In January 2014, the monarch butterfly reached North American political agendas due to reports of a long-term population decline. Requests were made for reliable descriptions of what was known about the butterfly, its population and migration, and the actions needed to protect it. This article studies the construction of the collective narrative that has come to dominate the public discourse on the butterfly. The analysis demonstrates how complexity and uncertainty in monarch knowledge have been managed through a process of coproduction, where focus has been on emphasizing knowledge certainty by portraying science and conservation as two separate but dependent social spheres.
AlkonA. H. (2004). Place, stories, and consequences: Heritage narratives and the control of erosion on Lake County, California, vineyards. Organization & Environment, 7, 145-169.
2.
AndrewsM. (2004). Opening to the original contributions: Counter-narratives and the power to oppose. In BambergM.AndrewsM. (Eds.), Consider counter-narratives: Narrating, resisting, making sense (pp. 1-6). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
3.
BaakeK.KaempfC. (2011). No longer “bullying the Rhine”: Giving narrative a place in flood management. Environmental Communication, 5, 428-446.
BrowerL. P. (1995). Understanding and misunderstanding the migration of the monarch butterfly (Nymphalidae) in North America: 1857-1995. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society, 49, 304-385.
6.
BrowerL. P.TaylorO. R.WilliamsE. H. (2012). Response to Davis: Choosing relevant evidence to assess monarch population trends. Insect Conservation and Diversity, 5, 327-329.
7.
BrowerL. P.TaylorO. R.WilliamsE. H.SlaybackD. A.ZubietaR. R.RamirezM. I. (2012). Decline of monarch butterflies overwintering in Mexico: Is the migratory phenomenon at risk?Insect Conservation and Diversity, 5, 95-100.
8.
BusselleR.BilandzicH. (2008). Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 18, 255-280.
9.
CollinsH.EvansR. (2007). Rethinking expertise. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
CookC. N.MasciaM. B.SchwartzM. W.PossinghamH. P.FullerR. A. (2013). Achieving conservation science that bridges the knowledge–action boundary. Conservation Biology, 27, 669-678.
12.
CurtisR. (1994). Narrative form and normative force. Social Studies of Science, 24, 419-461.
13.
DavisA. K. (2012). Are migratory monarchs really declining in eastern North America? Examining evidence from two fall census programs. Insect Conservation and Diversity, 5, 101-105.
14.
DavisA. K.DyerL. A. (2015). Long-term trends in eastern North American monarch butterflies: A collection of studies focusing on spring, summer, and fall dynamics. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 108, 661-663. doi:10.1093/aesa/sav070
15.
DixonG. N.ClarkeC. E. (2012). Heightening uncertainty around certain science: Media coverage, false balance, and the autism-vaccine controversy. Science Communication, 35, 358-382.
16.
DyerL. A.ForisterM. L. (2016). Wherefore and whither the modeler: Understanding the population dynamics of monarchs will require integrative and quantitative techniques. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 109, 172-175.
17.
FischerA.YoungJ. C. (2007). Understanding mental constructs of biodiversity: Implications for biodiversity management and conservation. Biological Conservation, 136, 271-282.
18.
FoucaultM. (1980). Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. New York, NY: Pantheon.
19.
GierynT. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48, 781-795.
20.
GierynT. F. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
21.
GrossA. G. (1994). The roles of rhetoric in the public understanding of science. Public Understanding of Science, 3, 3-23.
22.
GustafssonK. M. (2011). Made in conflict: Local residents’ construction of a local environmental problem. Local Environment, 16, 655-670.
23.
GustafssonK. M.AgrawalA. A.LewensteinB. V.WolfS. A. (2015). The monarch butterfly through time and space: The social construction of an Icon. BioScience, 65, 612-622.
24.
GustafssonK. M.LidskogR. (2012). Acknowledging risk, trusting expertise, and coping with uncertainty: Citizens’ deliberation on spraying an insect population. Society & Natural Recourses, 25, 587-601.
25.
GustonD. H. (2000). Between politics and science: Assuring the integrity and productivity of research. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
26.
GustonD. H. (2001). Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: An introduction. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 26, 399-408.
HilgartnerS. (1990). The dominant view of popularisation: Conceptual problems, political uses. Social Studies of Science, 20, 519-539.
29.
HothJ.MerinoL.OberhauserK.PisantyI.PriceS.WilkinsonT. (Eds.). (1999). 1997 North American conference on the monarch butterfly paper presentations: Biology, conservation, sustainability and development, and environmental education. Montreal, Québec, Canada: Commission for Environmental Cooperation.
30.
HowardE.DavisA. K. (2015a). Investigating long-term changes in the spring migration of monarch butterflies (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) using 18 years of data from journey north, a citizen science program. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 108, 664-669. doi:10.1093/aesa/sav061
31.
HowardE.DavisA. K. (2015b). Tracking the fall migration of eastern monarchs with journey north roost sightings. In OberhauserK. S.NailK. R.AltizerS. (Eds.), Monarchs in a changing world: Biology and conservation of an iconic butterfly (pp. 207-214). Ithaca, NY: Comstock.
32.
HuttonJ.AdamsW. M.MurombedziJ. C. (2005). Back to the barriers? Changing narratives in biodiversity conservation. Forum for Development Studies, 32, 341-370.
33.
InamineH.EllnerS. P.SpringerJ. P.AgrawalA. A. (2016). Linking the continental migratory cycle of the monarch butterfly to understand its population decline. Oikos, 125, 1081-1091. doi:10.1111/oik.03196
34.
IrwinA. (1995). Citizen science: A study of people, expertise, and sustainable development. London, England: Routledge.
35.
IrwinA.WynneB. (Eds.). (1996). Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
36.
JasanoffS. (2004a). Afterword. In JasanoffS., (Ed.), States of knowledge: The coproduction of science and social order (pp. 274-282). London, England: Routledge.
37.
JasanoffS. (2004b). The idiom of co-production. In JasanoffS. (Ed.), States of knowledge: The coproduction of science and social order (pp. 1-12). London, England: Routledge.
38.
JasanoffS. (2004c). Ordering knowledge, ordering society. In JasanoffS. (Ed.), States of knowledge: The coproduction of science and social order (pp. 13-45). London, England: Routledge.
39.
JasanoffS. (2005a). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
40.
JasanoffS. (2005b). Restoring reason: Causal narratives and political culture. In HutterB.PowerM. (Eds.), Organizational encounters with risk (pp. 209-232). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
41.
KortenkampK. V.BastenB. (2015). Environmental science in the media: Effects of opposing viewpoints on risk and uncertainty perceptions. Science Communication, 37, 287-313.
42.
LatourB. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43.
LawtonR. M.RuddN. A. (2014). A narrative policy approach to environmental conservation. Ambio, 43, 849-857.
44.
LeslieH. M.GoldmanE.McleodK. L.SievanenL.BalasubramanianH.Cudney-BuenoR.. . . SamhouriJ. F. (2003). How good science and stories can go hand-in-hand. Conservation Biology, 27, 1126-1129.
45.
LewensteinB. (1992). The meaning of “public understanding of science” in the United States after World War II. Public Understanding of Science, 1, 45-68.
46.
LidskogR. (2008). Scientised citizens and democratised science: Re-assessing the expert-lay divide. Journal of Risk Research, 11(1-2), 69-86.
47.
LidskogR. (2014). Representing and regulating nature: Boundary organisations, portable representations, and the science–policy interface. Environmental Politics, 23, 670-687.
48.
MalcolmS. B.ZaluckiM. P. (Eds.). (1993). Biology and conservation of the monarch butterfly. Los Angeles, CA: Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.
49.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldañaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50.
MolotchH. L.BodenD. (1985). Talking social structure: Discourse, domination and the Watergate hearings. American Sociological Review, 50, 273-288.
Monarch Joint Venture. (2015). In the face of declines in monarch numbers and habitat availability, MJV partners are pooling their efforts to protect monarch and pollinator habitat in the U.S. Retrieved from http://www.monarchjointventure.org/
MyerG. (2002). Discourse studies of scientific popularization: Questioning the boundaries. Discourse Studies, 5, 265-279.
60.
NowotnyH.ScottP.GibbonsM. (2001). Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
61.
OberhauserK. S.NailK. R.AltizerS. (Eds.). (2015). Monarchs in a changing world: Biology and conservation of an iconic butterfly. Ithaca, NY: Comstock.
62.
OberhauserK. S.RiesL.AlrizerS.BataldenR. V.Kudell-EkstrumJ.GarlandM.. . . WaltonD. (2015). Contributions to monarch biology and conservation through citizen science: Seventy years and counting. In OberhauserK. S.NailK. R.AltizerS. (Eds.), Monarchs in a changing world: Biology and conservation of an iconic butterfly (pp. 13-30). Ithaca, NY: Comstock.
63.
OberhauserK. S.SolenskyM. J. (Eds.). (2004). The monarch butterfly: Biology and conservation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
64.
OreskesN.ConwayE. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming (1st U.S. ed.). New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
65.
PalmerM.A. (2012). Socioenvironmental sustainability and actionable science. BioScience, 62, 5-6.
66.
PierceA. A.AltizerS.ChamerlainN. L.KronforstM. R.de RoodeJ. C. (2015). Unraveling the mysteries of monarch migration and global dispersal through molecular genetic techniques. In OberhauserK. S.NailK. R.AltizerS. (Eds.), Monarchs in a changing world: Biology and conservation of an iconic butterfly (pp. 257-267). Ithaca, NY: Comstock.
67.
PleasantsJ. M.OberhauserK. S. (2013). Milkweed loss in agricultural fields because of herbicide use: Effect on the monarch butterfly population. Insect Conservation and Diversity, 6, 135-144.
68.
PleasantsJ. M.WilliamsE. H.BrowerL. P.OberhauserK. S.TaylorO. R. (2016). Conclusion of no decline in summer monarch population not supported. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 109, 169-171.
PorterN. (2013). “Singel-minded, compelling, and unique”: Visual communications, landscape, and the calculated aesthetic of place branding. Evironmental Communication, 7, 231-254.
71.
PotterJ. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction. London, England: Sage.
RiesL.OberhauserK. S. (2015). A citizen army of science: Quantifying the contributions of citizen scientists to our understanding of monarch butterfly biology. BioScience, 65, 419-430. doi:10.1093/biosci/biv011
74.
RiesL.TaronD. J.Rendón-SalinasE.OberhauserK. S. (2015). Connecting eastern monarch population dynamics across their migratory cycle. In OberhauserK. S.NailK. R.AltizerS. (Eds.), Monarchs in a changing world: Biology and conservation of an iconic butterfly (pp. 268-281). Ithaca, NY: Comstock.
75.
RiessmanC. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. London. England: Sage.
76.
SchwarzeS. (2006). Environmental melodrama. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 92, 239-261.
77.
ScudderS. H. (1893). The life of a butterfly. New York, NY: Holt.
78.
SemmensB. X.SemmensD. J.ThogmartinW. E.WiederholtR.López-HoffmanL.DiffendorferJ. E.. . . TaylorO. R. (2015). Quasi-extinction risk and population targets for the Eastern, migratory population of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus). Scientific Reports, 6, 23265. doi:10.1038/srep23265
79.
SergioF.NewtonI.MarchesiL.PedriniP. (2006). Ecologically justified charisma: Preservation of top predators delivers biodiversity conservation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1049-1055.
80.
ShackleyS.WynneB. (1996). Representing uncertainty in global climate science and policy: Boundary-ordering devices and authority. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21, 275-302.
81.
SiegristM.KellerC.KiersH. A. L. (2005). A new look at the psychometric paradigm of perception of hazards. Risk Analysis, 25, 211-222.
82.
SlettoB. (2008). The knowledge that counts: Institutional identities, policy science, and the conflict over fire management in the Gran Sabana, Venezuela. World Development, 36, 1938-1955.
83.
SlocumR. (2004). Polar bears and energy-efficient lightbulbs: Strategies to bring climate change home. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22, 413-438.
84.
SlovicP. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280-285.
85.
SlovicP. (1992). Perception of risk: Reflections on the psychometric paradigm. In KrimskyS.GoldingD. (Eds.), Social theories of risk (pp. 117-152). Westport, CT: Praeger.
86.
SnookL. C. (1993). Conservation of the monarch butterfly reserves in Mexico: Focus on the forest. In MalcolmS. B.ZaluckiM. P. (Eds.), Biology and conservation of the monarch butterfly (pp. 363-376). Los Angeles, CA: Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.
87.
StarS. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35, 601-617.
88.
StarS. L.GriesemerJ. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “Translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkley’s Museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387-420.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
91.
UrquhartF. A. (1976). Found at last: The monarch’s winter home. National Geographic, 150, 160-173.
92.
UrquhartF. A.UrquhartN. R. (1976). The overwintering site of the eastern population of the monarch butterfly (Danaus P. Plexippus; Danaidae) in southern Mexico. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society, 30, 153-158.
93.
van der PloegJ.ArañoR.R.van WeerdM. (2011). What local people think about crocodiles: challanging environmental policy narratives in the philippines. Journal of Environment & Development, 20, 303-328.
94.
VidalO.Lopez-GarciaJ.Rendon-SalinasE. (2013). Trends in deforestation and forest degradation after a decade of monitoring in the Monarch butterfly biosphere reserve in Mexico. Conservation Biology, 28, 177-186.
95.
WalkerK.WalshL. (2012). “No one yet knows what the ultimate consequences may be”: How Rachel Carson transformed scientific uncertainty into a site for public participation in Silent Spring. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26, 3-34.
96.
WalshL. (2015). The double-edged sword of popularization: The role of science communication research in the popsci.com comment shutoff. Science Communication, 37, 658-669.
97.
WalshL.WalkerK. C. (2016). Perspectives in uncertainty for technical communication scholars. Technical Communication Quarterly, 25(2), 71-86.
98.
WhiteH. (1978). Tropics of discourse: Essays in cultural criticism. London, England: Johns Hopkins University Press.
99.
WhiteH. (1981). The value of narrative in the representation of reality. In MitchellW. J. T. (Ed.), On narrative (pp. 1-24). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
100.
WhitleyC. T.KalofL. (2014). Animal imagery in the discourse of climate change. International Journal of Sociology, 44(1), 10-33.
101.
WilliamsE. H.BrowerL. P. (2015). Microclimatic protection of overwintering monarchs provided by Mexico’s high-elevation Oyamel fir forests: A review. In OberhauserK. S.NailK. R.AltizerS. (Eds.), Monarchs in a changing world: Biology and conservation of an iconic butterfly (pp. 109-116). Ithaca, NY: Comstock.
102.
WozniakA.LückJ.WesslerH. (2015). Frames, stories, and images: The advantages of a multimodal approach in comparative media content research on climate change. Environmental Communication, 9, 469-490.
103.
WynneB. (2005). Risk as globalizing “democratic” discourse? Framing subjects and citizens. In LeachM.ScoonesI.WynneB. (Eds.), Science and citizens: Globalization and the challenge of engagement (pp. 66-82). London, England: ZED Books.
104.
ZhanS.ZhangW.NiitepõldK.HusJ.Fernández HaegerJ.ZaluckiM. P.. . . KronforstM. R. (2014). The genetics of monarch butterfly migration and warning colouration. Nature, 514, 317-321.
