{"word_count": 2870, "character_count": 23343}
ArgumentaireLes recherches men&#233;es sur les enjeux du th&#232;me de l&#8217;environnement ont atteint, mondialement, une maturit&#233; indiscutable. Elles ont soulev&#233; des questions nouvelles ou d&#233;plac&#233; des questions ant&#233;rieurement pos&#233;es dans d&#8217;autres champs, que ce soit sur l&#8217;industrie, les politiques d&#8217;&#201;tat (europ&#233;ennes ou nationales), l&#8217;espace public, les controverses technologiques, les risques ou la soci&#233;t&#233; civile. En laissant de c&#244;t&#233; le mod&#232;le du &#171; d&#233;ficit &#187;, il n&#8217;en reste pas moins que la question de la communication - envisag&#233;e comme un processus public de confrontation et d&#8217;&#233;volution des points de vue - est un ressort essentiel de la th&#233;matisation publique de l&#8217;environnement.Cet appel &#224; contributions vise &#224; mieux cerner la communication &#171; de &#187; l&#8217;environnement. Il s&#8217;agit notamment de mettre en &#233;vidence qu&#8217;&#224; la sp&#233;cificit&#233; du th&#232;me environnemental correspond une sp&#233;cificit&#233; de la communication. Cette sp&#233;cificit&#233; est largement corr&#233;l&#233;e &#224; la publicisation de la question environnementale et aux mobilisations collectives autour de ces questions. Dans cette perspective, le pr&#233;sent appel &#224; contributions se propose de rassembler des articles qui, sur la base de d&#233;marches diff&#233;renci&#233;es, abordent le probl&#232;me de la th&#233;matisationde la question environnementale et de ses effets sur les d&#233;cisions, les pratiques, les rapports entre les diff&#233;rentes parties prenantes ou encore les modalit&#233;s de l&#8217;agir collectif.La publicisation de la question environnementale implique tant le tissu associatif et syndical que la sph&#232;re &#233;tatique, le monde scientifique ou la sph&#232;re marchande. Dans ces &#171; sph&#232;res &#187; &#8211; et entre elles &#8211; se sont constitu&#233;s des espaces de confrontation o&#249; sont mis en d&#233;bat des pratiques et des exigences renouvel&#233;es concernant l&#8217;environnement. Le processus de mise en public, constituant l&#8217;espace public de l&#8217;environnement, a incit&#233; l&#8217;Etat &#224; modifier les processus de d&#233;cision et ses formes d&#8217;intervention. Plus particuli&#232;rement, l&#8217;int&#233;gration formelle des citoyens aux processus de d&#233;cision, remarquable avec la th&#233;matique de l&#8217;environnement, tend &#224; red&#233;finir les formes de l&#8217;agir &#233;tatique. Mais l&#8217;environnement constitue aussi un th&#232;me de mobilisation particuli&#232;rement puissant qui s&#8217;impose aux entreprises comme en t&#233;moigne l&#8217;usage d&#233;sormais banalis&#233; de la notion de &#171; responsabilit&#233; sociale &#187;. Les mobilisations et les d&#233;bats sur ces th&#232;mes p&#232;sent sur les choix industriels et technologiques. Cette dialectique entre discours et action ou entre institution et discours forme le pivot de ce num&#233;ro.Dans cette optique pourraient &#234;tre propos&#233;es des contributions sur plusieurs axes.Un premier axe consiste &#224; rendre compte de l&#8217;&#233;mergence, et des conditions d&#8217;&#233;mergence, de certaines th&#233;matiques de l&#8217;environnement (OGM, nucl&#233;aire, nanotechnologies, changement climatique, &#8230;)Quels sont les ressorts de la mise en public de ces th&#232;mes ? Quelles sont les freins et les r&#233;sistances &#224; leur mise en visibilit&#233; et en d&#233;bats ? Comment la tension entre enjeux &#233;conomiques et exigences universalisables se traduit-elle et &#224; quels compromis conduit-elle ?En outre, la d&#233;finition de ces th&#232;mes repr&#233;sente un enjeu qui a conduit ces derni&#232;res ann&#233;es &#224; l&#8217;&#233;mergence de notions telles que : &#171; savoir citoyen &#187;, &#171; savoir d&#8217;usage &#187;, &#171; expertise associative &#187;, &#171; savoir profane &#187;&#8230; La vari&#233;t&#233; des &#171; savoirs &#187; dans l&#8217;espace public, la vari&#233;t&#233; de leurs finalit&#233;s et la vari&#233;t&#233; des espaces de production incitent &#224; interroger leurs articulations, leurs modes de confrontation et leurs effets sur la d&#233;finition des th&#232;mes de l&#8217;environnement, mais aussi, et surtout, sur la port&#233;e de ces th&#232;mes.Un second axe a trait aux processus d&#8217;institutionnalisation des questions environnementales. Cette institutionnalisation red&#233;finit le processus de communication entre les parties prenantes. Elle transforme, &#224; la fois, les conditions de mobilisation et les r&#233;ponses apport&#233;es par les entreprises et l&#8217;Etat.L&#8217;institutionnalisation des th&#232;mes de l&#8217;environnement est-elle sp&#233;cifique ? Induit-elle des formes particuli&#232;res de l&#8217;action &#233;tatique ? Quels sont les processus qui ont conduit &#224; l&#8217;institutionnalisation de ces th&#233;matiques ? En quoi les modalit&#233;s d&#8217;&#233;change et de confrontation entre le niveau national et les instances internationales et/ou europ&#233;ennes en sont-elles affect&#233;es ?&#160;L&#8217;institutionnalisation de l&#8217;environnement touche aussi directement la sph&#232;re marchande. Comment les pratiques des entreprises ont-elles progressivement inclus le poids de la mise en public du th&#232;me de l&#8217;environnement ?Enfin, une tendance forte a marqu&#233; la question environnementale ces derni&#232;res ann&#233;es : celle d&#8217;un renforcement de la r&#233;glementation et de la l&#233;gislation tant au niveau europ&#233;en que dans chacun des E&#201;tats-membre. On peut alors interroger le levier que repr&#233;sente le droit pour chacune des parties prenantes.Dans la perspective du second axe, on diff&#233;renciera un troisi&#232;me axe concernant l&#8217;institutionnalisation de la concertation publique &#224; l&#8217;&#339;uvre tant au niveau local, national qu&#8217;international. Quelles sont les proc&#233;dures qui cadrent les &#233;changes des grands organismes internationaux et leurs effets ? Qu&#8217;ont transform&#233; ou d&#233;plac&#233; les &#171; grands sommets &#187; du point de vue de la communication (tels que le Grenelle de l&#8217;environnement en France, le GIEC&#8230;) ?Ces multiples dynamiques conduisent &#224; des pr&#233;conisations g&#233;n&#233;rales et/ou des op&#233;rations incitatives qui ont des effets plus ou moins structurants au niveau local. Comment le local est-il affect&#233; par ces processus nationaux, europ&#233;ens ou mondiaux ? Comment les territoires s&#8217;approprient-ils ces exigences ? Quels sont les processus de production des normes qui en d&#233;coulent ?Un quatri&#232;me axe concerne les &#171; &#233;v&#232;nements &#187; qui ont catalys&#233; les conditions de prise en compte de l&#8217;environnement et/ou modifi&#233; plus ou moins fortement le traitement des questions de l&#8217;environnement.&#192; ce titre, les crises, souvent provoqu&#233;es par des accidents (Seveso, Erika, AZF, Fukushima&#8230;), &#171; intensifient &#187; la communication et conduisent &#224; une visibilit&#233; accrue des discours, des positions et des parties prenantes. Quels sont les effets durables de ces crises, tant au niveau des r&#233;glementations, des formes d&#8217;institutionnalisation, du renforcement des exigences ou de l&#8217;engagement de nouvelles parties prenantes ? On peut aussi interroger le r&#244;le des m&#233;dias lors de ces &#233;v&#232;nements.Coordination du dossierPieter LEROY (Radboud University Nijmegen, Pays-Bas)Marie-Gabrielle SURAUD (CERTOP, Universit&#233; Paul Sabatier de Toulouse 3, France)Conditions de soumissionLes propositions de contribution doivent parvenir sous la forme d'un r&#233;sum&#233; d&#8217;environ&#160;2500-3500 signes espaces compris&#160;(comportant 5 mots cl&#233;s et bibliographie s&#233;lective r&#233;cente) &#224;&#160;essachess@gmail.comavant le 15 juillet 2013.Les articles devront comprendre entre&#160;20 000 et 25 000 signes espaces compris. Ils peuvent &#234;tre soumis&#160;en fran&#231;ais ou en anglais&#160;et doivent &#234;tre accompagn&#233;s d`un r&#233;sum&#233; en fran&#231;ais et en anglais (200-250 mots), de 5 mots cl&#233;s, des noms, ainsi que des affiliations et adresses e-mail de tous les auteurs. Les articles et questions compl&#233;mentaires doivent &#234;tre adress&#233;s &#224; :&#160;essachess@gmail.comLes auteurs dont les articles auront &#233;t&#233; accept&#233;s en seront avis&#233;s par e-mail. La revue sera publi&#233;e le&#160;23 juillet 2014.Calendrier15 juillet 2013 :&#160;envoi de la proposition d&#8217;article30 septembre 2013 :&#160;notification des r&#233;sultats ;15 f&#233;vrier 2014 :&#160;soumission int&#233;grale de l&#8217;article;30 mai 2014 :&#160;acceptation d&#233;finitive de l'article.La&#160;revue ESSACHESS&#160;est index&#233;e dans les bases de donn&#233;es internationales ProQuest CSA, EBSCO Publishing, Ulrich&#8217;s, Gale, J-Gate, Index Copernicus, CEEOL, DOAJ, SSRN, DRJI et en cours de r&#233;f&#233;rencement dans d&#8217;autres bases de donn&#233;es.Comit&#233; scientifiqueDelia BALABAN, Universit&#233; Babes-Bolyai Cluj, RoumanieLee BECKER, James M. Cox Jr. Center for International Mass Communication Training and Research, University of Georgia, USAAdrian BEJAN, Duke University, USAFran&#231;oise BERNARD, Universit&#233; de Provence, FranceRobert BOURE, Universit&#233; Paul Sabatier de Toulouse, FranceConstantin BRATIANU, Acad&#233;mie d&#8217;Etudes Economiques de Bucarest, RoumanieOlivier CHANTRAINE, Universit&#233; Charles de Gaulle Lille 3, FranceMihai COMAN, Universit&#233; de Bucarest, RoumanieEric DACHEUX, Universit&#233; Blaise Pascal de Clermont Ferrand, FranceLise DEMAILLY, CLERSE UMR 8019, Universit&#233; Lille 1, FranceIon DUR, Universit&#233; Lucian Blaga Sibiu, RoumanieElena FELL, University of Central Lancaster, Great BritainPierre-Henri FRANCOIS, Universit&#233; de Poitiers, FranceSandu FRUNZA, Universit&#233; Babes-Bolyai Cluj, RoumanieMagda FUSARO, Homoludens - Groupe de recherche sur la communication et la socialisation dans les jeux vid&#233;o, Universit&#233; du Montr&#233;al &#224; Qu&#233;bec, CanadaGino GRAMACCIA, Universit&#233; de Bordeaux 1, FranceR&#233;gis GUILLAUME, Universit&#233; du Mirail Toulouse, FranceLama HAMANDI, American University of Beyrouth, LibanTamar KATRIEL, Universit&#233; de Haifa, IsraelRoula KHOURY, Universit&#233; St Joseph de Beyrouth, LibanSylvie LELEU-MERVIEL, Universit&#233; de Valenciennes et du Hainaut-Cambr&#233;sis, FranceJo&#235;lle LE MAREC, ENS de Lyon, FranceChristian LE MO&#203;NNE, Universit&#233; de Rennes 2, FranceGuy LOCHARD, Universit&#233; Sorbonne Nouvelle - Paris 3, FranceLuc MARCO, Universit&#233; Paris 13, FranceRegina Maria MARTELETO, Funda&#231;&#227;o Oswaldo Cruz, Instituto de Comunica&#231;&#227;o e Informa&#231;&#227;o Cient&#237;fica e Tecnol&#243;gica em Sa&#250;de, Universit&#233; de Br&#233;sil, Br&#233;silSorin NASTASIA, Southern Illinois University, USARobert NOUMEN, Universit&#233; d&#8217;Orl&#233;ans, FrancePaul RASSE, Universit&#233; de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, FranceDaniela ROVENTA-FRUMUSANI, Universit&#233; de Bucarest, RoumanieConstantin SALAVASTRU, Universit&#233; &#171; Al. I. Cuza &#187; Iasi, RoumanieIlie RAD, Universit&#233; Babes-Bolyai Cluj, RoumanieMartine ROQUES, Universit&#233; de Poitiers, FranceConstantin SCHIFIRNET, Ecole Nationale d&#8217;Etudes Politiques et Administratives Bucarest, RoumanieMichel SENECAL, Universit&#233; du Qu&#233;bec &#224; Montr&#233;al, CanadaPanayiota TSATSOU, Swansea University, Great BritainTudor VLAD, James M. Cox Jr. Center for International Mass Communication Training and Research, University of Georgia, USAJean-Marc ZULIANI, Universit&#233; du Mirail Toulouse, FranceArgumentOver the last 40 years, scientific research on environmental issues has become a well-established field worldwide. These environmental issues, on the one hand, have provoked a series of novel questions in a variety of scientific disciplines. Simultaneously, they have led to a series of controversies over political, technological, economic and related issues with and between public authorities, industries and civil society. Communication is a quintessential part of these questioning and debating, and a precondition for scientific, societal and political responses to environmental challenges at large.This special issue envisages a better understanding of &#8216;communication&#8217; on environmental issues. We would like to pay attention to the specific features of communication over environmental issues, to its role in the controversies about them, to their mediatisation, to their role in public and political debates, and in negotiation and policy making. What role does &#8216;communication&#8217; play in all this? What forms and functions does it take? What are the implications thereof when it comes to societal and political action? And under what conditions can communication contribute to the gradual institutionalisation of these environmental responses?Making the environmental issue into a challenge for collective action affects every single societal sphere: the world of science and technology as well as the associative world of citizens, communities and non-governmental associations; the sphere of public authorities as well as market representatives; employers as well as employees, and farmers as well as banks; agencies at local as well as at global level. Within each of these spheres and between them, &#8216;environment&#8217; not only has become a discourse, it also created new discursive spaces for concern and mobilisation, it contributed to novel platforms for debate and decision making, resulting into new practices and new standards. While one has to study their mechanisms and effects in more detail, environmental concern in general made citizens to adopt new daily practices - and to conquer other practices -, market agencies developed their &#8216;social responsibility&#8217; and sustainability standards - either con amore or as green washing -, while public authorities engaged in the development and implementation of environmental policies. In comparable ways, &#8216;the environment&#8217; informs certain technological options, while challenging others. And above all, communication over the environment created novel ways for these spheres to interact, through a variety of multi-actor and multi-sector arrangements, covering a series of environmental topics, and ranging from the local to the global.In brief, we regard &#8216;communication&#8217; to be the link between discourse and action, between discourse and institution, and - under conditions still to be more precisely unravelled and understood - as a motor for societal change.Within this approach, we call for contributions that could cover four complementary perspectives.First:&#160;the emergence of environmental issues&#160;or particular sub-issues thereof, such as GMOs, the nuclear, climate change, biodiversity and others.What are the factors that drive and further their mediatisation and their politicisation, and what are the factors that block or hinder these processes? What is the role of scientific information in this emergence of environmental issues, and what role does citizen science or societal expertise play? How get these different sources of information articulated into different discourses and problem definitions? And how then do the latter enter in confrontation and debate, and eventually result in negotiation and collective decision making?Second:&#160;the institutionalization of environmental discourses.When concern and mobilisation over environmental issues results in successful agenda-setting, these discourses institutionalise into concrete practices, into new ways of interaction, into novel strategies of intervention, either within or among public authorities, market agencies and civil society representatives. What processes do generate successful institutionalisation? What hinders it? To what extent and through what mechanisms this institutionalisation then actually affects the day to day practices of public authorities, of market enterprises, of citizens and the interactions between these stakeholders? Is &#8216;environmentalism&#8217; indeed a catalyst of institutional change? And how does, within and beyond the well-known mechanisms of &#8216;implementation&#8217;, institutionalisation at one level of governance trigger institutionalisation at other levels?Third:&#160;co-operative arrangements for negotiation and decision-making on environmental issues.As stated above, &#8216;environmentalism&#8217; has led to the set up of a whole series of new ways of interaction, negotiation and decision-making. While initially environmental impact statements, risk assessments and cost-benefit analyses reflected a technocratic discourse, they all adopted, albeit in various ways, a &#8216;participatory&#8217; variant. Moreover, environmental issues induced the coming into being of new arena&#8217;s and platforms for negotiation and decision-making, their stakes ranging from the location of hazardous activities at local level up to the gradual institutionalisation of some global environmental governance. The recent &#8216;Grenelle de l&#8217;environnement&#8217; in France reflects a trend that encompasses a whole bunch of participatory and interactive initiatives, including the IPCC and, more recently, IPBES. While some of these platforms link the public, the economic and the societal sphere, others relate science to policy, and still others can be regarded as private governance initiatives. Here again, questions arise as to what extent these newly institutionalised arrangements echo certain discourses while, in turn, they facilitate some definitions of the problem and might hinder other forms of communication.Fourth:&#160;the role of sensitizing events and crises.Under normal circumstances, communication, also environmental communication tends to be business as usual. Yet the very character of environmental communication changes dramatically when sensitizing events occur, let alone in times of crisis. While the first pictures of &#8216;planet Earth&#8217;- the blue marble - created such a sensitizing moment in the late 1960s, creating sensitizing moments seems part of any environmental communication strategy, with logo&#8217;s and icons - from the panda to the ice bear &#8211; in a prominent role. Yet environmental catastrophes and crises in particular, such as Seveso, Erika, Chernobyl, AZF and Fukushima, do generate specific patterns of communication. Parts of these communications regard the people and the region directly affected, while other parts regard the amplification and multiplication of the scientific, moral and political messages&#160; that (should) go with this particular crisis. Sensitizing events and crises, therefore, make environmental communication more visible, yet it remains to be seen what their long term impact is, whether they give rise to the institutionalisation of new practices and new rules. And, of course, while public media and social media do play a role in whatever environmental communication, their role is even more accentuated under conditions of crises. The latter raises questions as to how they take up their &#8216;societal responsibility&#8217;, be it here and now or in a wider frame of time and space.CoordinatorsPieter LEROY (Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands)Marie-Gabrielle SURAUD (CERTOP, Paul Sabatier University of Toulouse 3, France)The journal &#8222;ESSACHESS&#8221; has been indexed in the databases ProQuest CSA, EBSCO Publishing, Ulrich&#8217;s, Gale, J-Gate, DOAJ, CEEOL, Index Copernicus, SSRN, DRJI.Submission guidelinesPapers should be between 6,000-10,000 words in length. Papers can be submitted in English or French. The abstracts should be in English and French, max. 200-250 words followed by 5 keywords. Please provide the full names, affiliations, and e-mail addresses of all authors, indicating the contact author. Papers, and any queries, should be sent to:&#160;essachess@gmail.comScheduleAuthors of the accepted papers will be notified by e-mail. The journal will be published in July 2014.July 15, 2013: submission of the proposition of article in the form of a summary of 400-500 words. The proposal must include a list of recent references;September 30, 2013: acceptance of the proposal;February 15, 2014: full paper submission;May 30, 2014: full paper acceptance.Scientific committeeDelia BALABAN, Universit&#233; Babes-Bolyai Cluj, RoumanieLee BECKER, James M. Cox Jr. Center for International Mass Communication Training and Research, University of Georgia, USAAdrian BEJAN, Duke University, USAFran&#231;oise BERNARD, Universit&#233; de Provence, FranceRobert BOURE, Universit&#233; Paul Sabatier de Toulouse, FranceConstantin BRATIANU, Acad&#233;mie d&#8217;Etudes Economiques de Bucarest, RoumanieOlivier CHANTRAINE, Universit&#233; Charles de Gaulle Lille 3, FranceMihai COMAN, Universit&#233; de Bucarest, RoumanieEric DACHEUX, Universit&#233; Blaise Pascal de Clermont Ferrand, FranceLise DEMAILLY, CLERSE UMR 8019, Universit&#233; Lille 1, FranceIon DUR, Universit&#233; Lucian Blaga Sibiu, RoumanieElena FELL, University of Central Lancaster, Great BritainPierre-Henri FRANCOIS, Universit&#233; de Poitiers, FranceSandu FRUNZA, Universit&#233; Babes-Bolyai Cluj, RoumanieMagda FUSARO, Homoludens - Groupe de recherche sur la communication et la socialisation dans les jeux vid&#233;o, Universit&#233; du Montr&#233;al &#224; Qu&#233;bec, CanadaGino GRAMACCIA, Universit&#233; de Bordeaux 1, FranceR&#233;gis GUILLAUME, Universit&#233; du Mirail Toulouse, FranceLama HAMANDI, American University of Beyrouth, LibanTamar KATRIEL, Universit&#233; de Haifa, IsraelRoula KHOURY, Universit&#233; St Joseph de Beyrouth, LibanSylvie LELEU-MERVIEL, Universit&#233; de Valenciennes et du Hainaut-Cambr&#233;sis, FranceJo&#235;lle LE MAREC, ENS de Lyon, FranceChristian LE MO&#203;NNE, Universit&#233; de Rennes 2, FranceGuy LOCHARD, Universit&#233; Sorbonne Nouvelle - Paris 3, FranceLuc MARCO, Universit&#233; Paris 13, FranceRegina Maria MARTELETO, Funda&#231;&#227;o Oswaldo Cruz, Instituto de Comunica&#231;&#227;o e Informa&#231;&#227;o Cient&#237;fica e Tecnol&#243;gica em Sa&#250;de, Universit&#233; de Br&#233;sil, Br&#233;silSorin NASTASIA, Southern Illinois University, USARobert NOUMEN, Universit&#233; d&#8217;Orl&#233;ans, FrancePaul RASSE, Universit&#233; de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, FranceDaniela ROVENTA-FRUMUSANI, Universit&#233; de Bucarest, RoumanieConstantin SALAVASTRU, Universit&#233; &#171; Al. I. Cuza &#187; Iasi, RoumanieIlie RAD, Universit&#233; Babes-Bolyai Cluj, RoumanieMartine ROQUES, Universit&#233; de Poitiers, FranceConstantin SCHIFIRNET, Ecole Nationale d&#8217;Etudes Politiques et Administratives Bucarest, RoumanieMichel SENECAL, Universit&#233; du Qu&#233;bec &#224; Montr&#233;al, CanadaPanayiota TSATSOU, Swansea University, Great BritainTudor VLAD, James M. Cox Jr. Center for International Mass Communication Training and Research, University of Georgia, USAJean-Marc ZULIANI, Universit&#233; du Mirail Toulouse, France