Greener Social Constructions: Marie Lake, Fort Chipewyan, and the Alberta Oil Sands by Scott Brodie M.A. (Criminology), Simon Fraser University, 2005 B.A., Mount Royal University, 2001 Dissertation Submitted In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the School of Criminology Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences © Scott Brodie 2014 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Spring 2014 Approval Name: Scott S. Brodie Degree: Doctor of Philosophy Title: Greener Social Constructions: Marie Lake, Fort Chipewyan, and the Alberta Oil Sands Examining Committee: Chair: Dr. Bill Glackman Associate Director: Graduate Programs Dr. Brian Burtch Senior Supervisor Professor Dr. Sheri Fabian Supervisor Senior Lecturer Dr. Patricia Brantingham Supervisor Professor Dr. Karl Froschauer Internal Examiner Associate Professor Department of Sociology and Anthropology Dr. Steven Bittle External Examiner Assistant Professor Department of Criminology University of Ottawa Date Defended: April 22, 2014 ii Partial Copyright Licence iii Abstract There is considerable debate in the green criminological and environmental sociological literature regarding achieving environmental reform. This dissertation contributes to the discussion through a qualitative constructivist interpretation of regional/national news media depictions of two environmental/industrial controversies. The embroiled controversies pit concerned social actors from the Alberta communities of Marie Lake and Fort Chipewyan against Canadian oil sands proponents. Using grounded theory methods and NVivo 10 software, media depictions of the controversies were examined as indicative of the dominant voices at the intersection of a public conversation about the harms caused by the oil sands industry. Very few issue entrepreneur efforts resulted in meaningful environmental reforms, but several key findings emerged. First, we must provide empowering eco-solutions for government, appreciating that politicians are particularly adept at avoiding the negativity accompanying symbolically charged environmental issues. Second, there is value in embracing human interests as a means to save nature, recognizing that social actors can appear self- serving when they affix conventional environmental concerns to anthropocentric (human- centered) causes. Third, sensationalizing isolated aspects of an environmental issue can allow attention to be diverted from fundamental environmental considerations. Fourth, issue entrepreneurs must remain cognizant of the ways in which ideology can defile science during an environmental controversy. Fifth, issue entrepreneurs must acknowledge that scientists are frequently ill prepared to portray their environmental findings against political ideology, and in the media where suspenseful stories routinely take precedence to nuanced and contextualized environmental portrayals. Sixth, it is important to depict environmental controversies in ways that cast science as only one part of a broader landscape of environmental decision-making that also acknowledges localized/first-hand experiences, and the precautionary principle. Lastly, official “truth- seeking” investigations by authoritative governmental agencies often subjugate other important avenues for understanding environmental realities. These key findings are placed in a constructivist framework entitled greener social constructions. The framework contributes to an evolving body of environmental social constructivist literature critical of ways in which journalists, policymakers, iv environmentalists, criminologists, and concerned publics include the environment and environmentalism in their communications. Ultimately, greener social constructions are synonymous with conceiving more compelling ways to remake the planet’s future. Keywords: environmentalism; environmental crime; environmental social constructionism; environmental sociology; green criminology; oil sands v Dedication For my loving parents. Thanks for always taking me outside to play. vi Acknowledgements I am indebted to my supervisory committee for their tireless support. I would like to thank Dr. Brian Burtch for his patience, insightful comments, and first-rate editing skills. Brian, you provided sound advice, amazing ideas, and ample encouragement. Because of you, I am truly proud of this dissertation. I would also like to express my thanks to Dr. Patricia Brantingham for supporting me throughout my PhD with thoughtful words of advice and encouragement. I am honoured to have worked with the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies. I also owe a huge debt of gratitude to Dr. Sheri Fabian for always holding me to task. Your detailed comments and encouraging words of advice were invaluable. In addition, thank you to Dr. Steven Bittle, my external supervisor, and Dr. Karl Froschauer, my internal/external supervisor, for taking the time to carefully read my dissertation. Your comments were both incisive and extremely encouraging. Finally, thank you to all my teachers and colleagues at Simon Fraser University; I learned a lot! A very special thank you goes out to all my friends and family. Yes, I am finally done my homework. Heartfelt thanks go out to my parents for their support and encouragement. It certainly has been a long road. Special thanks to Dr. Nahanni Pollard; you are a true friend and an exceptional scholar. Our provocative conversations inspired many of these pages. I am also profoundly thankful for my partner in crime, Jenna Winder. Your generous and compassionate character is truly amazing. You provided me with the space to write and the motivation to persevere. I honestly owe you everything. I am also indebted to my colleagues and students at Douglas College. It has been a privilege to instruct criminology and teach a course in green criminology. Much of this dissertation was shaped by our engaging classroom discussions. I am truly grateful for having the opportunity to work with so many creative and inspired students and teachers. Finally, I would like to acknowledge Alberta. Many youthful days were spent exploring its forests and swimming its lakes. Alberta is a beautiful place that deserves our protection. I hope this dissertation contributes in some way. vii Table of Contents Approval .......................................................................................................................... ii Partial Copyright Licence ............................................................................................... iii Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iv Dedication ...................................................................................................................... vi Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... vii Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... viii List of Figures.................................................................................................................. x List of Tables ................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1 Introduction: Canada’s Socially Constructed Environment ..................... 1 1.1 Research Questions .............................................................................................. 12 1.2 Dissertation Structure ............................................................................................ 13 Chapter 2 The Social Construction of Environmental Problems ............................. 15 2.1 Realists versus Constructionists ............................................................................ 15 2.2 Models and Techniques of Environmental Social Construction ............................. 19 2.2.1 The Rhetorical Analysis of Environmental Arguments ................................ 20 2.2.2 Claims-making and the Environment ......................................................... 29 2.2.3 Framing Environmental Issues .................................................................. 39 2.2.4 Environmental Discourse ........................................................................... 46 2.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 52 Chapter 3 Prominent Theories of Environmental Sociology .................................... 54 3.1 Ecophilosophy ....................................................................................................... 54 3.2 Theoretical Explanations for Environmental Harm ................................................. 57 3.2.1 The Competing Environmental Functions Model ........................................ 57 3.2.2 The Treadmill of Production ....................................................................... 59 3.3 Explaining Environmental Reform ......................................................................... 66 3.3.1 Ecological Modernization Theory ............................................................... 66 3.3.2 Risk Society Thesis: Towards a New Modernity ........................................ 69 3.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 75 Chapter 4 Methodology, Design, and Analysis ......................................................... 79 4.1 Research