The environmental movement has often contested and reshaped scientific knowledge to achieve its goals. However, theorists have yet to account for this social movement tactic. This research uses a case study of the anti-dam movement in Brazil, with particular reference to three instances of anti-dam activism across the country, to delineate how scientization of the state motivates environmental movements to contest science. It uses Jurgen Habermas's theory of communicative action to explicate how instrumental and communicative claims are deliberated on in collaborations between activists and researchers, resulting in new scientific conceptualizations. These results are then translated to the public through innovative movement frames. This research helps situate communicative action as a social movement strategy important in a global knowledge society.
Alvares, C. (1992). Science. In W. Sachs (Ed.),The development dictionary. London: Zed Books.
2.
Backstrand, K. (2002). Civic science for sustainability. Paper presented at the Conference on Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, Berlin, Germany.
3.
Beck, U. (1995). Ecological enlightenment: Essays on the politics of the risk society. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.
4.
Bimber, B., & Guston, D. H. (1994). Politics by the same means: Government and science in the United States. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.),Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Brown, A., & McCully, P. (1997). Uniting to block the dams. Multinational Monitor,18, 6-7.
6.
Buechler, S. M. (1995). New social movement theories. Sociological Quarterly,36, 441-465.
7.
Chambers, R. (1997). Whose reality counts? Putting the first last.London: Intermediate
8.
Technology. Cohen, J., & Arato, A. (1990). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9.
Drori, G., Meyer, J. W., Ramirez, F. O., & Schofer, E. (2003). Science in the modern world polity: Institutionalization and globalization. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
10.
Evans, P. (1979). Dependent development: The alliance of multinational, state and local capital in Brazil. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
11.
Evans, P. (1997). State-society synergy: Government action and social capital in development. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, International and Area Studies Publications.
12.
Fraser, N. (1989). Unruly practices: Power, discourse and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press and Polity Press.
13.
Fung, A., & Wright, E. O. (2002). Deepening democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance. London: Verso.
14.
Habermas, J. (1972). Science and technology as ideology. In B. Barnes (Ed.),Sociology of science: Selected readings. Canada: Penguin Books.
15.
Hess, D. (1997). Science studies: An advanced introduction. New York: New York University Press.
16.
Jacobson, T. L., & Storey, J. (2004). Development communication and participation: Applying Habermas to a case study of population programs in Nepal. Communicative Theory,14(2), 99-121.
17.
Jasanoff, S. (1996). Science and norms in global regimes. In F. O. Hampson & J. Reppy (Eds.),Earthly goods: Environmental change and social justice. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
18.
Khagram, S. (2004). Dams and development: Transnational struggles for water and power. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
19.
Khagram, S., Riker, J., & Sikkink, K. (2000). Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
20.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
Krimsky, S. (2003). Science in the private interest: Has the lure of profits corrupted biomedical research?Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
22.
LaRovere, E. L., & Medes, F. E. (2000). Brazil case study: Tucuruí Dam and Amazon/ Tocantins River Basin. Cape Town, South Africa: World Commission on Dams.
23.
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology,82, 1212-1241.
24.
McCully, P. (1990). Silenced rivers: The ecology and politics of large dams. London: Zed Books.
25.
Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging codes: Collective action in the Information Age. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Moore, M. (1998). Coalition building between Native American and environmental organizations in opposition to development. Organization & Environment,11, 287-313.
27.
Parajuli, P. (1991). Power and knowledge in development discourse: New social movements and the state in India. International Social Science Journal,127, 173-190.
28.
Pinto, L. F. (2002). Hidreletricas na Amazonia: Predestinacao Fatalidade ou Engodo? [Hydroelectric dams in Brazil: Predestination or enticement?] Belem, Para,Edição Jornal Pessoal.
29.
Rosenberg, D. G. (2000). Toward indigenous wholeness: Feminist praxis in transformative learning on health and the environment. In G. J. Sefa Dei, B. Hall, & D. G. Rosenberg (Eds.),Indigenous knowledges in global contexts. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
30.
Rothman, F. (1994). Political process and peasant opposition to large hydroelectric dams: The case of the Rio Uruguai movement in Southern Brazil. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Department of Sociology.
31.
Rothman, F., & Oliver, P. (1999). From local to global: The Brazilian anti-dam movement in Southern Brazil, 1979-1992. Mobilization,4, 41-57.
32.
Scott, J. (1998). Seeing like a state. New London: Yale University Press.
33.
Shiva, V. (1989). Staying alive: Women, ecology and development. London: Zed Books.
34.
Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1992). Master frames and cycles of protest. In A. D. Morris & C. M. Mueller (Eds.),Frontiers in social movement theory. New Haven: Yale University Press.
35.
Steinberg, M. (1998). Tilting the frame: Considerations of collective action framing from a discursive turn. Theory and Society, 27(6), 845-872.
36.
Whiteman, G. (2004). The impact of development in James Bay Canada: The Cree tally-men speak out. Organization & Environment,17(4), 425-448.
37.
World Bank. (1999). Entering the 21st century. New York: Oxford University Press.
38.
Wright, A., & Wolford, W. (2003). To inherit the earth: The landless movement and the struggle for a new Brazil. Oakland, CA: Food First Books.
