. (1970) Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmology. London: Barrie and Jenkins.
14.
Douglas, M. and A. Wildavsky (1982) Risk and Culture: An Essay in the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
15.
Downey, G.L. and J. Dumit (1997) ‘Locating and Intervening: An Introduction’, in G.L. Downey and J. Dumit (eds) Cyborgs and Citadels: Anthropological Interventions in Emerging Sciences and Technologies. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
16.
Escobar, A. (1995) Encountering Development. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
Escobar, A. (1997) ‘Cultural Politics and Biological Diversity: State, Capital and Social Movements in the Pacific Coast of Colombia’, in R.G. Fox and O. Starn (eds) Between Resistance and Revolution: Cultural Politics and Social Protest pp. 40–64. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
18.
Escobar, A. (1999) ‘After Nature: Steps to an Antiessentialist Political Ecology’, Current Anthropology40(1): 1–30.
19.
Fairhead, J. and M. Leach (1996) Misreading the African Landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Gare, A.E. (1995) Postmodernism and the Environmental Crisis. London and New York: Routledge.
21.
Haraway, D. (1991) Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. London: Free Association Books.
22.
Haraway, D. (1997) Modest_Witness@Second_Millenium: FemaleMan_Meets_OncoMouse Feminism and Technoscience. London and New York: Routledge.
23.
Hey, C., U. Brendle and C. Weinber (1992) Umweltverbände und E6: Handlungs möglichkeiten der Umweltverbände für die Verbesserung des Umweltbewussteins und der Umweltpolitik in der europäischen Gemeinschaft. Freiburg: EURES.
24.
Hobart, M. (1993) ‘Introduction: The Growth of Ignorance’, in M. Hobart (ed.) An Anthropological Critique of Development: The Growth of Ignorance. London and New York: Routledge.
25.
Irwin, A. (1995) Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. London and New York: Routledge.
26.
Irwin, A. and B. Wynne, eds (1996) Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28.
Latour, B. (1993) We Have Never Been Modern. London and New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. (Original: Nous n’avons jamais été modernes, Editions La Découverte, 1991)
29.
Latour, B. (1998) ‘To Modernise or Ecologise? That is the Question’, trans. C. Cussins, in B. Braun and N. Castree (eds) Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millennium, pp. 221–242. London and New York: Routledge.
30.
Luke, T.W. (1995) ‘On Environmentality: Geo-power and Eco-knowledge in the Discourses of Contemporary Environmentalism’, Cultural Critique31: 57–81.
31.
McCarthy, J. (1998) ‘Environmentalism, Wise Use and the Nature of Accumulation in the Rural West’, in B. Braun and N. Castree (eds) Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millennium, pp. 126–149. London and New York: Routledge.
32.
Melucci, A. (1989) Nomads of the Present. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
33.
Melucci, A. (1996) Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
Milton, K. (1991) ‘Interpreting Environmental Policy: A Social Scientific Approach’, Journal of Law and Security18(1): 4–17.
35.
Milton, K. (1996) Environmentalism and Cultural Theory. London and New York: Routledge.
36.
Nandy, A. (ed.) (1988) Science, Hegemony and Violence: A Requiem for Modernity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
37.
O’Brien, M. (1999) ‘Rubbish Values: Reflections on the Political Economy of Waste’, Science as Culture8(3): 269–295.
38.
Peet, R. and M. Watts, eds (1996) Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Movements. London and New York: Routledge.
39.
Petts, J. and G. Eduljee (1994) Environmental Impact Assessment for Waste Treatment and Disposal Facilities. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
40.
Rocheleau, D.E. and C. Radel (1999) ‘Comment on P. Brosius, “Analyses and Interventions: Anthropological Engagements with Environmentalism” ’, Current Anthropology40(3): 277–309.
41.
Strathern, M. (1980) ‘No Nature, No Culture’, in M. Strathern and C. MacCormack (eds) Nature, Culture and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
Strathern, M. (1992) After Nature: English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Strathern, M. (1999) Property, Substance and Effect: Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things. London and New Brunswick: Athlone Press.
44.
Thompson, M. and P. Tayler (1986) The Surprise Game: An Exploration in Constrained Relativism. Warwick Papers in Management No.1, University of Warwick.
45.
Yearley, S. (1995) ‘The Environmental Challenge to Science Studies’, in S. Jasanoff et al. (eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage.
46.
Zonabend, F. (1993) The Nuclear Peninsula. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
