AAC 10 février 2022 pour la Pré-conférence ICA “Au-delà du monde des humains. Communication végétale émergente dans l’espace public”

ICA Pre-conference: un Evénement labellisé par la SFSIC
Version française/  English version/Bibliographie-Bibliography

L’émergence du vivant dans son entier capillarise, de proche en proche, les arènes publiques, de manière non linéaire et parfois non visible. Certaines luttes emblématiques, certains symboles cristallisent l’attention médiatique. Les ours polaires, les orangs-outans, les abeilles, les grands tigres ont bénéficié d’une sympathie publique, érigés en étendards de lutte des ONG contre des phénomènes beaucoup plus vastes, ceux du changement climatique ou de la déforestation. L’agenda et l’attention publique nous polarisent sur des espèces, soit menacées d’extinction, soit menaçantes (car invasives par exemple) avant de passer à d’autres urgences médiatiques. Ces « voix » non humaines font ainsi l’objet d’attentions parcellaires et isolées, voire elles sont absentes des dispositifs de médiation parce qu’elles nous sont « invisibles » (Wandersee, Schussler 2001 ; Morizot, Zhong Mengual 2018 ; Morizot 2020 ; Batke, Dallimore, Bostock, 2020).

Il n’empêche que cette émergence cognitive et compréhensive croît et se normalise via un combat parallèle législatif mené par des associations de lutte contre la maltraitance animale.

Une autre forme de vie pointe à la faveur de cette évolution de notre considération du vivant et en particulier du monde animal. Moins visible, moins médiatique, parfois plus intime aussi, le monde végétal est également reconsidéré, dans de multiples dimensions, entre instrumentalisation et contemplation, en suscitant une palette large de constructions de sens. Si la médiatisation est plus discrète, elle n’en est pas moins présente (Cholet, Catellani & Pascual Espuny, 2020).

Notre rapport aux plantes, aux algues, aux mousses, aux champignons, aux arbres, aux fleurs, aux forêts ouvre de multiples champs d’étude : au-delà de notre rapport à une nature verte, emblématique, c’est également notre rapport à la lumière, à la nourriture, à la fertilisation, à l’ombre, aux couleurs que nous observons.

Du jardin aux forêts mythologiques, de nos potagers à notre assiette, de la jungle à nos platanes urbains, de nos parcs à nos landes sauvages, notre rapport au temps change, s’adaptant au rythme des saisons et à des temps de croissances non humains. Notre rapport à l’espace évolue également : du séquençage microscopique de la pharmacopée à la gestion macro-économique des grands espaces agricoles et forestiers. Appréhender le végétal est une autre entrée réflexive pour envisager notre rapport au monde.

Des recherches en biologie et en écologie, mais aussi en philosophie, invitent à les percevoir sous un nouveau jour, notamment comme des êtres sensibles, mais aussi intelligents, voire conscients (Calvo, Keijzer, 2009 ; Gagliano, 2012 ; Mancuso, 2013 ; Trewavas, 2016 ; Tassin, 2016 ; Chamovitz, 2017 ; Calvo, Gagliano, 2020 ; Parise, 2020). Des livres à succès (Wohlleben 2015, 2019, 2021) et un certain nombre de documentaires et de couverture médiatique, dans le domaine de la vulgarisation notamment, montrent la présence d’un mouvement culturel qui semble modifier les fondations de notre vision des relations entre humain, animal et végétal.

Axes du colloque

Envisager notre communication sur le monde végétal nous conduit donc à réfléchir et analyser notre rapport à un vivant primordial des écosystèmes, et qui revêt une importance symbolique, environnementale, sociétale, économique, culturelle. Par l’étude de la communication, ce sont différents axes qui nous paraissent émerger, que nous suggérons comme liste non exhaustive pour les propositions de communication :

  • L’évolution de la vision naturaliste (telle que théorisée par Philippe Descola)
  • La question des récits du rapport au vivant
  • La question des territoires et leurs stratégies de valorisation et de promotion des pratiques dites vertes
  • La question des apports artistiques, dont nombre sont actuellement portés par des territoires et/ou la question du rapport au corps et aux émotions
  • La remédiation de la culture par la nature
  • Les questions de normalisation et d’institutionnalisation de notre rapport au vivant incluant les différents acteurs, tels que les Parcs Nationaux ou régionaux ou les ensembles transfrontaliers
  • Les mutations du rapport à la norme et d’autorégulation dans le rapport au vivant
  • Les questions d’édu-communication
  • Les questions d’anthropisation
  • Les questions politiques, associatives mais aussi marchandes.
Informations pratiques Le colloque aura lieu Aix-en-Provence en France, dans les locaux de d’Aix-Marseille Université, les 25 et 26 mai 2022. Les propositions de communication, en français ou en anglais, comprendront : prénom et nom, titres et fonctions, institutions de rattachement (p. ex. université, laboratoire), coordonnées de l’auteur (courriel) ; un résumé, de 500 et bibliographie exclue, en prenant soin de présenter la problématique et la méthodologie de recherche ; une bibliographie ; une courte biographie de l’auteur à la troisième personne du singulier (max. 1 000 caractères, espaces compris). Il est demandé aux auteurs de respecter les normes bibliographiques APA. Un deuxième fichier devra inclure seulement une version entièrement anonymisée du résumé et de la bibliographie (vérifier que l’identité de l’auteur n’apparaisse pas dans les métadonnées).Les résumés de contribution au colloque sont attendus pour le 10 fév.2022, via le site web du colloque :https://vegetals.sciencesconf.org et aussi par courriel aux adresses suivantes : celine.pascual@univ-amu. fr et andrea.catellani@uclouvain.be Un e-mail accusant réception des propositions sera envoyé. Si la proposition est retenue, les auteur.es en seront informés avant le 15 mars 2022. Une contribution économique pourrait être demandée aux auteur.es retenu.e.s.   Une publication scientifique est prévue, suite au colloque.

At the interface between the natural environment and human communication, the understanding and the interest of non-human worlds are emerging more and more strongly in the public space. Connected to the notions of biodiversity and ecosystem, and fully inscribed in the vision of a “one-ness” of the natural world, the emergence of the living seeps into the public arenas, in a non-linear and sometimes non-visible way. Some emblematic struggles, some symbols crystallize the media attention. Polar bears, orangutans, bees, tigers have benefited from public sympathy, set up as banners for the struggle of NGOs against much larger phenomena, those of climate change, loss of biodiversity or deforestation. The public agenda and attention focus on species, either threatened with extinction or threatening (because they are invasive, for example) before moving on to other media emergencies. Research in environmental communication has thus been able to highlight our approach and our imaginary of the Wild (Busmek, 1997 2005, 2007 ; Collins & Kephart, 2007, Hardy and Short, 1997 ; Horn, 2007, Paystrup, 1993, Schwarze, 2001 ; Wilson, 2007, Borusé, 2000), our relationship to nature and biodiversity (Denton 2001, Hall, 1992, Eilers 1995, Cooper 1993), our perception of other “voices” (Coppola, 2001, Freeman, 2008, Sanchez, 1993, Meisner, 1995, 1997, 2005, Davis 1997)

These non-human “voices” are thus the object of fragmented and isolated attentions, or even absent from mediation devices because they are “invisible” to us (Wandersee, Schussler 2001; Morizot, Zhong Mengual 2018; Morizot 2020; Batke, Dallimore, Bostock, 2020). Nonetheless, this cognitive and comprehensive emergence is increasing and becoming normalized via a parallel legislative struggle led by animal abuse associations.

Another form of life is emerging because of this evolution in our consideration of the living world and in particular the animal world. Less visible, less mediatic, sometimes more intimate too, the vegetal world is also reconsidered, in multiple dimensions, between instrumentalization and contemplation, by arousing a large palette of meaning constructions. If media coverage is more discreet, it is no less present (Cholet, Catellani & Pascual Espuny, 2020, Halford, 2013 Fournier, Moula 2018). Our relationship with plants, algae, mosses, mushrooms, trees, flowers, and forests opens up multiple fields of study: beyond our relationship with the green, emblematic nature, it is also our relationship with light, food, fertilization, shade, and colors that we observe. From the garden to the mythological forests, from our vegetable gardens to our plate, from the jungle to our urban plane trees, from our parks to our wild moors, our relationship to time is changing, adapting to the rhythm of the seasons and to non-human growth times. Our relationship to space is also evolving from the microscopic sequencing of the pharmacopoeia to the macro-economic management of large agricultural and forest areas. Understanding plants is another way of looking at our relationship with the world.

Research in biology and ecology, but also in philosophy, invites us to perceive plants in a new light, notably as sensitive beings, but also intelligent, even conscious (Calvo, Keijzer, 2009; Gagliano, 2012; Mancuso, 2013; Trewavas, 2016; Tassin, 2016; Chamovitz, 2017; Calvo, Gagliano, 2020; Parise, 2020). Best-selling books (Wohlleben 2015, 2019, 2021) and several documentaries and media coverage, in the field of popularization, show the presence of a cultural movement that seems to be changing the foundations of our view of human-animal-plant relationships. ■

Focus of the conference:

To consider our communication on the plant world thus leads us to reflect and analyze our relationship with living beings that are essential to ecosystems, and that have crucial symbolic, environmental, societal, economic, and cultural importance. Through the study of communication, different axes seem to emerge, which we suggest as a non-exhaustive list for communication proposals:

  • The evolution of the naturalistic vision (as theorized by Philippe Descola)
  • The question of narratives of the relationship to the living
  • The question of territories and their strategies for promoting and promoting so-called green practices
  • The question of artistic contributions, many of which are currently carried by territories
  • the question of the relationship to the body and emotions
  • The remediation of culture by nature Issues of standardization and institutionalization of our relationship with the living including the different actors, such as National or Regional Parks or transboundary complexes
  • Changes in the relationship to the norm and self-regulation in the relationship to the living
  • Educommunication issues
  • Anthropization issues
  • Political, associative but also commercial questions
Practical information The conference will take place in Aix-en-Provence, France, in the premises of Aix-Marseille University, on 25 and 26 May 2022. Paper proposals, in French or English, should include : first and last name, titles and functions, affiliation (e.g. university, laboratory), contact details of the author (e-mail); an abstract, between 500 words including spaces and excluding bibliography, taking care to present the research problem and methodology; a bibliography; a short biography of the author in the third person singular (max. 1000 characters, including spaces) Authors are asked to respect the APA bibliographic standards. A second file should include only a fully anonymized version of the abstract and bibliography (check that the author’s identity does not appear in the metadata).Abstracts for contributions to the conference are due by 10/02/2022, via the conference website:          
https://vegetals.sciencesconf.org and also by email to the following addresses:
celine.pascual@univ-amu. fr and andrea.catellani@uclouvain.be An email acknowledging receipt of the proposals will be sent. If the proposal is accepted, the authors will be informed before 15 of March 2022. An economic contribution may be requested from the selected authors.A scientific publication is planned, following the conference.


 

Conference organising committee/ Comité organisateur de la conférence Céline Pascual Espuny : Full Professor, Aix-Marseille Université, celine.pascual@univ-amu.fr Andrea Catellani : Full Professor, Université catholique de Louvain, andrea.catellani@uclouvain.beDaniel Raichvarg : Full Professor, Université de Bourgogne, Président d’honneur de la SFSIC (Société française des sciences de l’information et de la communication)Nicole d’Almeida : Full Professor, Université de la SorbonneCatherine Loneux : Full Professor, Université de RennesAmélie Coubault Lazzerini Associated professor, Université de GrenobleNataly Botero : Associated professor, Université de BourgogneDaphné Duvernay : Associated professor, Université de ToulonAnne Gagnebien : Associated professor, Université de Toulon   Sponsorship / Division/Interest Group Affiliation This preconference has received endorsements from the ICA Environmental Communication divisions, as well as the French Society of Information and Communication Sciences (SFSIC)    

.

Bibliography/ Bibliographie   Bousé, D. (2000) Wildlife Films. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press Bsumek, P. (2005). The Idea of Rhetoric in the Field of Environmental Communication: Reflecting on “Ways of Knowing” in Our Own Field. In G. B. Walker & W. J. Kinsella (Eds.), Finding our Way(s) in Environmental Communication: Proceedings of the Seventh Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 236-246). Bsumek, P. (2007). Mapping the Ideology of the Domination of Nature from Wilderness to Ecosystem, or, Defending Wilderness by Taking Rhetoric, Science, and Ideology Seriously. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 139-150). Bsumek, P. K. (1997). Strategic Rhetoric and the Control of Place from Wilderness to Ecosystem: An Exploration of the Legacy of Yellowstone National Park. In S. Senecaln (Ed.), Proceedings of The Fourth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 346-356). Clarke, T., & Salvador, M. (2001). Beyond the Human/Nature Dualism: Nez Perce Environmental Discourse. In C. B. Short & D. Hardy-Short (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 329-342). Collins, C., & Kephart, S. (2007). Wilderness in the American Imaginary: Media Constructions of Scientific and Political Knowledge. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 249-259). Coppola, N. W. (2001). Listening for Voices: The Role of Attitude and Belief in Environmental Communication. In C. B. Short & D. Hardy-Short (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 16-20). Crawford, L. (1992). Environmental Advocacy and Speaking with Trees. In C. L. Oravec & J. G. Cantrill (Eds.), The Conference on the Discourse of Environmental Advocacy (pp. 299-305). Denton, S. (2001). Discourses of Sustainability and Biodiversity: Scientific or Social Norms? In M.-F. Aepli, J. W. Delicath & S. P. Depoe (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 201-206). Eilers, P. (1995). Creating an Environmental Conscience: Form as a Rhetorical Strategy in Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. In D. B. Sachsman, K. Salomone & S. Senecaln (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and our Environment (pp. 230-235). Fournier, M., & Moulia, B. (2018). Sensibilité et communication des arbres: entre faits scientifiques et gentil conte de fée. Forêt Nature, 149(octobre-novembre-décembre), 12-21. Freeman, C. P. (2008). Putting the Human Animal at Ease with Itself: Deconstructing the False Human/Animal Dichotomy. In B. Willard & C. Green (Eds.), Communication at the Intersection of Nature and Culture: Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 186-197). Hall, L. (1992). Environmental Semiotics: The Evolution of Ecoliteracy. In C. L. Oravec & J. G. Cantrill (Eds.), The Conference on the Discourse of Environmental Advocacy (pp. 78-92). Halford, M. (2013). La communication sur les plantes invasives: bilan et perspectives. Hardy-Short, D. C., & Short, C. B. (1997). Redefining the Wilderness Experience: The Grand Canyon, Canyon Forest Village, and Controlled Tourism -. In S. Senecaln (Ed.), Proceedings of The Fourth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 217-225). Horn, G. V. (2007). Invoking the Wild: Radical Environmentalism’s Use of Animal Totems in Wilderness Protection. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 369-377). Horton, C. C., Hall, D., & Gilbertz, S. (2008). An Interpretive Analysis of Core Values of Agriculturalists of the Yellowstone River. In B. Willard & C. Green (Eds.), Communication at the Intersection of Nature and Culture: Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 346-356). Lertzman, R. (2008). Love, Guilt and Reparation: Rethinking the Affective Dimensions of the Locus of the Irreparable. In B. Willard & C. Green (Eds.), Communication at the Intersection of Nature and Culture: Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 8-13). Meisner, M. (1997). Pitching The Beast: Representations of Non-human Animals in Contemporary Print Advertising. In S. Senecaln (Ed.), Proceedings of The Fourth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 302-314). Meisner, M. (2005). Knowing Nature Through the Media: An Examination of Mainstream Print and Television Representations of the Non-human World. In G. B. Walker & W. J. Kinsella (Eds.), Finding our Way(s) in Environmental Communication: Proceedings of the Seventh Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 425-437). Meisner, M. S. (1995). Resourcist Language: The Symbolic Enslavement of Nature. In D. B. Sachsman, K. Salomone & S. Senecaln (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and our Environment (pp. 236-243). Oravec, C. (1995). An Inventional Archeology of Rachel Carson’s ‘A Fable for Tomorrow’. In D. B. Sachsman, K. Salomone & S. Senecaln (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and our Environment (pp. vii-xi). Paystrup, P. (1993). The Wolf at Yellowstone’s Door: Cultural Rationality and Risk Communication in an Endangered Species Controversy. In J. Cantrill & M. J. Killingsworth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and Our Environment (pp. 100-136). Sanchez, R. (1993). Environmental Constructs Revealed Through the Voices of the ‘Other’: Discourse Practices in Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca’s 1542 La Relacion. In J. Cantrill & M. J. Killingsworth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and Our Environment (pp. 264-269). Schutten, J. K. (2007). Environment/Human Dialogics: Toward A Queering of Nature. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 116-127). Schwarze, S. (2001). Appreciating the Wilderness: Aesthetics and Wilderness Preservation in the Forest Service/ Park Service Controversy of the 1920s. In C. B. Short & D. Hardy-Short (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 393-397). Wilson, T. (2007). A Wilderness Fetish?: Performing Nature and Identity in Poland. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 202-212)
Cooper, M. M. (1993). Environmental Rhetoric in the Age of Hegemonic Politics: Earth First! vs The Nature Conservancy. In J. Cantrill & M. J. Killingsworth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and Our Environment (pp. 29-34). Marquette, MI: Northern Michigan University. Coppola, N. W. (2001). Listening for Voices: The Role of Attitude and Belief in Environmental Communication. In C. B. Short & D. Hardy-Short (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 16-20). Crawford, L. (1992). Environmental Advocacy and Speaking with Trees. In C. L. Oravec & J. G. Cantrill (Eds.), The Conference on the Discourse of Environmental Advocacy (pp. 299-305). Denton, S. (2001). Discourses of Sustainability and Biodiversity: Scientific or Social Norms? In M.-F. Aepli, J. W. Delicath & S. P. Depoe (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 201-206). Eilers, P. (1995). Creating an Environmental Conscience: Form as a Rhetorical Strategy in Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. In D. B. Sachsman, K. Salomone & S. Senecaln (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and our Environment (pp. 230-235). Fournier, M., & Moulia, B. (2018). Sensibilité et communication des arbres: entre faits scientifiques et gentil conte de fée. Forêt Nature, 149(octobre-novembre-décembre), 12-21. Freeman, C. P. (2008). Putting the Human Animal at Ease with Itself: Deconstructing the False Human/Animal Dichotomy. In B. Willard & C. Green (Eds.), Communication at the Intersection of Nature and Culture: Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 186-197). Hall, L. (1992). Environmental Semiotics: The Evolution of Ecoliteracy. In C. L. Oravec & J. G. Cantrill (Eds.), The Conference on the Discourse of Environmental Advocacy (pp. 78-92).
Halford, M. (2013). La communication sur les plantes invasives: bilan et perspectives. Hardy-Short, D. C., & Short, C. B. (1997). Redefining the Wilderness Experience: The Grand Canyon, Canyon Forest Village, and Controlled Tourism -. In S. Senecaln (Ed.), Proceedings of The Fourth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 217-225). Horn, G. V. (2007). Invoking the Wild: Radical Environmentalism’s Use of Animal Totems in Wilderness Protection. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 369-377). Horton, C. C., Hall, D., & Gilbertz, S. (2008). An Interpretive Analysis of Core Values of Agriculturalists of the Yellowstone River. In B. Willard & C. Green (Eds.), Communication at the Intersection of Nature and Culture: Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 346-356). Lertzman, R. (2008). Love, Guilt and Reparation: Rethinking the Affective Dimensions of the Locus of the Irreparable. In B. Willard & C. Green (Eds.), Communication at the Intersection of Nature and Culture: Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 8-13). Meisner, M. (1997). Pitching The Beast: Representations of Non-human Animals in Contemporary Print Advertising. In S. Senecaln (Ed.), Proceedings of The Fourth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 302-314). Meisner, M. (2005). Knowing Nature Through the Media: An Examination of Mainstream Print and Television Representations of the Non-human World. In G. B. Walker & W. J. Kinsella (Eds.), Finding our Way(s) in Environmental Communication: Proceedings of the Seventh Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment (pp. 425-437).  
 Meisner, M. S. (1995). Resourcist Language: The Symbolic Enslavement of Nature. In D. B. Sachsman, K. Salomone & S. Senecaln (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and our Environment (pp. 236-243). Oravec, C. (1995). An Inventional Archeology of Rachel Carson’s ‘A Fable for Tomorrow’. In D. B. Sachsman, K. Salomone & S. Senecaln (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and our Environment (pp. vii-xi). Paystrup, P. (1993). The Wolf at Yellowstone’s Door: Cultural Rationality and Risk Communication in an Endangered Species Controversy. In J. Cantrill & M. J. Killingsworth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and Our Environment (pp. 100-136). Sanchez, R. (1993). Environmental Constructs Revealed Through the Voices of the ‘Other’: Discourse Practices in Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca’s 1542 La Relacion. In J. Cantrill & M. J. Killingsworth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Communication and Our Environment (pp. 264-269). Schutten, J. K. (2007). Environment/Human Dialogics: Toward A Queering of Nature. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 116-127). Schwarze, S. (2001). Appreciating the Wilderness: Aesthetics and Wilderness Preservation in the Forest Service/ Park Service Controversy of the 1920s. In C. B. Short & D. Hardy-Short (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 393-397). Wilson, T. (2007). A Wilderness Fetish?: Performing Nature and Identity in Poland. In L. S. Volkening, D. Wolfe, E. Plec, W. Griswold & K. DeLuca (Eds.), Wilderness, Advocacy, and the Media: Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Conference on Communication and Environment (pp. 202-212)

Catherine GAUTHIER

Catherine Gauthier Maître de conférences Associée en communication scientifique et environnementale Université Grenoble Alpes (UFR LLASIC Institut des Médias et de la Communication) Conservatrice du Patrimoine Naturel (Ville de Grenoble)

Vous aimerez aussi...

1 réponse

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse e-mail ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *

Ce site utilise Akismet pour réduire les indésirables. En savoir plus sur comment les données de vos commentaires sont utilisées.

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search