University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn Doctoral Dissertations University of Connecticut Graduate School 7-25-2014 Social Movements and Framing Decisions: Ecuador's Campaign for the Rights of Nature Maria Fernanda Enriquez Szentkiralyi University of Connecticut - Storrs, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations Recommended Citation Enriquez Szentkiralyi, Maria Fernanda, "Social Movements and Framing Decisions: Ecuador's Campaign for the Rights of Nature" (2014). Doctoral Dissertations. 575. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/575 Social Movements and Framing Decisions: Ecuador’s Campaign for the Rights of Nature María Fernanda Enríquez Szentkirályi, PhD University of Connecticut, 2014 This study investigates why and how social movements frame their campaigns in the ways they do. It explores Ecuador’s environmental movement, which framed its campaign in terms of the rights of nature. This framing decision is intriguing considering the ideological divisions within the movement, the absence of debate over the plausibility of the frame, and the multiple understandings of the meaning and implications of the rights of nature frame. Surprisingly the framing decision proposed by intellectuals within the movement was endorsed by participants without much clash and disputes. Challenging current explanations of how framing decisions are made, this study complicates the conventional claim that “alignment” (of ideas and interests) between the authors of a frame and movement participants is a necessary condition for any framing decision. The concept of “alignment” is problematic because it assumes that social movement participants understand a frame as proposed by the intellectuals who author the frame, when in reality the possible meanings, intentions, and implications of a frame are commonly interpreted differently by diverse audiences. Additionally, social movements are often fractured, with different groups having different motivations and, thus, promoting their own specific interests, which makes it unlikely that all factions within a movement align with a frame as articulated by intellectuals. i María Fernanda Enríquez Szentkirályi, University of Connecticut, 2014 Contrary to what negotiation scholars have propounded, this study also finds that clashes and disputes are not always inherent to the process of frame decision-making. As the Ecuadorian case bears out, there is an alternative explanation for how framing decisions are made, which I term “agreement without alignment.” Given the various actors involved, their unique motivations and interests, and invariable differences in the understanding of a frame, I argue that groups within a social movement need only agree or tacitly agree with a framing option when (a) the frame does not contradict their interests, (b) the groups are constrained by a common identity, and (c) the political opportunity is volatile. I differentiate between agreement and tacit agreement because sometimes movement participants may disagree with the frame but yet they do not attempt to block it, implying that they are tacitly or passively agreeing with the frame. ii Social Movements and Framing Decisions: Ecuador’s Campaign for the Rights of Nature María Fernanda Enríquez Szentkirályi M.A., University of Connecticut, 2006 A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Connecticut 2014 iii Copyright by María Fernanda Enríquez Szentkirályi 2014 iv Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation Social Movements and Framing Decisions: Ecuador’s Campaign for the Rights of Nature Presented by María Fernanda Enríquez Szentkirályi, B.A., M.A. Major Advisor ________________________________________________________________ Peter Kingstone Associate Advisor ______________________________________________________________ Shareen Hertel Associate Advisor ______________________________________________________________ Cyrus Ernesto Zirakzadeh University of Connecticut 2014 v Acknowledgements (Agradecimientos) Sin la iluminación de la energía más poderosa que cada día guía mi camino, esta tesis nunca hubiera sido posible. Gracias Dios. Gracias a mi Levente por las caminatas donde tuvo la paciencia de escuchar mis ideas, de contribuir con las suyas, por leer y editar cada capítulo de mi tesis, y por empujarme a terminar lo que comencé. Gracias a mi András Rafael porque aunque está chiquito y no sabe bien lo que hace su mami, es un sol que me ilumina la vida. Gracias a toda mi familia en Quito, a mi mami, mi papá, mis hermanas Silvi, Sole y Claudia y mi hermano Santi. Tal vez mi familia nunca entendió bien lo que estudiaba en Estados Unidos, pero si saben lo difícil que a veces es la vida cuando estas en un país que no es el tuyo. Todos han sido un apoyo increíble. Gracias a mis profesores, Peter, Shareen, Ernie. Cuando llegue a UConn tuve la inmensa suerte de encontrar a estos profesores increíbles. Su compromiso, paciencia y consejo me ayudaron a comenzar y terminar este proyecto. Gracias Peter por ayudarme a identificar el “puzzle.” Tal vez no le he contado la historia a Peter, pero una que otra lágrima cayó en la biblioteca cuando mi disertación no marchaba bien: no había “puzzle.” Y por supuesto gracias a mis amigos de UConn, en especial a Yaz con quien comencé este camino hace ya varios años y con quien compartí tantos momentos buenos y malos. Un agradecimiento especial al Departamento de Ciencias Políticas de UConn, a Graduate School, y al Centro de Estudios Latinoamericanos y del Caribe de UConn por las becas recibidas para poder llevar a cabo el proyecto. Y un gracias enorme para toda la gente de Ecuador que me dio entrevistas y me colaboró con su tiempo. Muchos de ellas y ellos se sentaron conmigo por horas y me dieron luces sobre lo que sucedía en el país con los derechos de la naturaleza. Gracias a Anamaría Varea, Alberto Acosta, Camilo Martínez, Carlo Ruiz, Carlos Larrea, Carmen Barrera, Cecilia Lincango, Cesar Pilataxi, Dania Quirola, Delfín Tenezaca, Esperanza Martínez, Floresmilo Simbaña, Gustavo Prieto, Jorge León, Líder Góngora, Lourdes Peralvo, María Andrade, María vi Catalina Noroña, María Fernanda Espinosa, Mario Melo, Natalia Greene, Norman Wray, Pablo Lucio Pareces, Pablo Ortiz, Rolando Panchana, Simón Pachano, Tania Villegas, Yuri Iturralde, Antonio Gaybor, Benjamín Macas, Byron Quishpe, Carlos Zambrano, Carlos Zorilla, Cecilia Cherrez, Denis García, Diana Palacios, Ermel Chávez, Federico Koelle, Iván Morillo, Janette Ulloa, Javier Morales, Jorge Hidalgo, Pepe Rivadeneira, Luis Robalino, Luis Yanza, Manolo Morales, María Amparo Albán, Marianeli Torres, Marlon Santi, Martha Roldos, Mónica Chuji, Nancy Minga, Olindo Nastacuaz, Patricia Gualinga, Patricio Carpio, Pepe Acacho, Polibio Pérez, Ricardo Crespo, Ricardo Torres, Roció Bastidas, Rossana Manosalvas, Sigrid Vásconez, Silvia Tibi, Susan Poats, Ulbio Torres, Vicente Pólit, Vladimir Serrano, William Ochoa, Wilson Guzmán, y Yolanda Kakabadse. vii Table of Contents Chapter 1: Social Movements and Framing Decisions Chapter 2: The Argument Chapter 3: What do Rights of Nature Mean? Discourses Employed in the Frame Construction Chapter 4: Heterogeneity of the Ecuadorian Environmental Movement Chapter 5: Constructing and Endorsing the Rights-of-nature frame Chapter 6: After the Constitutional Reform Chapter 7: Conclusions viii Chapter 1 Social Movements and Framing Decisions Political Process scholars argue that social movements develop and mobilize sustained collective action when the political opportunity for social change is ripe, when the organizational and financial means are available, and also when movements frame the issues and their objectives in such a way as to motivate widespread support and participation (McAdam, McCarthy, and Zald 1996; Tarrow 1998; Tilly and Tarrow 2007). This dissertation focuses on the framing aspect of Political Process Theory, and investigates why and how social movements frame their campaigns in the ways they do, a question that social movement scholars acknowledge has received little attention despite the sophistication achieved in the framing literature (Polleta and Kai Ho 2006, 188). To begin to answer this question, I employ the case study of Ecuador’s unique environmental movement, which recently succeeded in its effort to compel the state to implement more stringent environmental standards and, thus, helped to make Ecuador the first country in the world to constitutionally recognize the rights of nature, and our correlative obligation to protect the natural world for its own sake. There is evidence that during the late 1980s and 1990s, Ecuadorian intellectuals concerned with environmental issues started to develop ideas about granting rights to nature. Yet, only in late 2007 did intellectuals within the Ecuadorian environmental movement launch a campaign championing for the rights of nature. Motivated by various eco-centric approaches of environmental ethics and law, indigenous philosophies that advocate for a harmonious relationship with nature, and symbolic cases of grassroots efforts of local communities to resist the extraction of natural resources from their 1 lands, this campaign for the rights of nature was developed in the midst of a particular political climate and also in response to a strategic political opportunity. A Constituent Assembly had been convened in Ecuador in late 2007 to draft a new constitution. Environmental movement intellectuals sought to garner