CHAILLEUX, Sébastien

Métadonnées

Afficher la notice complète

Licence d’utilisation du document

CHAILLEUX, Sébastien
Centre Émile Durkheim [CED]

Langue

Communication dans un congrès avec actes

Ce document a été publié dans

ECPR General Conference, panel : S15 P14 "Argumentative Strategies and Definitional Struggles in the Policy Process", 2015-08-26, Montréal.

Résumé en anglais

The paper aims to explore the argumentative strategies and the definitional struggles over bedrock hydrocarbon controversies in France and in Quebec. Both cases demonstrated the success of the opponents’ coalition, although with different temporality, to stop shale gas industry. However, in both countries, diversion strategies occurred in favor of other types of hydrocarbon: shale oil in Quebec, coalbed methane in France. Controversy over shale gas ignited the conflict between proponents of unconventional hydrocarbon and their opponents. The study of this controversy demonstrated the failure of the industrial definition of shale gas as an economic and energy resource (and of fracking as a safe technique), often backed by institutional actors. The opposition networks succeeded in framing shale gas as a threat for the environment and public health, pressurizing for a ban in France and for more impact studies and a moratorium in Quebec.< Réduire

Mots clés en anglais

Hydrocarbon

France

Quebec

Environmental policy

Governance

Public policy

Constructivism

Origine

Importé de hal

Unités de recherche

Centre Emile Durkheim - Science politique et sociologie comparatives (CED) - UMR 5116