Student: Valentine Morell 11434546 E-mail: val.morell.vm@gmail.com Supervisor: Dr. J.M. Bavinck Second reader: Dr. Mirjam A.F. Ros-Tonen The role of collective action in environmental management: the case of the social-ecological system of the Bassin d’Arcachon, France. MSc International Development Word count: 25 746 01/01/2018
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Tout d’abord, je voudrais remercier Maarten Bavinck, qui m’a guidée au long de ce processus complexe qu’est l’écriture d’un mémoire de master. Son enseignement au cours de l’année m’a permis d’éveiller une curiosité axée sur les enjeux environnementaux, indispensable pour ce travail et pour le futur. Je voudrais aussi remercier Mirjam Ros-Tonen, dont les conseils ont été précieux et qui a accepté d’évaluer mon travail.
De plus, je voudrais remercier l’ensemble des associations et organismes mentionnés dans ce travail, dont la participation a permis la production de ce mémoire. J’aimerais remercier particulièrement Émilie de Blas, Sylvain Brun, William Marquet, Valentin Bonfils, Maria De Vos, Christophe Le Noc, Natalia Pulido de la Uz et Antoine Bruge, qui ont accepté de répondre à mes questions avec patience.
Finalement, je voudrais remercier toutes les personnes qui m’ont encouragée et soutenue dans le choix et la réalisation de ce projet. J’aimerais porter une attention particulière à Margot, dont la présence lors de mes premiers pas sur le terrain a été très bénéfique.
First of all, I would like to thank Maarten Bavinck, who guided me during the process of writing a master’s thesis. His teaching during the year has triggered my interest concerning environmental issues, and reinforced an essential curiosity for this work and the future. I would also like to thank Mirjam Ros-Tonen whose advice has been precious and who agreed to evaluate the present work. Furthermore, I would like to thank all the associations and organisms mentioned, whose participation has allowed the production of this thesis. I would especially like to thank Émilie de Blas, Sylvain Brun, William Marquet, Valentin Bonfils, Maria De Vos, Christophe Le Noc, Natalia Pulido de la Uz and Antoine Bruge who answered my questions patiently.
Eventually, I would like to thank everybody who has encouraged and supported this project. I would like to pay a particular attention to Margot, whose presence at the
“Je crois qu’il profita, pour son évasion, d’une migration d’oiseaux sauvages.” – Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
ABSTRACT
Located on the French Atlantic coast, the Bassin d’Arcachon stands as a safe haven for biodiversity and is characterized by its level of primary production and important habitat services. The quality of the natural ecosystem and the resources it is composed of make this area a unique but fragile common good. In the broad context of sustainability, the overall objective of this work is to conduct an in-depth analysis of the social-ecological system of the Bassin d’Arcachon. Furthermore, the ambition is to understand the dynamics inherent to the relation between the populations and their natural environment. In order to identify the driving forces of collective environmental protection and the underlying individual motivations, qualitative data and participant observation are being analysed from an insider’s and interpretivist point of view.
An overall environmental paradigm amongst influent groups involved in pro-environmental collective action has been identified. However, the analysis of individuals’ discourses within those movements has unveiled the existence of diverging positions from this shared worldview. Those bottom-line findings have empowered a reflection on the action for the public good, and on role of the enlightened self-interest in collective action. Situated in the more general field of environmental studies, this work contributes to the interdisciplinary academic debate on collective action. In addition to this, it appears as relevant for adaptation to change in environmental management. Anchored in development studies, this work contributes to the understanding of the human-environment relation, its dynamics and the consequences for international issues.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 OUTLINE OF THE THESIS 3 CHAPTER 2: CONCEPTUALIZING THE HUMAN-ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIP 1 2.1 UNDERSTANDING THE SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS 12.2 PUBLIC GOODS AND PUBLIC BADS: THE COMMONS 3
2.3 ECOSYSTEM SERVICES 3
2.3.1 THE MILLENNIUM ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT 3
2.3.2 REFLECTION ON THE CONCEPT OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES 5 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PARADIGMS 8 2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSES 10 2.5.1 DRYZEK’S ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSES CLASSIFICATION 11 3.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT 15 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY 19 4.1 BEFORE THE FIELD 19
4.2 ON THE FIELD RESEARCH DESIGN 20
4.3 LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH 23 4.4 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY 25 4.5 RESEARCH ETHICS 27 CHAPTER 5: THE GEOGRAPHY OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN THE BASSIN D’ARCACHON 29 5.1 THE NATURAL MECHANISMS FORMING THE BAY 29 5.2 THE GEOGRAPHICAL KEY LOCATIONS FOR A PROSPEROUS ECOSYSTEM 31 CHAPTER 6: PRO-ACTION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 39 6.1 THE ROLE OF THE FRENCH STATE IN PROTECTING THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 39 6.1.1 NATURA 2000 39
6.1.2 MARINE PROTECTED AREA 40
6.1.3 NATIONAL NATURAL RESERVES 41
6.2 COLLECTIVE ACTION: THE ASSOCIATIONS STUDIED DURING FIELDWORK 42 6.3 URBAN PLANNING ON THE BAY: TWO RELEVANT CASES FOR MY WORK 52 CHAPTER 7: ANALYSIS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT DISCOURSES 54
7.1 APPROACHING ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSES 54
7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS: AN ADAPTATION OF DRYZEK’S CLASSIFICATION 55 7.2.1 NATIONAL NATURAL RESERVE (RNN) OF THE PRÉS-SALÉS D’ARÈS-LÈGE 55
7.2.2 THE DUNE DU PILAT 62
7.2.3 NATIONAL NATURAL RESERVE (RNN) OF THE BANC D’ARGUIN 64
CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION 70 8.1 ANSWERING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS 70 8.2 REFLECTING ON THE FINDINGS 73 8.3 POLICY AND PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS 8.4 THEORETICAL REFLECTION 8.5 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 75 REFERENCES 78
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: THE BASSIN D’ARCACHON
FIGURE 2: GLADWIN ET AL. ALTERNATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL PARADIGMS TABLE
FIGURE 3: DRYZEK’S ADAPTED ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSES SPECTRUM
FIGURE 4: CONCEPTUAL SCHEME
MAP 1: THE GEOGRAPHY OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
FIGURE 5: CROSS-TABLE OF HABITATS OF COMMUNITY INTERESTS AND COSTANZA’S ECOSYSTEM SERVICES CLASSIFICATION
FIGURE 6: MPA OF THE BASSIN D’ARCACHON
FIGURE 7: CORRESPONDING KEY ASSUMPTIONS – IDENTIFYING THE ASSOCIATIONS’ PARADIGMS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Extended along more than 1.5 million km over 123 countries in the world, coastal ecosystems concentrate substantial resources on which human activities and wellbeing depend (UNEP, 2017). Consequently, human populations tend to gather on those areas rich in resources, increase the rate of their activities and inevitably reinforce their impact on the natural coastal environment (UNEP, 2017). The United Nations Environment Programme has highlighted the essential role of ecosystems in adaptation, and the importance of their social, economic and biological values (UNEP, 2017). Hence, in the context of International Development, coastal areas where various social-ecological systems develop hold a very important role for overall sustainability. Those systems include the interrelations between social, economic and ecologic fields, and offer a multi-lens approach to viable environmental development. The Programme for Action adopted at the international conference on population and development (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994 highlights the interrelationships between populations, sustainable economic growth and sustainable development with an important overview on the contemporaneous environmental issue (ICPD, 1994). The goal of the Programme for Action was to set an agenda where inclusiveness, sustainability as well as equity would be integrated. Adopted by a great majority of governments in the world, the ICPD Programme of Action appears as a fundamental shift in the perception of development issues, and for the inclusion of all individuals in tackling those issues (ICPD, 1994). The proposition 3.24 mentions that “meeting the basic human needs of growing populations is dependent on a healthy environment” (ICPD, 1994: 25). It appears that environmental degradation is an obstacle to the fulfilment of basic human needs, and human wellbeing. Subsequently, sustainable environmental management and policies seem crucial for the development of viable social-ecological systems. Indeed, the relationship between human societies and the environment is at the core of those social-ecological systems over the world, in the Global South and Global North, and should receive a particular attention. Therefore, the analysis of those systems targets the understanding of existing dynamics between individuals in collective action and their natural environment. In the specific case of this work, the ambition is to unveil the motivations for environmental pro-action, and to for
the purpose of environmental management adaptation and eventually contribute to a more sustainable international development.
While situated in the more general field of environmental studies, this master’s thesis is anchored in the interdisciplinary academic debate on collective action. Indeed, in the context of a master’s thesis in international development, this work aims at unveiling the specific role of collective action in empowering environmental management, in one coastal region of France. The purpose of the study is to unveil how the harmony between human societies and the natural environment is altered and slowed-down by a malfunctioning mechanism within the social-ecological system. Indeed, the ambition is to understand what hinders sustainability practices on the Bassin d’Arcachon, from an insider’s point of view. In order to do so, a broad picture of ecosystem services and pro-environmental actions on the bay will be set, and an in-depth analysis of the underlying individual motivations of actors will be conducted. Within the academic debate of environmental management and collective action, what motivates this work is that “the prediction of resource collapse is supported in very large, highly valuable, open access systems when the resource harvesters are diverse, do not communicate, and fail to develop rules and norms for managing the resources.” (Ostrom, 2009: 419).
Furthermore, this work contributes to international development studies in the sense that it reinforces an analytic frame for sustainability on the local level. Indeedn it might be a reflection of similar social-ecological systems in the world. The choice of the Bassin d’Arcachon as a case study has been made while acknowledging the existence of a related fragile coastal area in Mauritania: le Banc d’Arguin. Indeed, the National Parc of the Banc d’Arguin in Mauritania and the National Natural Reserve of the Banc d’Arguin on the bay present similar dynamics. In addition to this further research could be conducted following this work on areas such as the Marine Natural Parks of Mayotte, and of the Glorioso Islands in the Indian Ocean, or the Marine Natural Park of Martinique (Agence des Aires Marines Protégées, 2012). Eventually this works contributes to environmental management by analysing the remaining gaps existing within collective action on the bay and highlights the school of thought of ecological modernization that suggest that the economy would benefit from moving towards environmentalism.
1.1 Outline of the thesis
In this chapter, I have introduced the context and the topic of the research, that is to say a general idea and the purpose of my work. In chapter 2, I will look at the theoretical background of the research. In order to do so I will identify the academic debates in which the research is anchored, and I will define the different concepts that frame this work. I will also describe the different tools involved in chapter 6 and 7. Chapter 3 aims at highlighting the problem statement and the research questions that will be answered to in the conclusion. The methods used for data collection as well as a reflection on reliability, validity, the ethics and limits of the research will appear in chapter 4. Chapters 5, 6 and 7 will focus on data analysis. Indeed, in chapter 5 I will identify the different ecosystem services existing on the Bassin d’Arcachon. Later, in chapter 6 and 7, I will use the tools described in chapter 2 in order to analyse various approaches to environmental issues on the collective and individual levels. Finally, I will conclude on my findings and contribution of the research in chapter 8.
Figure 1: The Bassin d’Arcachon Source: Agence des Aires Marines Protégée, 2014 Legend ________ Perimeter of the Marine Protected Area • Cities (Lège Cap-Ferret, Arès, Andernos-les-Bains, Lanton, Audenge, Biganos, Le Teich, Gujan-Mestras, La Teste de Buch, Arcachon) ________ Administrative boundaries ________ Rivers
CHAPTER 2: CONCEPTUALIZING THE HUMAN-ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIP
Chapter 2 aims at highlighting the different academic theories, concepts and literatures relevant to this master’s thesis. It includes the conceptualization of the relationship between humans and the environment, represented by social-ecological systems. Within this frame, the ideas of the commons, as well as the public good and bads are introduced. Indeed, these concepts lead to a more particular one anchored in environmental academic debates: that of the ecosystem services. Eventually, two relevant approaches on environmental paradigms and discourses are presented and referred to in chapters 6 and 7 : Gladwin et al. alternative environmental paradigms, and Dryzek’s environmental discourses analysis (Gladwin et al, 1995 ; Dryzek, 2013).
2.1 Understanding the social-ecological systems
The social-ecological systems (SES) are an integrated model revolving around the three key elements of sustainable development, and to this extent, depict the various dynamics between related subsystems: human society and economy, as well as biological ecology. This interrelation unveils the role of humans as social actors on a vast stage: their natural environment. Indeed, “ecological systems are linked systems of people and nature, emphasising that humans must be seen as a part of, not apart from, nature” (Berkes and Folke, 1998). In 2009, Elinor Ostrom described a general framework targeting the understanding of the multiple internal subsystems and variables of the SES, in which all humanly used resources are embedded (Ostrom, 2009: 419). Four core subsystems are identified by Ostrom, implementing a framework for analysing social-ecological systems: resource units, resource systems, governance system and users; all elements interacting between one another and stressing the extended variability and complexity of such social-ecological systems (Ostrom, 2009: 419).
Understanding social-ecological systems aims at building capacity to adapt to change and promote resilience. Indeed, « complex systems thinking is therefore used to bridge social and biophysical sciences to understand, for example, climate, history and human action. » (McIntosh, Tainter, and McIntosh, 2000). The complexity of
interrelations between the systems and within them needs to be grasped in order to have a clear overview of how to adapt to change and empower it (Berkes et al. 2003: 2). The intrinsic goal of such research is to contribute to sustainability that is to say the good management of three essential variables: social, economic, and environmental. It is always keeping in mind the full integration of humankind within its environment that sustainability, and thus viable social-ecological systems can develop. “The lesson from complex systems thinking is that management processes can be improved by making them adaptable and flexible, able to deal with uncertainty and surprise, and by building capacity to adapt to change.” (Berkes et al. 2003: 9) Eventually, the ambition is to unveil ideas which make sense to both natural and social scientists, and how by finding a common point, systems of people and nature will be able to co-evolve in an « adaptive dance » (Berkes et al. 2003: 9). Eventually, it would prevent treating two closely interrelated fields apart, and acknowledge that only the integration and cooperation of the sciences they belong to will lead to sustainable solution to life on earth crises (Walters, 1986).
More concretely, natural ecosystems and their resources evolve as we seek the services they offer, and slowly, humankind becomes more and more dependant on those services. In the meantime, those services become more vulnerable and fragile, when the use that is made out of it, is made with few considerations of sustainability and appear to be anthropocentric. The integration of social-ecological systems aims at highlighting the ecological systems, their services and resilience within social sciences, in order to empower the restoration of natural resources (always to a limited extent as boundaries have been crossed.) (Rockström et al. 2009) It is under this idea of integration and reconciliation of social and scientific fields, leaning towards viable actions and positive change for the commons’ management that the research has been made. As mentioned in the Annual Review of Review Economics of 2009, collaborative research between economists and ecologists in identifying relevant biophysical trade offs is necessary (Polasky et al., 2009: 417). It seems now interesting to describe the ways in which the public goods and their antithetical aspects are understood.
2.2 Public Goods and Public Bads: the Commons
Public goods can be defined by what opposes them to private goods. Indeed, while private goods’ dynamics rest on market transactions, ownership and private rights framing access and use; public goods are defined by two different properties: non-rivalry and non-excludability (Rich et al. 1997: 3). The first property corresponds to the extent to which a public good can benefit several persons at the same time without any additional cost or an increasing number of people with a very low marginal cost (Rich et al. 1997: 4). It reflects how the quantity of this good is not subject to scarcity. The second property shows how this good cannot require any sort of payment from the individuals benefiting from it, avoiding in that way the exclusion of any. The concept of the public bad can be understood in the continuity of the concept of the public good. Economically defined as the symmetric of the good, it responds to the same characteristics of non-rivalry and non-excludability but through common negative externalities (Rich et al. 1997: 4). To sum up, it concerns public and common elements to a great number of people who have to endorse the consequences of the use of these public goods with no differentiation. The concept of negative externalities in itself refers to “the effect of an activity or good that arises when an individual, firm or any other actor takes an action but does not bear the full costs.” (Rich et al. 1997: 458)
In the case of this research, and following the definition of the commons and their externalities, the concept of the ecosystem services arises.
2.3 Ecosystem Services
2.3.1 The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) of 2005 depicts the linkages between ecosystem services and human beings, including socio-economic, cultural, and environmental factors that need to be taken into account when considering the concept of wellbeing. Well-being can be perceived as a suitable way of living according to the need of the populations as well as to the resources available (MEA, 2005). However it is important to recall that it is a matter of perception and is relative to each individual (MEA, 2005).
The interdisciplinary research of the Millennium Ecological Assessment, as a bridge between social and natural sciences, is necessary in order to “ensure that human actions do not damage ecological processes necessary to support the continued flow of ecosystem services on which the welfare of present and future generations depend.” (Polasky et al., 2009: 410)
The MEA presents four types of services provided by ecosystems:
The provisioning aspect refers to the ways in which nature and its resources sustain human life (NWF, 2015). It represents the sum of the elements that can be extracted from nature and eventually benefit to humans. For example it refers to fruits, vegetables, livestock, fishes but also natural gas or timber that fulfil other needs than simply nutrition (MEA, 2005). In the case of the Bassin d’Arcachon and especially its coasts, it refers to the marine, terrestrial and interface habitats resources.
The regulating aspect of the ecosystem services concerns the natural dynamics and system that make life possible (MEA, 2005). While the provisioning aspect focuses on what can be extracted, the regulating aspect is based on the interrelation of systems that converge towards the cleaning and the stabilization of the natural environment. It includes systems of pollination, decomposition that are in relation with the fauna, but also purification and carbon storage; services more in relation with the flora (NWF, 2015). The geomorphic aspect of the Bassin d’Arcachon and its surroundings are threatened by different kind of erosion, caused by humans, wind or the sea. The most well know regulating actor in this area is the Oyat also known as the Marram grass. Indeed, thanks to its density, its ability to grow in the sand and have long roots, and its size (60 to 120 cm) it facilitates the stabilization of the dunes and coasts (La Depeche, 2008). The cultural ecosystem service is a more transcendent one as it looks at the aesthetic, spiritual, and educational aspects (MEA, 2005). Indeed, nature, the environment and its dynamics impact us in the sense that they are a guiding force to our personal development. They have a great role in our ways of thinking and approaches to the world, and the cultural aspect is one that cannot be materialized in comparison to the
first two services mentioned (NWF, 2015). In the case of the Bassin d’Arcachon, the most important aspect of the cultural service is how recreation has been developed around the environment.
The supporting aspect is a more intrinsic one, referring to underlying natural processes such as photosynthesis, nutrient cycling, or soil formation (MEA, 2005). It targets the sustainability of the rest of the ecosystem services, and is a necessary condition for the development of provisioning, regulating and cultural aspects (NWF, 2015). This type of service will be further developed and reflected upon in the next section.
2.3.2 Reflection on the concept of ecosystem services
This section is based on a very recent article by Costanza et al. that focuses on the evolution of the concept of ecosystem services and clarifies its role. The aim is to reflect on this relevant article and integrate the updates in our local approach to the Bassin d’Arcachon.
The golden thread of this article is an “evolutionary history” of ecosystem services over twenty years, unveiling the weaknesses of the mainstream approaches to the concept (Costanza, 2017: 2). First of all, it is important to recall the genesis of the focus on ecosystem services. It is when the depletion of natural resources started to have a visible impact on human’s livelihood that ecology as an important field of study arose, with a greater focus on the ecosystems as a whole and on the extent to which not everything can be given a market value (Costanza, 2017: 2). In 1997, a quantitative global assessment of the value of ecosystem services has been elaborated: the synthesis was a « meta-analysis of all existing literature on seventeen ecosystem services across sixteen biomes, using a basic value transfer technique that assumed a constant value per hectare for each of the biomes » (Costanza, 2017: 2). The results had diverging impacts on populations concerned, but the outcome was a demonstration that « ecosystem services were much more important to human
well-being than conventional economic thinking had given them credit for. » (Costanza, 2017: 3) This is on this statement and on the reconciliation of humankind with nature that this clarification occurs.
A first reflective clarification revolves around the definition of the ecosystem services. Understood as ecological functions and processes contributing to human wellbeing, there is still a distinction to be made. Indeed, we must keep in mind that the functions and processes of the ecosystems, referring to biophysical relationship, do exist independently of the benefits humankind draw from them (Costanza, 2017: 3). However, the ecosystem services are those processes and functions’ outcomes applied to human welfare. Thus the omnipresent functions and processes can only be considered as the well-known concept of ecosystem services once they become « useful ». In a few words, it depicts the extent to which the the environment is not relying on us, while humankind can only survive with a full consciousness of its dependency towards nature. As Costanza et al. put it in words, « Homo sapiens is an internal part of the current biosphere », an idea that the concept of social-ecosystem services wishes to enhance. (Costanza, 2017: 3)
« Unless we recognize our interdependence with the rest of nature we are putting our species wellbeing at risk, and at the same time we blindly endanger global ecosystems. » (Costanza, 2017: 3) By acknowledging this interdependence, the focus is made on the whole system, and the outcome appears to be more sustainable than with an anthropocentric approach. Furthermore, Costanza et al. (2017) insist on how those ecosystem services can be seen as natural capital since they only become services once they are included in a system requiring human agency. They depict the interrelation between four types; social, built, human and natural capital that create a sustainable wellbeing. (Costanza, 2017: 4) Out of this interaction are produced the four broad types of services, listed in Costanza et al. (1997) article and revisited in 2017: provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services. It is within this last category that another very relevant clarification in the case of this master’s thesis appears. Indeed, while supporting services had always referred to basic ecosystem processes and primary productivity, the role of ecosystems as a key habitat has been distinguished and highlighted in The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity Project (TEEB, 2010). It
refers to the importance of ecosystems for migratory species and « gene-pool protectors ». (Costanza, 2017: 6)
To sum up, the multidimensional aspect of services, processes and functions as well as direct and indirect contributions for human kind, unveils a very complex system. Hence, a clear and exhaustive classification of ecosystem services is difficult to reach. Various tables and lists of services have been elaborated such as the seventeen services of Costanza et al. in 1997, or the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of 2005. A comparison of the most broadly used classification systems shows great similarities, whose variations are made on details of the biomes studied (Costanza, 2017: 7).
The ecosystem functions and processes become services once they become useful. It is a form of valuation, but is it worth it? First of all, the act of delimiting, categorizing and listing the services derived from the ecosystems ensures recognition of their importance (not their value) and their integration in public policy. The economic values attributed to those services only allow them in the market machinery. The individual « willingness-to-pay » for the stream is a key characteristic of an economic value given to ecosystem services, and thus for the individual assessment of human wellbeing. However, as Costanza et al. (2017) point out, such an approach appears as very narrow. More than the aggregate of individual, self-assessed welfare, human wellbeing rely on the welfare of community or society. This aspect clarified in the updated article anchors our research even deeper in the social-ecological services theory. (Costanza, 2017: 7)
Eventually, this article offers a table for analysis focusing on the potential uses of ecosystem services valuation. Once again it reflects on the variability and complexity of this concept, and at the same time on the all-encompassing aspect it bears. Indeed, raising awareness and interest; national income and wellbeing accounts; specific policy analyses, urban and regional land use planning, payment for ecosystem services, full cost accounting or common asset trusts are all the categories included and integrating all spatial scales within the process of valuation (Costanza, 2017: 8). As a very concise conclusion given in the clear renewed article, a new paradigm has to be taken into account in order to put nature at the core of the actions, not only to avoid
anthropocentrism but mostly to understand the ecosystems as a whole, integrating humankind and its wellbeing all together. The challenge is to create a bridge between conventional economic approaches and fast pace evolving global ecosystems, in order to reach sustainability for nature and for society, which leads us back to the intrinsic goal of this research: the reconciliation of humankind within its environment. 2.4 Environmental paradigms In 1995, Gladwin et al. have elaborated an illustrative trichotomy of alternative environmental paradigms (Gladwin et al., 1995: 881). It is a very schematic representation of a two-ended spectrum, ranging from technocentrism to ecocentrism, with an alternative paradigm existing in-between (Gladwin et al., 1995: 882). Indeed, « the alienated poles of technocentrism and ecocentrism have long been the subject of attention in a variety of disciplines that have examined the human-environment relationship. » (Gladwin et al., 1995: 881) Based on this assumption, Gladwin et al. develop an alternative worldview, creating a bridge between the two academic poles of ecocentrism and technocentrism.
What is technocentrism? According to Gladwin et al., the core of this paradigm stresses the fact that « the earth is inert and passive and therefore legitimately exploitable. » (Gladwin et al., 1995: 882) It appears as similar to the anthropocentric ontology referred to by De Lucia in 2015, where the only intrinsic value in the system is given to human being, while « all else in this view, has value only instrumentally. » (De Luca, 2015: 2) In this paradigm, human benefit is the main priority, the natural world is objectified and « humankind is separate from and superior to nature. » (Gladwin et al., 1995: 882) Therefore, the ontological stance that technocentrism depicts can also be understood as anthropocentrism, that is to say centred on human interests mainly.
On the other end of the spectrum, what is ecocentrism? We have seen that Gladwin et al. defined the earth as inert and passive from a technocentrist point of view. The ecocentrist point of view stresses the opposite: the earth is alive and active. This ontology highlights the interconnectedness between parts of the system, and mentions that « internal relations and process take primacy over parts. » (Gladwin et al., 1995:
886) In line with the concept of the social-ecological system where the emphasis is made on how humankind must be understood as fully part of nature, ecocentrism states that humankind does not occupy a privileged place in the system (Berkes and Folke, 1998; Gladwin et al., 1995: 886 ).
Sustaincentrism is the alternative paradigm, Gladwin et al. propose. It appears as a compromise between the first two paradigms mentioned: technocentrism and ecocentrism. Indeed, the authors mention that « humans are neither totally disengaged from, nor totally immersed in the rest of nature », and that for this reason, a balanced alternative worldview, closer to the broad concept of sustainability should be highlighted (Gladwin et al., 1995: 890). This alternative paradigm refers to evolution as a process through which humanity has been transformed into « the steward of life’s continuity » (Gladwin et al., 1995: 890). The radical ontological stances at the core of techno- and ecocentrism are rejected by this alternative paradigm, which eventually promotes moral pluralism (Gladwin et al., 1995: 891).
The worldview of sustaincentrism integrates a people-centred vision of development with ethics based on the conservation of nature; it also allows the interests of “today and tomorrow (…) of North and South.” (Gladwin et al., 1995: 894). Eventually it highlights the stewardship role of humankind on earth, reinforced by group actions and collective movements promoting pro-environmental unity (Gladwin et al., 1995: 890). These are the reasons why I have chosen Gladwin et al. alternative environmental paradigms table in order to analyse the mandates of environment-related associations in the context of the Bassin d’Arcachon. The following figure describing the different key assumptions in each alternative environmental will be used in chapter 6. Indeed, it will help determine which worldview corresponds the most to the different associations’ mandates, and thus it will help understanding the organizational positions held on the bay. Finally, individual environmental positions will be further analysed in chapter 7, via a classification focusing on discourse analysis: Dryzek’s environmental discourses classification.
Figure 2: Gladwin et al. Alternative Environmental Paradigms Table Source: Gladwin et al., 1995: 883 2.5 Environmental discourses Defining the most basic ideas, such as Human Nature, the Good and the Bad, or even the Truth, has been a challenge in most civilizations (Dryzek, 2013: 1). The most intrinsic values of humankind have been; successfully or not, categorized in order to offer a better understanding of our role. Throughout time and alongside cultural adaptations, those key concepts have evolved, while other meaningful ones arose. Amongst them, the idea of Nature, the Environment and the Earth supporting life have grown as very meaningful concepts (Dryzek, 2013: 2). According to Dryzek, attention has been given to those ideas when the Earth was first photographed from space (Dryzek, 2013: 5). The author, in his book The politics of the Earth: environmental
discourses, focuses on how discourses can be powerful, and the extent to which it is necessary to acknowledge their diversity. Indeed, while the environmental discourse has been developed in the context of an industrial society, the focus on increased growth and quantities is fading away. Industrialism is disintegrating, opening a broader range of discourses and understandings revolving around the environmental issues and values (Dryzek, 2013: 22). Indeed, Dryzek stresses the variability found in environmental discourses, in opposition to the hegemonic point of view held by Foucault for instance, revealing a more flexible capacity of analysis, or a broader spectrum (Dryzek, 2013: 22). The ambition of this environmental analysis axis is to bring environment at the core of our society and what composes it, rather than seeing it as a source of difficulties standing outside of it (Dryzek, 2013: 14). Hence, under the idea of interlaced variables within the environment such as aesthetics, moral, culture, the economy or the intrinsic value of Nature, Dryzek has established a classification for environmental discourses that will serve as a basis for analysis in the case of the Bassin d’Arcachon. 2.5.1 Dryzek’s environmental discourses classification Dryzek organizes environmental discourses according to how they argue against industrialism, and according to how they commit to economic growth and the ensuing wellbeing. The first dimension, represented by the vertical axis on figure 3, highlights the degree to which moving away from the conditions created by industrialism is promoted. (Dryzek, 2013: 15). Two departures from the terms of industrialism are represented: radicalism and reformism. Referring to the environmental field, reformist and radical ecology distinguish themselves to the extent that reformism recommends the reconciliation between conflicting elements, while radicalism views total replacement of dynamics as the only solution to problems.
In the case of Dryzek’s classification, the radicalist point of view promotes a dynamic moving strictly away from the industrialist conditions, therefore limiting economic growth. The reformist point of view proposes a change away from the unlimited economic growth, but proposing alternatives and the integration of industrialist terms into environmental considerations.
The second dimension introduced by Dryzek represented by the horizontal axis on figure 3, also has two values: prosaic and imaginative, and arises from the concept of industrialism mentioned previously. In order to present those elements, the authors use the idea of a chessboard, that is to say the scene on which the act occurs. On the prosaic chessboard, the political-economic system set by industrial society is a given (Dryzek, 2013: 14). When it comes to environmental issues, they are understood as troubles on this society’s path, and while this chessboard highlights the problem it doesn’t offer alternatives (Dryzek, 2013: 14). On the contrary, on the imaginative chessboard “the environment is brought into the heart of society and its cultural, moral, and economic systems, rather than being seen as a source of difficulties standing outside these systems.” (Dryzek, 2013: 14) Hence, while environmental issues are seen as obstacles on the prosaic chessboard, they are seen as opportunities on the imaginative one. (Dryzek, 2013: 14)
By combining the two values of each dimension, Dryzek has defined four ideal-typical environmental discourses: environmental problem solving, survivalism, sustainability and green radicalism. Originally presented as a table with strict categories, I would rather use the following figure in order to highlight the aspect of variability and locate the discourses on a spectrum.
Figure 3: Dryzek’s adapted environmental discourses spectrum
Environmental problem solving is the combination of prosaic dimension with a reformist approach. By using the previous general terms, my understanding of the situation is that the industrial political-economic chessboard is agreed upon, and the obstacles that environmental issues represent need to be solved through cooperation. According to Dryzek, public policy appears as the best tool in order to adjust the political-economic system coping with environmental problems (Dryzek, 2013: 15)
Survivalism also includes the prosaic dimension but with a radical approach. Thus, it would appear that if the political-economic chessboard is also agreed upon, the methods coping with environmental issues would not be progressive and cooperative, but would rather correspond to a profound restructuration. Indeed, when Dryzek explains this type of discourse he refers to the Club of Rome and to the alarming idea focusing on our society’s limits: the population growth, maximization of profit, the natural resources and thus the Earth’s capacity of hosting us and our current behaviours (Dryzek, 2013: 15). In this discourse, the solution is described as a “wholesale redistribution of power” within the defined chessboard and a “wholesale reorientation” taking a 180° turn away from perpetual growth. (Dryzek, 2013: 15)
The two last discourses depict the imaginative dimension, that is to say where the political-economic chessboard is questioned and redefined.
First, sustainability seeks harmony between environmental and economic values. The intrinsic goal is to dissolve the conflicts arising from the Earth’s and society’s limits perspective (Dryzek, 2013: 16). As the Brundtland Report of 1987 recommends it, the best path to follow lies in the complementary of our society, the economy and the environment. (United Nations, 1987)
Finally, green radicalism combines the imaginative dimension with a radical approach. As mentioned previously, the industrial political-economic chessboard is rejected and the role of the environment is fully reconceptualised (Dryzek, 2013: 16). As Dryzek depicts it accurately and concisely, this discourse promotes ‘landscapes without humans” (Dryzek, 2013: 16).
Eventually, discourses are useful tools for storytelling, and each discourse enables a different story from a different point of view (Dryzek, 2013: 17). Each story includes actors, in relation with each other and their environment. This is the reason why the next part of this thesis will look at how the interviewee’s discourses can be integrated in this classification, and thus give an insight on the underlying motivations of pro-environmental actions. Thanks to Dryzek’s explanation and classification, the different stories lived by the actors involved on the field will be told and analysed in order to unveil my last findings. Conclusion This chapter has focused on the different theories and concepts that will be used throughout this work. It has unveiled the focus made on the idea of a social-ecological system in which the human-nature relationship is very dynamic. Furthermore, it has highlighted how this relation is central to different theories and academic debates. Two elements of classification have been brought to the light. The first one presents an alternative environmental paradigm or a broad worldview in which organizations’ mandates can be anchored. The second focuses on a more particular approach, using discourse analysis in order to understand individuals’ visions on the natural environment. Within the framework set in chapter 2, the following chapter introduces the specific topic of this research, the problem statement as well as the research question that will eventually be answered to.
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH QUESTION 3.1 Problem statement In order to introduce the problem statement I would like to illustrate it by using the concepts of the biosphere, the biotope and the biocenosis. The biosphere corresponds to the all-encompassing artificial structure, where various ecosystems abundantly develop. Biotopes are found amongst the global biosphere: it depicts a unique and complex local environment reflecting the inseparable habitat under which the living organisms develop. The bundle of those living organisms is known as the biocenosis. Those biological elements are closely interrelated, and present a multitude of complex dynamics. Humans, as individuals in society, belong to the biocenosis; we evolve and interact in and with our natural environment. Social-ecological systems all over the planet depict our embeddedness and the necessity to understand social systems in association with ecological systems. In the case of the social-ecological system of the Bassin d’Arcachon, a bay located in the South-West of France, the focus is made on how people benefit from a habitat that needs to be sustained, since they highly depend on it.
The interrelation between the environment and its populations appears to be vital. The GEO-6, or Global Environmental Outlook whose ambition is to report periodically the global environmental state has for a main and very concise argument: “Healthy Planet, Healthy People” (Global Environmental Outlook, 2017). In adequacy with the Sustainable Development Goal 14, the reconnection between the human community and the natural environment, and more specifically the oceans and the seashore, belongs to international development issues (United Nations, 2017). Within the context of sustainable development and the reconciliation of humans with their environment, the focus is made on how humans’ activities in society can exclude or not include the natural environment properly. It unveils how sustaining life and wellbeing means finding common values and interests for future development: the reconciliation.
In the case of the Bassin d’Arcachon, it means approaching the ways in which the coastal populations interact with their environment, the extent to which they are aware of their surrounding environment, and how they are engaged in sustaining a viable relationship. In order to do so, the goal is to highlight the mechanisms of environmental protection implemented on the Bassin d’Arcachon. Furthermore, the ambition is to unveil the underlying motivations of environmental pro-action by analysing participants’ discourses. Is it a social or a moral responsibility? Is there intrinsic collective action? What are the reasons for engaging in environmental protection? Furthermore, how allying economic purposes and ecological beliefs in society can be sustainable? What is the role of pro-social behaviour in developing environmental strategies? How is the promotion of one’s enlightened self-interest a response to social dilemmas, and eventually motivating the action for the public good?
Within the frame of this problem statement, the research question and sub-questions can be stated in the following manner:
Q: In the context of the reconciliation of humans with their environment, what are the driving forces of collective environmental protection in the social-ecological system of the Bassin d’Arcachon and how can discourse analysis unveil the underlying motivations?
1) Contextualization: What are the ecosystem services and their quality on the Bassin d‘Arcachon?
2) Observation: What actions are being undertaken to reduce coastal degradation in the Bassin d’Arcachon? What is the role of government agencies in reducing the alteration of the local environment?
3) Interpretation: What are the underlying motivations of the actions being implemented by different actors?
Figure 4: Conceptual scheme
This conceptual scheme highlights the interactions between the concepts and pillars of this research. Indeed, it depicts the dynamic social-ecological system in which the actors engaged with the natural environment live. Those actors, central to the research, are on the one hand part of collective actions and on the other hand individual actors. By conducting an analysis of the mandates expressed by associations and of the individual motivations for environmental pro-action, a combination of the results will contribute to the broad field of environmental management. Conclusion Chapter 3 has unveiled the purpose of my research, and the elements I focused on during fieldwork. The next chapter will now focus on how I managed to conduct the research. It mentions the ontological and epistemological stances held in this work, the methods of data collection as well as the limitations of this work.
CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY This chapter aims at explaining and justifying the methods I used in my research. It depicts the evolution of the research design and assesses the validity and reliability of data collection. 4.1 Before the field
The initial methodologies of my work reflected the steps I intended to take in order to gather adequate data and answer the problem statement. I would like to briefly recall this methodological overview in order to unveil how my work has evolved through time.
Indeed the research design was directed towards a time-sequenced mixed methods collection of data. I had in mind that the triangulation of quantitative, qualitative and participant observation elements would effectively address the problem and provide with an extended response to the strategies of environmental conservation on the coasts of the Bassin d’Arcachon (Bryman, 2006, pp.105-107). The goal was to set the research by collecting data on the environmental state of the bay, looking at the actual state defined by the archives, and by looking at the perceptions of the future of this degradation according to qualified scientists. After this, and thanks to garbage collection initiatives, I wanted to bridge my research by focusing on participant observation and by creating a network of possible participants for the next step of the research. Indeed, the goal was to create a pool of interested people from which I could draw a random sample of individuals agreeing to participate in semi-structured interviews. On the 18th of June 2017, I began my fieldwork by participating in a garbage collection on the Lacanau beach, located on the Atlantic coast and organized by a notorious social media representative in France. As this opportunity arose, I decided to seize it, even though it modified the research design I had defined.
4.2 On the Field Research Design
The ontology in this research is based on the fact that it is impossible to see the world through anyone else’s eyes except our own, and that due to this limit, interpretation appears as the way towards successful data analysis (Hudson et al. 1988: 508). The empathetic identification has barriers, whose alternative in order to grasp the extent of the meaning, is interpretation (Geertz, 1973). Subjectivity, flexibility and the capacity of adaptation are key elements to bear in mind, as “reality is essentially mental and perceived” (Hudson et al. 1988: 509). It is a social construct, highly depending on the context of the study and where holism is predominant, as all subjective elements cannot be dissociated. Thus, as multiple realities can co-exist, it means that things are not fixed in time and space. In relation to the theoretical paradigm set by Blumer in 1969, the symbolic interactionism points out how individuals, their interactions and the environment they evolve in are deeply interrelated. The creation and sustaining of a structure appears as a “reification, because society, like individual actors’ interactions and experiences with one another, is constantly in flux.” (Carter et al., 2015: 2)
For this reason, interpretivism appears as the ontological stance held and this case, where all elements influence one another, and where the context is crucial. Therefore, in opposition to a positivist point of view where the greatest intention is to draw generalizations applicable independently from any outside elements, it is the particularity and singularity of an element that matters for an interpretivist epistemological stance. An idiographic approach valuing the individual allows a better understanding of the complexity between the participant, its actions and its environment (Hudson et al. 1988: 511).
A cooperative inquiry is created between the researcher and the people under investigation (Hudson et al. 1988: 511). And for this reason, the methods of data collection and analysis must be all encompassing, which means that the research process can’t be hermetic to the subject’s influence. It is about the researcher’s perception of how the participant perceives the world, and thus the limit between being part of the research and conducting it becomes blurred. This leads to show how
participant observation can be a very adequate method of data collection in such a hermeneutic circle. The goal is to understand the social world; and its relations with the scientific one, through the examination of the interpretation of that world by its participants (Bryman, 2012: 380). The mutual interaction with the participants offers an in-depth collection of data and analysis, a process through which the subjectivity and arguably the validity of the work are increased. In opposition to a positivist epistemological position, I cannot be detached from the individuals I work with and the data collected - the first reason why, is the constant participant observation I have been anchored in, and the second reason why is that the research looking at the motivations of actual actions cannot be deeply objective as it refers to feelings. I entered the field with a prior insight and the ambition to develop it, and the methods I used are the following.
As I mentioned in the first paragraph, the research design set prior to the field has not been the one implemented on the field. The evolution of the design is in adequacy with the interpretivist belief, referring to the complexity and constant adaptation of the subjects (Hudson et al. 1988: 513). The first method implemented on the field, was participant observation, from day 1 to day 60. The perpetual immersion has been a key element of the research, increasing my proximity with the participants and the environment. It remains important to recall that my role on the field was to be a researcher, while being intrinsically a participant. As a native of the location I studied, this inseparable duo researcher/local has been a very useful tool, but also a barrier, on the field and for data analysis. The immersion started with collective action, organized by the Surfrider Foundation and sustained by the municipality of the location targeted. The Surfrider Foundation is a European NGO founded in 1990 whose purpose is the protection of the coastal environment. With a team of 12 persons, voluntary present on the field through prior registration (up to 1 year before), I participated and assisted to this initiative targeting the reduction of coastal garbage accumulation, paying attention the motivation of the people present on the field. This specific garbage collection was implemented by a french vlogger called “wildpastelhair”, who decided to use her notoriety across the country for environmental purpose. While the main purpose of her Youtube channel does not concern coastal
degradation awareness, she decided to organize a garbage collection in the context of the UN World oceans day. The 2017 theme, “Our oceans, Our future” recalled the unfortunate and various pressures made on global natural environment, in order to sensitize and trigger individual and collective actions. Thus, my first day of participant observation on the field, had a focus on how to use the ability to reach a great amount of people through media, and how one’s motivation with access to broad communication can trigger collective actions. After this first step on the field as a researcher, I immersed myself in the topic, by spending time doing direct observation in order to be able to understand, and contextualize the future interviews and data. My intention was to look at an overview of social behaviours concerning the relation human-environment, always taking into account that the area is very touristic especially during summer and to witness the quality and quantity of environmental degradation. This time spent for observation purposes appeared to be very useful in order to acknowledge visible elements of the quality of the bay, on the shore and on the sea, and how people on the bay act towards their environment. Amongst the 10 municipalities around the bay, I spent a significant time in 6 of them: Arcachon, La Teste-de-Buch, Lanton, Andernos-les-Bains, Arès, Lège Cap-Ferret. Due to my location during fieldwork, I especially did observation in the municipality of Lanton. Thus, my intention was to look at an overview of social behaviours concerning the relation human-environment, always taking into account that the area is very touristic especially during summer and to witness the quality and quantity of environmental degradation.
Always in the context of an interpretivist epistemology and ontology, I conducted semi-structured interviews. First of all, I got in contact with a local student, who did an internship in direct relation with natural environment conservation and initiated the first interview. After that and thanks to her, I got in contact with the Cap Termer organization that protects one of the two most important natural reserves on the Bay. They allowed me to conduct a short survey during the whole summer, and I’ve interviewed the current guide and the intern. Then I talked to the previous natural guide of the reserve, who started his own organization called Nature Gasconne and now works Audenge tourism office. After that I got an interview from the Directrice of the
Syndicate of the Dune du Pilat, which is the greatest sand dune in Europe and an important economic element of the Bay. After that, I got an interview/lecture from a specialist of the matter and member of the association "écocitoyens du Bassin d'Arcachon". It was very enriching as he gave me some keys in understanding the mechanisms of the Bay, and thus the basis on which the activities are built on. Afterwards, I met the two environmental policemen mandated by the ONCFS (National Office of Hunting and Wild Fauna) and working on the natural reserve I mentioned before. After that I went to Biarritz, as the Surfrider Foundation invited me to come in order to interview two representatives from the initiatives "Coastguards" and "Riverine Input". Eventually, I go an appointment with the SEPANSO and the local team that protects the second natural reserve on the bay: le Banc d'Arguin.
The process of participant observation and the overview of the different semi-structured interviews I conducted, concisely reflect what happened on the field. However, it seems important to mention the obstacles and weaknesses of the methodology used.
4.3 Limitations of research
The main weakness of my participant observation lies in my personal connection to the region that may have affected the research process. This position may have introduced some subjective elements, during data collection and due to previous knowledge and experiences concerning the bay. As mentioned previously, my relations to the area and its population appeared as a two-sided tool. Building connections with the participants, and multiplying interactions is necessary in order to generate and collect adequate data, however avoiding any sort of a priori and assumptions with no factual actual data has been and is a challenge. The interpretivist epistemological stance allows subjectivity, however my interpretation can be easily founded on previous observations, or time-built experiences and opinion. The systematization of participant observation in the context of a research seems hard for a local researcher, but I believe that being aware of it is a plus in order to stay on tracks. Thus, even though my inclusion on the field has been clearly eased, it also brought challenges, especially for the interviews and data analysis.
First of all, during the discussions with the actors, not being too involved and keeping a certain distance has been difficult. The duo researcher/local had to be managed, and objectivity had to be implemented in order to avoid any bias in the data collected. Furthermore, this position on the field and in data analysis will have to be cautiously taken into account through interpretation. Indeed, in order to correctly assess the results and give valid information, this distance will have to be kept during the process while still be subjective through interpretation.
This unveils how personal relations might be difficult to tackle on the field, and that even though integration is required on the field for qualitative inquiry and participant observation, there is still a limit that must not be crossed: the balance between conducting the research and being part of it, the researcher and the participant; two related position encompassed by interpretivism.
During collection of data, I have put efforts in avoiding any suggestive questions unveiling my opinion on the topics discussed. However, some of the participants were not only part of the research context, but also part of the insider’s, that is to say a more personal context. This element suggests that those participants may have entered the research with assumptions on my opinions on the topic. Acknowledging this possible bias, I have tried to put a sufficient distance between my two roles in order to obtain valid results without hindering the opportunity offered by an insider’s point of view. Indeed, while it appears as an obstacle, the insider’s position has also opened the research on more in-depth discussions, where a trusting relationship has been built rapidly.
After the collection of data and during the process of data analysis, this dual role has resurfaced. Indeed, I have tried to be as fair as possible while also being careful in classifying collective actions and individuals’ motivations. This process involves my interpretation and my judgement, therefore a very personal point view. However, in order to anchor my findings in the academic debated of environmental management and obtain valid results, it was very important to respect the limit between what has been found, and what I would have liked to find. By this I mean that, if the insider’s position is a great opportunity for research, it is important to respect the ethics and the transparency needed for valid results, in avoid an excessive involvement of my personal
opinion. Even though those elements of limitation have been worked on carefully, it seems important to recall them.
4.4 Reliability and Validity
While the interpretivist stance seems to avoid any fixed structure for research and leave room for diversity, some general laws can be identified in order to assess the reliability and validity of such a research design. Hudson et al., through an extended literature review, have gathered three main generalizations. The first one and derived from Blumer’s thinking, states that context matters to the extent that, a valid research must look at the phenomenon in the natural setting of the participants. A second criteria defined by Geertz in 1973 is the thick description, where the phenomenon must be detailed and inclusive of historical aspects. (Hudson et al. 1988: 515).
A third criteria, that can be included in the second, would be that the language used by the participants must be the one used for the study, in order to tackle the subjectivity in its entirety. From these three criteria recalled by Hudson et al., context, culture and proximity appear as key elements for the validity of an interpretivist research design.
When looking at Bryman’s overview on the criteria for reliability and validity, he refers to several methods, and especially three positions: the first one is the adaptation of quantitative criteria to qualitative research. Referring to LeCompte and Goetz, this adaptation depicts how internal reliability and validity, as well as external validity are the assimilation of quantitative criteria as proof of transparency. (Bryman, 2015: 390) The second position depicts an alternative method of assessment in which the authors Lincoln and Guba suggest that trustworthiness and authenticity are more adequate criteria. While the authors hold an interpretivist epistemological stance, they suggest that “although you cannot predict case by case, you can look for patterns and develop working hypothesis” (Hudson et al. 1988: 517). Thus, the adequacy of studying the specificity and complexity of social dynamics can be delimited by defined patterns. The third and preferred method for my work is Hammersley’s approach to the assessment of the quality of a research, lying in between of adapted quantitative criteria and the alternative ones. (Bryman, 2015: 394) He suggests that the researcher cannot mirror correctly the image of the social world, as he would have to fix it and abandon the
possibility of multiple realities, and that the focus must rather be made on how the researcher is part of the world he studies; therefore he is “engaged in representations or constructions of that world.” (Bryman, 2015: 398) Anchored in social constructionist ontology, Hammersley defines a subtle realist account, in which it is recognized that there is no absolute insurance or certainty about the validity and reliability of a study, as the intangible and dynamic aspects of reality can’t allow a direct access to it. This relativism acknowledges that the perception of the researcher must always be kept in mind and thus that reflexivity must be included as an influent variable in assessing the quality of a research (Andrews, 2012).
In this middle ground between realism and antirealism set by Hammersley, the assessment of the coherence, adequacy and reliability of this research design will be done in reference to the three criteria recalled by Hudson, while keeping in mind the concept of subtle realism.
The first aspect is the extent to which the participants must be studied in their natural setting. This element can be understood as characteristic for internal adequacy: it is in the most familiar environment, that the participant’s behaviours will be the most representative overall. In the case of this research, this characteristic can be validated: all contacts with the population, and all observations have been directly made on the Bassin d’Arcachon, and more specifically on each participant’s area of action. Indeed, in order to ensure a very natural collection of data, pressure or bias has been hopefully avoided by setting a familiar context in each case. Moreover, the fact that the interviews were semi-structured allowed room for adaptation and space for the participant, in order to give the discussion a direction he or she felt at ease being part of. However, an ambiguity remains concerning the natural setting and the role of tourists in the area. Indeed, during direct observation no distinction can be made concerning the nature of the relation between the individuals and the area. Thus, while the first characteristic focusing on the natural setting seems to be respected for all interviews, it is important to recall the a weakness remains: the dichotomy local/tourist. The second aspect for validity and reliability (words borrowed to a positivist stance) is the idea of thick description defined by Geertz. It unveils the importance of the context and its description in order to clearly anchor the local informant’s thoughts in a natural
