Page 87 - Sustainability Communication Interdisciplinary Perspectives and Theoritical Foundations

70 L. Kruse

dealing with ‘human dimensions of global change’ would have to be included, all of
which could be summarized under the label of ‘human ecology’ (Kruse 2004).
Typically each sustainability problem also includes aspects that involve natural
science. As a result sustainable development requires multidisciplinary – or better
yet – interdisciplinary cooperation between natural and human sciences, in which
each of the participating disciplines must present, negotiate and integrate their theo-
retical concepts, their methodologies, and their problem-solving approaches in
order to create a scientific basis for the societal process of sustainable development.
There are few analyses of environmental, or rather ecological communication, that
miss the opportunity to quote Niklas Luhmann that there can only be a socially shared
perception of environmental and of ecological risks if it is communicated (1989). The
manner of communication becomes apparent – as, for example, environmental
discourse – when certain issues and events are linked to concepts and corresponding
valuations. These are created, stabilized or changed through face-to-face interactions or
through the media, in scientific and in political discussions, that is, they are socially
constructed. The environmental discourse that attracts attention through its large vocab-
ulary of crises and risks, and at the same time of reassurance and alarm, is part of a
continually changing social representation that is shared collectively or only by specific
groups (Farr and Moscovici 1984; Graumann and Kruse 1990). The concept of ‘sustain-
able development’ has not quite reached the status of a social representation; at best, one
could speak of a group-specific representation. When a biannual opinion poll on ‘envi-
ronmental awareness in Germany’ in 2004 showed that about one third of all intervie-
wees had at least heard of the term ‘sustainable development’, many saw this as a success
(Kuckartz and Rheingans-Heintze 2004), but the very concept was discarded from later
polls and replaced by concepts specifying crucial issues of sustainable development,
such as intergenerational equity etc. ( Umweltbundesamt 2009).
Environmental discourses and societal constructions of the environment often
show great cultural variations (Douglas and Wildavsky 1982), not only between dis-
tant countries, such as those in the industrialized North and the emerging nations of
the South, but also between neighbouring countries. A pertinent, and for some time
politically controversial, example was the culturally divergent concept, valuation and
use of Waldsterben (the ‘death of the forests’) in Germany and France. The adoption
of the German term le Waldsterben in French served as a kind of ‘distancing func-
tion’ and reflected the low relevance of this environmental problem in France.
If everyday behaviour patterns are to be changed, it is important to consider
group and subgroup-specific constructions and mentalities, which are discussed
below under the headings of lifestyles and social milieus.

Perception and Evaluation of Global Environmental Changes

Social representations of the environment, of nature or of sustainability – as
substantiated in societal discourse – play a crucial role in gaining attention to
the structures and processes needing to be sustainably transformed, with the