Environmental Sociology
Introduction
The risk associated with significant projects like the construction if the Belo Monte Dam tends to be quite big. Risks tend to affect people in various aspects, for instance, there is a risk that affects people in the individual context and those that affect them in the general aspects (Mythen 2004, p. 11). However, the manner in which people deal with the possibility of an adverse outcome, especially in an investment like the big dam tends to differ depending on the magnitude of the risk.
Though the risks related to the project can cause dangerous and catastrophic problems, it is also evident that the benefits associated with it are quite significant, and deemed to take the nation and its constituent societies to greater economic heights (Mythen 2004, p. 13). The risks that affect many people because of the project tend to adopt the different shapes depending on the perceptions that people associate with them.
The construction of Belo Monte Dam is a project conceived in the year 1979. There was an increase in the need for electric power in Brazil. Therefore, the dam would serve the purpose of providing power, through aiding in the generation of hydro-electricity (Amazon Watch, n.d.; cf. Fainguelernt, 2016). Citing the environmental impacts associated with the Belo Monte Dam project, various groups mounted an opposition to the initiative since the inception of the idea.
As a result, the plan underwent many revisions depending on the proposals of the different stakeholders of the same. Some of the issues highlighted as environmental impacts of the project include the reduction in quality of the Xingu's water. The decrease in the water leads to a decline in food and water security for the community. The community entails the indigenous and the traditional people who depend on the river for the water to serve their domestic requirements like drinking, fishing, transport as well as bathing (Amazon Watch, n.d.; cf. Fainguelernt, 2016).
Additionally, the project might have severe effects on the biodiversity of the region, as suggested by (Amazon Watch, n.d.; cf. Fainguelernt, 2016). The effects on biodiversity involve the reduction of various fish species in the river. Based on Ulrich Beck and Antony Gidden’s ‘risk society’ perspective analysis, the paper will focus on the environmental impacts of the Belo Monte Dam construction.
Before the overview of the Beck's ‘risk society' theory, an introduction to the paper entails the constructionist approach to the sociological challenges. The final section involves the problems associated with the BMD plan, with an analysis focusing on the constructivism in sociology as a standard issue, as well as carrying out an analysis specifically of the risk society.
The Constructivism and Risk Society
According to the Constructivism perspective, the sociological problems change regularly, leading to unchanging issues existing regardless of the different forms of discourse they entail. The constructionist sees problems as fluctuating and does not stick to the individual and societal consciousness because of the adverse objective conditions (Hannigan 2006, p. 50). Therefore, the various groups involving scientists, politicians, industrialists, journalist as well as the civil servants and environmental activists, come together in a bid to claim and contest by way of casting as a success in the progress of the sociological problems.
A risk society involves the ways in which an organization prepares to handle the risks about developmental issues as perceived, in an organized manner. According to Beck, the advancement in society involves the generation of wealth goes in line with the systematic development of social risks (Beck 2006, p. 176). Despite the production of significant amounts of property via advanced technological processes, there existed associated risks of the apocalyptic proportions.
The risks and the effects of global warming, the nuclear fallout as well as the toxins disturb every person living around the area, regardless of their social cleavage or the national boundaries. Therefore, the egalitarian characteristic of the common risks is in contrast with the perception of the individualization of the risks as suggested by (Beck 1995, p. 67).
Noteworthy is that a difference exists between the manufactured risks and those that arise from the natural hazards (Beck 2006, p. 176). The physical risks result from the particular social systems. It is evident that there exist agencies responsible for managing the risks. Therefore, it is apparent that the magnitude of the risk involved in the process is proportional to the composition of the social relations.
Therefore, it is reasonable to insinuate that the dangers in ‘risk society' are products of a social process depending on the actions and perspectives of the social actors that make up the conjuncture. Additionally, research shows that the most severe risk is a social dependency upon social actors, which may be companies that might even be alien that are inaccessible to most people who fall victims of the risks (Beck 2006, p. 176).
It is unfortunate that most people are not aware of the kinds of risks they face. As a result, Beck defines the risk society as a systematic way of handling hazards and insecurities brought forward by modernization (Mythen, 2004, p. 25). Therefore, the creation of wealth has a direct connection to the generation of the risks associated with the development. According to Beck, the shift of the paradigm of the risk society involves a process of the creation of "socially unequal risk positions”. The rise in the standard led to the perception of possible threats and an array of contingency plans that enables a proactive foreign policy (Fleury, & Almeida 2013, p. 149).
The Constructionist Analysis of the Bole Monte Project
The construction of the dam is a project deemed to spur economic growth in a significant way. Great benefits associated with the construction of the dam instill courage and the reality to the matter (Fleury, & Almeida 2013, p. 145). Most importantly, the project is one of the most conspicuous modernization risks, because it involves the application of the best technology, to achieve the great benefits projected to improve the economy of the area and the nation at large to a significant extent.
The combination of the factors is evident in the construction project. As a result, the arguments directed to the same combination tend to affect the way in which the members of the community perceive the risks (Londe & Soriano et al. 2014, p. 134). Because the project is new in that place, people are not familiar with risks associated with the construction of the dam. Therefore, the unfamiliar risks tend to increase the perception of the risk among people. As a result, it becomes necessary to carry out a training program to enlighten people about some of the characteristics of the risks associated with the construction of the dam, to make them at least familiar with the consequences of its implementation (Londe & Soriano et al. 2014, p. 134).
There arouse significant opposition to the construction of the dam in the various views of the stakeholders of the project. The same forms of opposition lead to the modifications of the plan in various occasions before it came to materialize (Fuchs 2016, p. 222). One of the other factors that contributed to the delays observed in the implementation of the project, as well as the causes of it taking a long time. Firstly, there was no transparency on the side of the government.
The energy sector entailed very corrupt individuals who concentrated in embezzling public resources for their personal gain. As a result, there developed political instability in the region, leading to low standards of living within the country. The price of energy went up, and hence the cost of production increased (Figueiredo, Lenz, & Nunes 2014, p. 140). Additionally, there was an increase in the prices of power, industries find it hard to operate within the nation, and that is why some of them resort to retrenchment to reduce the operating costs.
Additionally, the Brazilian Federal Law prohibits foreign investments in the energy sector of the country. Therefore, it is evident that the law is anti-democratic. It restricts investments in the energy sector to local companies regardless of whether they are capable of delivering. Moreover, Brazilian judicial system is prone to political as well as an economic influence (Barcellos, et al. 2016, p. 168). Therefore, it is the mandate of the federal government to manage the energy sector.
On the other handle, the cultural diversity of the nation contributes to the diversity of the risk perception among members of society.
The Brazilian society perceives risks as very great. Most of them tend to separate risks by treating some as heavy and others as light. People tend to give less attention to the scientific explanations about risks they encounter, and they rather depend on subjective values (Bratman 2014, p. 266). Therefore, their perceptions about risks are that risks are very great. Most Brazilians fail to fit in the Beck’s definition of a risk society because people fail to prepare to handle the various types of risks that threaten their businesses. As a result, the risks tend to appear to them as very great opposition, and the challenges will cause them significant losses.
However, businesspeople tend to view risks as opportunities and gaps that need occupation or filling. Therefore, such a perception tends to insure them from the surprises encountered in the business realm in cases of an occurrence of the potential risk (da Costa, & Tavolaro 2008, p. 167). In the agricultural sector, farmers oscillate while not fully sure of the risks. Therefore, it is evident that risks tend to be unfamiliar to them. The most dangerous risks to them include unreliable rainfall, pests, or robbery.
Therefore, it is evident that the native Brazilians exist in different groups, which include the businesspersons, and the farmers, are the most affected groups if the dam is constructed (Ferreira 2002, p. 29). The effects might favor businesses because they will have a good economic climate to increase their business gains. Good economic and political climate will tend to create a good ground and conditions for businesses to grow. The political stability will also favor businesses and when the project is complete, the political temperatures in the country tend to go down.
However, the farmers will experience negative effects from the construction of the dam. The people who reside along the Xingu River will face a water shortage. Their crops might face water problems, and their living standards will decline (Ferreira 2002, p. 29). Therefore, although the dam will spur the general economic growth, individual farmers will have nothing to smile about, because the development issues take pace ate the expense of theirs.
Moreover, Belo Monte is not the first dam to be constructed in Brazil but other dams like the Tucurui dam led to the same challenges but a small scale because it is smaller. Research shows that many people relocated to other places to pave the way for the construction of the dam. Additionally, natural phenomena for example floods, led to losses, for example, the loss of over 10 million meters of timber (Leturcq 2016, p. 270). The construction of the dam also caused various environmental problems like the greenhouse gas emissions, the low water quality as well as increased cases of insect infestation.
Therefore, when compared to the Belo Monte Dam project, the problems will tend to increase by a higher value because the BDM project is quite bigger than the Tucurui project. Therefore, the risk perception by the community will adopt a different form (Hannigan 2014, p. 54). When they compare the experiences with the Tucurui dam, they tend to exaggerate the effects of the BDM project due to being a mega-project.
However, the companies like the Norte Energia tend to benefit in the project because they will be able to maximize profits (Renn, & Rohrmann, 2000, p. 50). The companies operate while disregarding the rights and status of the communities affected by the project. They use scientific explanations based on empirical research and analysis in explaining to the public the effects of the risks (Renn, & Rohrmann, 2000, p. 50). They portray the risks as simple and manageable occurrences that should not create stress but rather encourage people to work on positive outcomes.
The benefits of the project to the Amazon community include the hydroelectric power, which will lead to the drop in the production cost in the country, due to the low cost of power. Additionally, the cost of living will also reduce, as the necessities will be available at a slightly lower cost as compared to the previous economic era (Mythen 2004, p. 20).
However, the challenges associated with the implementation of the project include the degradation of the land, outbreak of waterborne diseases resulting from the contamination of the water, displacement of the people residing in the area allocated to the construction project (Mythen 2004, p. 20). As a result, it is evident the project has both challenges and benefits to the people of the Amazon forest as well as the economy of the region and that of the entire nation.
The calculation of the probabilities of the risks taking place is crucial, though it is only possible to calculate the hazards are quantifiable (Da Costa, &Tavolaro 2008, p. 165). After getting the quantity of the risks anticipated for a given initiative, the choice that is subjective to the initiative takes tends to take precedence. In such perspective, people will tend to view the project, as having no significant consequences as compared to the previous beliefs (Barcellos, Roux, Ceccato, Gosselin, Monteiro, de Matos, & Xavier 2016, p. 169).
Additionally, a risk is naturally a possible anticipated occurrence; hence, the danger associated with it is unquantifiable until it occurs. Therefore, the perceptions of the likelihood of such event occurring are debatable and can take any form of the views presented against or in support of it (da Costa, &Tavolaro 2008, p. 165). The same debates determine the perceptions associated with the risk based on the ideologies of different groups of people that makes up a society. There exist the socio-economic impacts that negatively affect the status of our environment (Ferreira 2002, p. 27).
Furthermore, the individualistic ways of solving problems through free-market techniques lead to arguments that disagree with the claims that the potential benefits affiliated to the application of technology in solving a certain problem. As a result, this derails development in an area is commensurate with the hazards caused by the implementation of the same (Ferreira 2002, p. 29). Moreover, they tend to attach little attention to the fragility of the environment and instead pay attention to the vastness of the issue, purporting the vast array of regulations as a drawback to development.
Additionally, it is important to determine the nature of the people making claims that would otherwise derail the process of achievement of the desired outcome as well as the determination of the basis of their claims and their aims or interest in supporting or going against a given project (Bratman 2014, p. 262). Ideally, it is evident that the project is facing opposition from the judiciary, as well as the indigenous people "we are not fighting against development, but for our planet for the world" (Fleury & Almeida 2013, p. 141)
Based on the cultural perspective, the perception of the risks tends to take diverse ways, especially because the diversity of the cultural composition of Brazil leads to deferent views regarding the project (Leturcq 2016, p. 267). Therefore, it is imperative to emulate the harmonized perception of the risks about the construction of the dam to avoid the prolonged process of making appropriate decisions on the same issue.
Conclusion
The paper discussed briefly the Beck’s risk society and the sociological problems surrounding the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. It has also been able to highlight the perception of the constructionist in its explanations, proving with solid evidence the views of different stakeholders behind the project under consideration. As a result, it is evident that the Belo Monte project has various benefits and sociological problems that polarize the society. The paper also considered the perceptions of risks by the Brazilian community, with a comparison of the smaller Tucurui project with the Belo Monte Dam project. Therefore, the perceptions about risks in society depend on familiarity, urgency, as well as magnitude of the risk.
Reference List
Amazon Watch, n.d.; cf. Fainguelernt, 2016. Retrieved from http://amazonwatch.org/
Barcellos, C., Roux, E., Ceccato, P., Gosselin, P., Monteiro, A.M., de Matos, V.P. and Xavier, D.R., 2016. An observatory to gather and disseminate information on the health-related effects of environmental and climate change. RevistaPanamericana de SaludPública, 40(3), pp.167-173.
Beck, U., 2006. Risk society revisited. The risk society and beyond.
Bratman, E.Z., 2014. Contradictions of green development: Human rights and environmental norms in light of Belo Monte dam activism. Journal of Latin American Studies, 46(02), pp.261-289.
Da Costa Ferreira, L., and Tavolaro, S.B., 2008. Environmental concerns in contemporary Brazil: an insight into some theoretical and societal backgrounds (1970s–1990s). International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 19(3-4), pp.161-177.
Ferreira, L.D.C., 2002. Brazilian environmental sociology: a provisional review. Ambiente&Sociedade, (10), pp.27-43.
Figueiredo, J.A.S., Lenz, C.A. and Nunes, M.F., 2014. Considering risk theories in relation to a case study in the south of Brazil. Ambiente&Sociedade, 17(1), pp.133-150.
Fleury, L.C., and Almeida, J., 2013. The construction of the Belo Monte hydroelectric power plant: environmental conflict and the development dilemma. Ambiente&Sociedade, 16(4), pp.141-156.
Fuchs, V.B., 2016. Blaming the weather, blaming the people: socio-environmental governance and a crisis attitude in the Brazilian electricity sector. Ambiente&Sociedade, 19(2), pp.221-246.
Hannigan, J., 2006. Environmental Sociology Ed 2. Routledge.
Hannigan, J., 2014. Environmental sociology. Routledge
Leturcq, G., 2016. Differences and similarities in impacts of hydroelectric dams between north and south of brazil. Ambiente&Sociedade, 19(2), pp.265-286.
Londe, L.D.R., Coutinho, M.P., Gregório, D., Torres, L., Santos, L.B.L. and Soriano, É., 2014. Water-related disasters in Brazil: perspectives and recommendations. Ambiente&Sociedade, 17(4), pp.133-152.
Mythen, G., 2004. Ulrich Beck: a critical introduction to the risk society. Pluto Pr.
Renn, O. and Rohrmann, B. eds., 2000. Cross-cultural risk perception: a survey of empirical studies (Vol. 13). Springer Science & Business Media.
