wider transformation, local–global axes in different ways. We also note other
contexts where a quieter, more hidden form of transformation occurs through shared
practice, linked to particular cultural–political modes of organization. We conclude
with a brief discussion of the implications of these differences for alliance building
for green transformations and the political challenges this suggests.
Green movements: a simple typology and a very brief
history
Not all movements conform to the banner-waving activist image of the media
stereotype. Indeed, there is a wide variety of forms and styles, some more resonant
with this image, others much less visible. A movement can be defined broadly as
a collective response binding different people in ‘practised engagement through
emergent solidarities’ around a particular issue, or set of issues (Leach and Scoones,
2007, p16, drawing on Ellison, 1997). Green movements have often been theorized
as exemplars of new social movements (Della Porta and Diani, 2006), and there
is a large literature that explores such dynamics of contentious politics (e.g. Tilly,
1978; Tarrow, 1998; McAdam et al., 2001, 2003). Today, at least three types of
‘green’ movement are evident (cf. Szerszynski, 1997; Jamison, 2001).
First, there are those green movements associated with lifestyle change, focusing on shifts in individual behaviour and practice. Such movements are usually
rooted in local networks and often part of ‘alternative’ lifestyles, linked to other
movements associated with, for example, food and housing. They may be more
broadly linked through wider networking and, while clearly political in the sense
of a personal commitment to change, many do not overtly campaign in the
public political sphere, arguing that change must be emergent from individual,
community-based and local efforts. There has been a long tradition of such
lifestyle-centred movements in Europe and North America from the 1960s
onwards, while in other parts of the world they have been associated with
protecting the political and cultural autonomy of particular groups (e.g. indigenous
people’s movements, peasant movements) as well as religious organizations (e.g.
Buddhist retreats, Ghandian ashrams), often with much longer traditions.
Second, there are activist organizations and networks that form around particular
issues. These are more confrontational and aim to tackle wider policy issues
through direct action and protest. From the classic Greenpeace whaling protests
of the 1970s to the climate justice or anti-GM campaigns of today, such movements
have had high visibility, often with visible impacts. In many ways these have
symbolized the environmental movement in the global North that came to promi -
nence in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and led to the creation of organizations
from Friends of the Earth to Greenpeace to the Sierra Club. Many of these
organizations have themselves changed, responding to shifts in the cultural and
political landscape, but the radical, activist edge has not been lost. From the late
1990s, certain green movements and campaigns became increasingly allied to anti120 Melissa Leach and Ian Scoones
contexts where a quieter, more hidden form of transformation occurs through shared
practice, linked to particular cultural–political modes of organization. We conclude
with a brief discussion of the implications of these differences for alliance building
for green transformations and the political challenges this suggests.
Green movements: a simple typology and a very brief
history
Not all movements conform to the banner-waving activist image of the media
stereotype. Indeed, there is a wide variety of forms and styles, some more resonant
with this image, others much less visible. A movement can be defined broadly as
a collective response binding different people in ‘practised engagement through
emergent solidarities’ around a particular issue, or set of issues (Leach and Scoones,
2007, p16, drawing on Ellison, 1997). Green movements have often been theorized
as exemplars of new social movements (Della Porta and Diani, 2006), and there
is a large literature that explores such dynamics of contentious politics (e.g. Tilly,
1978; Tarrow, 1998; McAdam et al., 2001, 2003). Today, at least three types of
‘green’ movement are evident (cf. Szerszynski, 1997; Jamison, 2001).
First, there are those green movements associated with lifestyle change, focusing on shifts in individual behaviour and practice. Such movements are usually
rooted in local networks and often part of ‘alternative’ lifestyles, linked to other
movements associated with, for example, food and housing. They may be more
broadly linked through wider networking and, while clearly political in the sense
of a personal commitment to change, many do not overtly campaign in the
public political sphere, arguing that change must be emergent from individual,
community-based and local efforts. There has been a long tradition of such
lifestyle-centred movements in Europe and North America from the 1960s
onwards, while in other parts of the world they have been associated with
protecting the political and cultural autonomy of particular groups (e.g. indigenous
people’s movements, peasant movements) as well as religious organizations (e.g.
Buddhist retreats, Ghandian ashrams), often with much longer traditions.
Second, there are activist organizations and networks that form around particular
issues. These are more confrontational and aim to tackle wider policy issues
through direct action and protest. From the classic Greenpeace whaling protests
of the 1970s to the climate justice or anti-GM campaigns of today, such movements
have had high visibility, often with visible impacts. In many ways these have
symbolized the environmental movement in the global North that came to promi -
nence in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and led to the creation of organizations
from Friends of the Earth to Greenpeace to the Sierra Club. Many of these
organizations have themselves changed, responding to shifts in the cultural and
political landscape, but the radical, activist edge has not been lost. From the late
1990s, certain green movements and campaigns became increasingly allied to anti120 Melissa Leach and Ian Scoones