The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) manages Tennessee’s Grey Cliffs lake and wilderness to control flooding and generate hydro power. For generations, it’s also been a beloved recreation area. At the time of Kristin Pickering’s study, ACE was considering closing the area in response to increasing damage to the land and crime rates; the community disbelieved those problems were serious and longed to keep the area open. These conflicting narratives created a communication challenge: to unite polarized people and create a shared vision of their mutual future. Turning that vision into a consensus narrative required building trust and empathy among stakeholders.
Pickering begins by thoroughly explaining her study’s theoretical context and approach—invaluable for anyone designing similar research. She provides many quotes from key actors to illustrate their diverse opinions and personalities, gradually revealing hidden shared values that eventually brought them together. For example, ACE is responsible for protecting the values residents found important (e.g., access to the site in perpetuity); clarifying this for the residents’ changed confrontation to cooperation.
Pickering notes the particular importance of establishing shared narratives “before” proposing actions. Sharing power proved essential, since actions persuade better than words alone. Part of that power lies in discussion leading to a shared narrative; that narrative provides context and values that subsequently guide everyone’s actions. Narrative also accounts for individual identities and a common purpose; it’s dangerous to challenge these identities or their underlying values.
One flaw in such studies is they lack triangulation (cross-checking researcher interpretations); Pickering acknowledges her potential bias but did not triangulate to correct it. Another flaw is that although some academic jargon is justifiable for academic audiences, the book’s difficult reading if you’re unfamiliar with phrases such as “heteroglossic narrative” (p. 12) or “created more reciprocal unity through aligned sustainability” (p. 35). A glossary would have been helpful for non-academics. And there’s no excuse for “fallen out of alignment with compliance” (p. 85) when the meaning is “broke the law.”
One key message is that except for specific discourse communities (e.g., scientists), appeals to authority and experience are less effective than appeals to shared goals, emotions, and values. Communicators must establish dialogs based on trust and respect, achieved, in part, by negotiating agency (the power to act) and ensuring all stakeholders are heard—a challenge when several communities coexist (“polyphony”). Chapters end with well-supported recommendations on how to reach and enlist multiple audiences (e.g., scientists, residents, governments). In-person communication proved crucial, even in our social media age. Trust also required “walking the talk” (leading by example), something that only becomes explicit late in the book (p. 190).
Quibbles aside, Environmental Preservation and the Grey Cliffs Conflict: Negotiating Common Narratives, Values, and Ethos provides an excellent, well-grounded example of how people cooperate to define a problem and solve it together through rhetorical techniques such as establishing credibility and trust.
Environmental Preservation and the Grey Cliffs Conflict: Negotiating Common Narratives, Values, and Ethos. Kristin D. Pickering 2024. Utah State University Press. [ISBN 978-1-64642-574-7. 238 pages, including index. US$31.95 (softcover).]
