Avoiding cultural trauma: climate change and social inertia

an article by Robert J. Brulle (Brown University, Providence, RI, USA) and Kari Marie Norgaard (University of Oregon, Eugene, USA) published in Environmental Politics Volume 28 Issue 5 (2019)

Abstract

The failure of societies to respond in a concerted, meaningful way to climate change is a core concern of the social science climate literature. Existing explanations of social inertia display little coherence.

Here, a theoretical approach is suggested that integrates disparate perspectives on social inertia regarding climate change.

Climate change constitutes a potential cultural trauma. The threat of cultural trauma is met with resistance and attempts to restore and maintain the status quo. Thus, efforts to avoid large-scale social changes associated with climate change constitute an effort to avoid cultural trauma, and result in social inertia regarding climate change at individual, institutional, and societal levels. Existing approaches to social inertia are reviewed.

An intellectual framework utilizing the work of Pierre Bourdieu is proposed to integrate these different levels of social interaction. Social processes that maintain social order and thus avoid cultural trauma create social inertia regarding climate change.

Full text (PDF 24pp)

---

Where have all the radicals gone?: How normative pressures can blunt the radical edge of a social enterprise

an article by Peter Francis Wheeler (Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK) published in Social Enterprise Journal Volume 13 Issue 2

Abstract

Purpose
This paper aims to track the operations of a radical social enterprise, “New Horizon”, which attempted to provide a different approach to improve the independent living and employment opportunities for disabled people. The longitudinal study covers a period from the new labour project in the late 1990s to current austerity measures.

Design/methodology/approach
The project applied an emancipatory disability research agenda which places both the social and material relations of knowledge in the hands of the disabled participants.

Findings
Under the neo-liberal marketisation of public services, the radical nature of the organisation needed to be tempered, as different stakeholder groupings required different and not always complementary approaches to be undertaken to maintain legitimacy. Neo-institutional pressures tended to drive the organisation towards conformity with similar more mainstream rivals meaning the radical approach which assisted the formation of the organisation became less observable.

Social/implications
This research provides a unique insight into the systemic challenges faced by a social enterprise attempting to improve the independent living/employment prospects of disabled people. The longitudinal nature of the study illustrates how similar radical social enterprises, policymakers and researchers can understand how normative forces act in opposition to radical agendas.

Originality/value
This longitudinal study of a radical disability organisation which is undertaken through an emancipatory disability research agenda provides a unique insight into a marginalised and largely disenfranchised group in society. The paper provides a voice for the disabled stakeholders of New Horizon and hence differs from the majority of social research in that interpretations and analyses arise from the knowing subjects of research as opposed to the more traditional non-disabled academic research community.

---

New legislative settings and the application of the participative-democratic model of mainstreaming equality in public policy making: evidence from the UK's devolution programme

an article by Paul Chaney (Cardiff School of Social Sciences, Wales) published in Policy Studies Volume 33 Issue 5 (September 2012)

Abstract

Studies of established parliamentary contexts highlight institutional barriers to mainstreaming equality of opportunity in public policy-making.

In contrast, this paper uses an actor-centred institutionalist perspective to explore the case of the new devolved legislatures in the UK purposively designed with mechanisms to broaden engagement in the policy process.

It assesses progress in applying the participative-democratic model of mainstreaming to policy-making.

The findings – based upon analysis of legislative proceedings and equality and human rights organisations’ accounts – reveal that ‘system openness’ has afforded opportunities to engage in – and influence – policy work. Yet, problems and shortcomings are also identified – signifying a ‘disconnect’ between the rhetoric and reality of mainstreaming at the meso-level – and continuity with the pre-existing policy style in UK governance.

The wider significance of this is that potential gains afforded by the adoption of mainstreaming in legislative settings purposively designed to foster the engagement of exogenous interests can be negated by leadership issues and government failure to secure the full range of pre-requisites prescribed by mainstreaming theory.

---