This article examines how a professional group articulates views of the new laws and institutions that call them to accept new practices and new meaning in the name of the ecological common good. Drawing on a framework integrating the approach of social representations and rhetorical social psychology with legal institutionalism, we analyze in-depth interviews and focus groups (n = 29) with artisanal fishers. We explore how fishers use reported speech, that is, the quotation of others or self in own discourse, for building representations of Self, institutional-Others and their relations, examining also the values and dimensions of citizenship they mobilize with it. We show how fishers consistently use reported speech for presenting a negative institutional-Other acting in disrespect of the civil and political dimensions of citizenship, and a positive Self acting as a competent citizen – although rarely as a good ecological citizen. We discuss how focusing on reported speech by drawing on a theorization of how the institutional dimension interacts with the micro-level of interaction and discourse extends current comprehension of how contestation of the new meaning embedded in new laws can be warranted and maintained.
AdgerWNBarnettJBrownK, et al. (2013) Cultural dimensions of climate change impacts and adaptation. Nature Climate Change3(2): 112–117.
2.
AndreouliEKadianakiIXenitidouM (2017) Citizenship and social psychology: An analysis of constructions of Greek citizenship. In: HowarthCAndreouliE (eds) The Social Psychology of Everyday Politics. London: Routledge, pp. 87–101.
3.
ArendtH (1972) The Crisis of the Republic. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.
4.
BatelSCastroC (2018) Reopening the dialogue between the theory of social representations and discursive psychology for examining the construction and transformation of meaning in discourse and communication. British Journal of Social Psychology57(4): 732–753.
5.
BatelSCastroP (2009) A social representations approach to the communication between different spheres: An analysis of the impacts of two discursive formats. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour39: 415–433.
6.
BatelSDevine-WrightPWoldL, et al. (2015) The role of (de-)essentialisation within sitting conflicts: An interdisciplinary approach. Journal of Environmental Psychology44: 149–159.
7.
BenwellB (2012) Common-sense anti-racism in book group talk: The role of reported speech. Discourse & Society23: 359–376.
8.
BertoldoRCastroP (2018) From legal to normative: A combined social representations and sociocognitive approach to diagnosing cultural change triggered by new environmental laws. Culture & Psychology25: 324–344.
9.
BeunenRVan AsscheKDuineveldM (2013) Performing failure in conservation policy: The implementation of European Union directives in the Netherlands. Land Use Policy31: 280–288.
10.
BilligM (1987) Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11.
BilligM (1991) Ideologies and Opinions: Studies in Rhetorical Psychology. London: SAGE.
12.
BilligM (1999) Freudian Repression: Conversation Creating the Unconscious. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
BilligMCondorSEdwardsD, et al. (1988) Ideological Dilemmas: A Social Psychology of Everyday Thinking. London: SAGE.
14.
BlicharskaMOrlikowskaEHRobergeJM, et al. (2016) Contribution of social science to large scale biodiversity conservation: A review of research about the Natura 2000 network. Biological Conservation199: 110–122.
15.
ButtnyR (1997) Reported speech in talking race on campus. Human Communication Research23: 477–506.
16.
ButtnyR (1998) Putting prior talk into context: Reported speech and the reporting context. Research on Language and Social Interaction31(1): 45–58.
17.
ButtnyRWilliamsP (2000) Demanding respect: The uses of reported speech in discursive constructions of interracial contact. Discourse & Society11: 109–133.
18.
CastroP (2012) Legal innovation for social change: Exploring change and resistance to different types of sustainability laws. Political Psychology33: 105–121.
19.
CastroP (2015) Social representations of sustainability: Researching time, institution, conflict and communication. In: SammutDGAndreouliEGaskellG, et al (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 295–308.
20.
CastroPMouroC (2016) ‘Imagining ourselves’ as participating publics: An example from biodiversity conservation. Public Understanding of Science25(7): 858–872.
21.
CastroPSeixasENecaP, et al. (2018) Successfully contesting the policy sphere: Examining through the press a case of local protests changing new ecological laws. Political Psychology39(1): 107–123.
22.
CondorS (2011) Towards a social psychology of citizenship? Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology21: 193–201.
23.
De FinaA (2003) Identity in Narrative: A Study of Immigrant Discourse. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
24.
DeakinSGindisDHodgsonGM, et al. (2017) Legal institutionalism: Capitalism and the constitutive role of law. Journal of Comparative Economics45(1): 188–200.
25.
Devine-WrightPHowesY (2010) Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology30: 271–280.
26.
Di MassoA (2015) Micropolitics of public space: On the contested limits of citizenship as locational practice. Journal of Social and Political Psychology3(2): 63–83.
27.
DixonJLevineMMcAuleyR (2006) Locating impropriety: Street drinking, moral order, and the ideological dilemma of public space. Political Psychology27(2): 187–206.
28.
DobsonA (2006) Ecological citizenship: A defense. Environmental Politics15: 447–451.
29.
ElcherothGDoiseWReicherS (2011) On the knowledge of politics and the politics of knowledge: How a social representations approach helps us rethink the subject of political psychology. Political Psychology32: 729–758.
30.
GibsonS (2011) Dilemmas of citizenship: Young people’s conceptions of un/employment rights and responsibilities. British Journal of Social Psychology50: 450–468.
31.
GibsonS (2015) From representations to representing: On social representations and discursive-rhetorical psychology. In: SammutGAndreouliEGaskellG, et al (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 210–223.
32.
GibsonSHamiltonL (2011) The rhetorical construction of polity membership: Identity, culture and citizenship in young people’s discussions of immigration in Northern England. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology21: 228–242.
33.
GillespieA (2008) Social representations, alternative representations and semantic barriers. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour38(4): 375–391.
34.
HoltECliftR (2007) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
HovardasT (2017) ‘Battlefields’ of blue flags and seashores: Acts of ‘fencing’ and ‘de-fencing’ place in a gold mining controversy. Journal of Environmental Psychology53: 100–111.
36.
JentoftS (2000) The community: A missing link of fisheries management. Marine Policy24: 141–148.
37.
JovchelovitchS (2007) Knowledge in Context: Representations, Community and Culture. London; New York: Routledge.
38.
JovchelovitchSPriego-HernandezJ (2015) Cognitive polyphasia, knowledge encounters and public spheres. In: SammutGAndreouliEGaskellG (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 163–178.
39.
MarkováI (2008) A dialogical perspective of social representations of responsibility. In: SugimanTGergenKWagnerW, et al (eds) Meaning in Action: Constructions, Narratives, and Representations. Tokyo, Japan: Springer, pp. 253–270.
40.
MarkováILinnelPGrossenM, et al. (2007) Dialogue in Focus Groups: Exploring Socially Shared Knowledge. London: Equinox.
41.
MartinACoolsaetBCorberaE, et al. (2016) Justice and conservation: The need to incorporate recognition. Biological Conservation197: 254–261.
42.
MogendorffKMolderHvan WoerkumC, et al. (2014) We say: ‘. . .’, they say: ‘. . .’: How plant science experts draw on reported dialogue to shelve user concerns. Discourse & Communication8(2): 137–157.
43.
MoscoviciS (1972) Society and theory in social psychology. In: IsraelJTajfelH (eds) The Context of Social Psychology: A Critical Assessment. London: Academic Press, pp. 17–68.
44.
MoscoviciS (1988) Notes towards a description of social representations. European Journal of Social Psychology18: 211–250.
45.
MoscoviciSMarkováI (2000) Ideas and their development: A dialogue between Serge Moscovici and Ivana Marková. In: DuveenG (ed.) Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 224–286.
46.
MouroCCastroP (2012) Cognitive polyphasia in the reception of legal innovations for biodiversity conservation. Papers on Social Representations21(1): 31–321.
47.
MouroCCastroP (2016) Self-Other relations in biodiversity conservation in the community: Representational processes and adjustment to new actions. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology26(4): 340–353.
48.
MouroCSantosTCastroP (2018) Past-present discontinuity in ecological change and marine governance: An integrated narrative approach to artisanal fishing. Marine Policy97: 163–169.
49.
Pecurul-BotinesMDi GregorioMPaavolaJ (2014) Discourses of conflict and collaboration and institutional context in the implementation of forest conservation policies in Soria, Spain. Biodiversity Conservation23: 3483–3499.
50.
PotterJ (1996) Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: SAGE.
51.
SearleJR (2005) What is an institution?Journal of Institutional Economics1(1): 1–22.
52.
StevensonCHopkinsNLuytR, et al. (2015) The social psychology of citizenship: Engagement with citizenship studies and future research. Journal of Social and Political Psychology3(2): 192–210.
53.
SvahnJ (2017) Reported speech in girls’ dispute stories: Building credibility and accounting for moral versions. Childhood24(2): 212–229.
54.
UzelgunMAMohammedDLewinskiM, et al. (2015) Managing disagreement through yes, but. . . constructions: An argumentative analysis. Discourse Studies17(4): 467–484.
