CLASSROOM SIMULATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONFLICTS
On the first day of my Environmental Sociology class I enter wearing a full-body toxic waste removal suit and a full-face gas mask, and begin to lecture. I hand out flyers of a mock newspaper article telling how the classroom building sits on the site of an old toxic chemical factory. The article goes on to report that all occupants of the building are being exposed to hazardous materials but that the University cannot afford to relocate all classes to other buildings. After making it clear the story is fake, we spend several minutes discussing the feelings students might experience and responses they might take after discovering the hazard. Students commonly report initial fear and anger at learning of their exposure. As a group, students report that they would take drastic measures to respond to the injustice they perceive: hold protests, sue the university, withdrawal from school, hold tuition boycotts, contact the media, and mobilize parents, alumni and faculty. Their demands are stiff: for full medical and psychiatric screening and treatment, full refund of tuition, and full cleanup of the building site and the surrounding area. In half an hour, the students have effectively become a "stakeholder group" in a struggle over the cleanup of a toxic waste site.
The class as a whole goes on to identify fourteen (or so) other stakeholder groups in the likely conflict that would ensue. As a class we then consider the widely different position the university administration would be likely to take from that of the students. I then divide the class into fifteen small groups of (3-5) students and assign them to represent one stakeholder interest. Outside of class, each group considers its position and strategies, their likely strengths and weaknesses and how they relate to the other groups. They prepare formal statements over the next week and present them in the simulation/debate to the rest of the class and to the remaining students (those joining the class late), who serve as "senators" and take on the task of evaluating the presentations and proposing a solution.
Bringing home the issues of environmental conflicts and sparking interest are my first priorities in teaching "Environmental Sociology." I want students to imagine themselves in the position of those social groups we are about to study in depth: people who discovered their neighborhoods, workplaces or ecosystems were contaminated, and who often met resistance from authorities when they attempted to address the problem. Putting students in the position of contamination victims creates more acute interest in environmental justice movements, and they don't quickly dismiss them as "those whining and lazy minorities, women, and workers who are just looking for easy money from a class-action lawsuit or workers compensation." Second, I find that the collaborative and participatory teaching style gives students the opportunity to explore topics and gives them the satisfaction of discovery, the learning experience of working together, organizing material, and the useful practice of attempting to present it persuasively (Smith 1995). In these environmental sociology simulations, the students have the experience of imagining in depth the likely position taken by one stakeholder group. They also get to hear the positions of other groups, identify conflicts inherent in environmental issues, and are forced to grapple with the structural advantages and disadvantages of each group. By working in small groups, students have been inspired by the efforts of other students, are forced to learn to work together, and have gotten to know some other members of the class (helping to reduce the anomie felt by many enrollees in larger universities).
Throughout the semester I brake the class into small groups seven or eight times for these senate-style hearings, debates or conferences. Some of these events were more formal, involving pre-class negotiations and preparation by student groups of a formal statement of their position, which was in turn graded. Others were less formal, and were done entirely in class after a short introductory lecture and discussion with the class as a whole. In this pedagogical note I present these eight simulations briefly, and provide their full handouts and summaries of how the class was organized in an appendix [or these could be available on the listserver or in our electronic archives]. I share these ideas with other teachers in the hope that we can develop an ongoing dialogue about successful teaching techniques in environmental sociology and perhaps improve the standing of our subdiscipline.
I have now tried eight conflict simulations in my two years teaching Environmental Sociology. The first is Toxic Newcomb Hall/ Your Classroom is Toxic, which was just described. To complement the simulation we go on to read Michael Edelstein's Contaminated Communities, the Cables' Environmental Problems/Grassroots Solutions, or Andy Szasz's EcoPopulism.
To learn about the breadth of the environmental movement and its factions, we read chapters from Dunlap and Mertig's American Environmentalism and Bob Brulle's excellent January, 1996 Sociological Inquiry article. Then in class we develop a list of about twenty mainstream and grassroots environmental groups. In a "Funding Pleas Simulation" I assign small groups to represent one environmental group's ideological position, its membership, and specific projects to a granting agency with five million dollars to give out. Non-presenters convene before class to decide on funding criteria and after the simulation to judge which groups merit funds. Students found they can quickly get information on their assigned environmental group by visiting the ballooning number of World Wide Web homepages of these groups.
When discussing political economy and threats that jobs will be lost if environmental protections are imposed, we simulate in class more informally a conflict is between states bidding to attract Japanese investors for the siting of their Film and Plastics Company. States come up with names for themselves and bid for the potential investors with competing packages of tax breaks, regulatory relief and other programs. A series of articles refutes the the hypothesis that firms seek the lowest-regulated "pollution haven" sites (a point most directly addressed by Kazis and Grossman in their book Fear at Work.
In a unit on workers' struggles over occupational health, we first read Toxic Work by Steve Fox. Next, students are assigned to groups to represent either the union or management positions in a case of a chemical company where cancers and other work-related health claims are becoming more common at times when the firm is cutting costs and increasingly using subcontracted maintenance workers. In another unit studets read Foster's The Vulnerable Planet, and then small groups of students must decide pro or con on the question of "Can Capitalism be Reshaped to Meet the Needs of Sustainability?" Interestingly, there is often an even balance of groups debating the yes and no positions.
In examining global environmental issues, we roughly simulate the conflict inherent at the UNCED Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 by debating "Global Environmental Change: Who Should Cut Emissions and Who Should Pay for Clean-up?" For our in-depth case study of "The Struggle over the Amazon," we identify stakeholder groups and develop a conflict simulation after reading Chico Mendes' book Fight for the Forest or Hecht and Cockburn's Fate of the Forest.
Finally, for the last day of the semester I challenge students to develop a sociologically plausible proposal for "What Would a Sustainable America Look Like?" I ask them to specifically address how they would face the tough choices (without resorting to easy techno-fixes) on energy resources, economic structure, urban structure, class structures and democratic institutions. They must take a position on how to coax a resistant populace, industry and government towards sustainability.
I should not say that every simulation/debate was perfect nor are they always the right pedagogical approach on a topic. Students need to be prepared with appropriate readings, lectures and videos, or they must be able to imagine their stakeholder group's position and particular dilemmas. However by imagining a stakeholder group's position beforehand, students often approach the readings with specific questions in mind and a piqued curiosity. Students are usually gratified when the readings confirm their expectations or are surprised by interesting twists. Most are struck by the similarities which emerge in the readings and films between responses by real people facing the different kinds of environmental conflicts we simulate in the classroom.
Sprinkled in between these debates and course lectures are additional activities such as carefully-selected videos and guest speakers who have first-hand experience and commitment working in local grassroots and mainstream environmental organizations. This year the class also conducted a random telephone survey on environmental perceptions and behaviors in New Orleans. Last year I organized an optional "Toxics Tour" of nearby hazardous sites and their communities (local environmentalists can help organize and lead the tour), and brought the class to the computer lab to demonstrate environmental resources and fora on the internet. This year I created an optional e-mail listserver for the class, so that students and I could discuss issues outside of the classroom, and I asked the students to post their discussion questions on readings to the list before class.
Student evaluations have been strongly positive on the class and on the simulations as valuable in their learning and caring about Environmental Sociology. Students have been saying they learned a lot in a class that they also enjoyed showing up for. I hope these ideas are useful to other Environmental Sociologists, and I hope other E,T,S readers will pick up the ball and share what works in their classes.
* The planning for this class was assisted by a course development grant from the Environmental Studies program at Tulane University, funded by a Tulane/Xavier University consortium and the Department of Energy.

Reference:
Karl A. Smith. 1995. "Cooperative Learning: Effective Teamwork for Engineering Students." IEEE Education Society/ASEE Electrical Engineering Division Newsletter.

APPENDIX: THE CONFLICTS AND HANDOUTS
For the more formal conflicts, I have included here the full handouts which can be adapted and improved on for other teaching scenarios. For the more informal debates, I summarize here how the class was organized.

1. Toxic Newcomb Hall (Your Classroom is Toxic)
Headline: EPA REVEALS NEWCOMB HALL SITS ON HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE: PANIC BREAKS OUT
Background: In the years of New Orleans' growth, Newcomb College's campus was for decades the site of a chemical-conversion facility which produced solvents for producing special paints for ocean and river-going freighters built in the city's shipyards. The site was abandoned after the firm, Seaboard Solvents Inc. went bankrupt. One of the firm's last actions was hiring a contracting firm to do its site demolition and bulldozing. Hundreds of 55-gallon drums of solvents, many containing heavy metals, dioxin and low-level radiation, were dumped in two rectangular holes and covered with the sandy soil that had been removed.
After sitting vacant for twenty-three years, the site was deeded from the State of Louisiana and the City of New Orleans to Newcomb College, which was looking for a larger Uptown site to which to move its growing school. Low on funds, the College took the site knowing that there were some chemicals. In beginning excavation for the foundation for Newcomb Hall, one bulldozer driver discovered three barrels at the south end. On a tight budget and unable to move the site nor clean up the barrels, College officials decided to raise the ground around the building, making it higher than the surrounding land. The building has served as classroom and faculty offices since its construction in 1924. Unwittingly the Newcomb Day Care Center and Nursery (between Broadway and Audubon street just north of Newcomb Hall) was built on the second toxic dump site in 1954.
Frequent headaches among students in the basement classrooms and among faculty whose offices face the south side of the building have been reported intermittently since the building's construction, but were dismissed as coincidental. Residents across Broadway reported higher than average rates of leukemia and lymphatic cancer. The connection between these events was not understood until the flooding of May 9, 1994, which included seepage into the basement of Newcomb Hall. Strong chemical odors alerted faculty, many of whom were leaving campus after handing in their final grades. After inspecting the building the Physical Plant department notified the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of a potential toxic spill. Tulane University wished to keep the story quiet but it was leaked to the media, and within a day the Times-Picayune and TV Channels 4 and 6 had run several pieces on the contamination. Statements by summer students and faculty members about the need to make the site perfectly clean met with calls for calm from the university's administration. Nearby residents demanded to be remunerated for loss of property value and for purchasing new homes away from the site.
While this story is fictional (I hope), virtually the same story has taken place in dozens or even hundreds of locations around the country. Mouton Elementary School and the surrounding housing development in Eastern New Orleans were built on the site of a long-time city dump which has now become a Superfund site and had to be abandoned. The "Love Canal" story is startlingly similar to the Toxic Newcomb narrative presented here. Land owners around chemical plants, landfills, toxic waste incinerators, etc. have all seen their property values plummet while their fears of adverse health effects grow.
The exercise: A Debate/Hearing on what to do about "remediation" (clean up) of a Hazardous Facility Siting, between: Businesses, Environmentalists, Experts, Lawyers, Residents, Environmental Protection Agency and Local Government Officials.
To negotiate settlements of disputes such as what came to be called the Newcomb Hall Scandal, we need to know who the likely players are, who's getting heard and who's not, and why. First, identify the groups who are likely to be involved in the Newcomb Hall Scandal dispute. Then consider their likely position on the matter, the organizational strengths and weaknesses of the group, the strategies they might take, and their likelihood of being heard and by whom under what circumstances. Finally, even if they are heard, will their input be included in final solution? Repeat for each group identified.
You and two or three others have been appointed to act the part of one of the interest groups just identified in the Newcomb Hall Scandal. Hearings will be held in somewhat the same way as a U.S. Senate hearing. Each will present their positions and a concrete proposed solution in a (maximum) five minute formal statement to the panel of questioners. These formal statements will then be submitted to the panel. After all the statements are made, the panel of questioners can then address each group for clarifications. After that, each group may address each group. Finally, two votes will be made: one by the senators, and one by the class as a whole as to which solution should be undertaken. Try your best to imagine the position of the group you are acting as.
We will discuss the relative contribution of each group to the debate and grading will be as both a group (team grades) and individual grades based on evaluation of peers.
1.Interest Group:

a. Likely Positions:
b. Organizational Resources:
c. Organizational Weaknesses:
d. Likely Strategies:
e. Relative Power:
f. Type and level of input into Outcome:

2. State and Municipalities Bargain for Investors with Tax Breaks and Regulatory Relief
You are the governor and members of the chamber of commerce for a state whose economy has been badly slumping since the main sources of employment have slowly collapsed due to competition overseas. Unemployment is high and state tax revenues have slipped, to a point where social programs such as schools, welfare, and policing have had to be cut back. As a result, your re-election campaign is showing early signs of trouble.
A Japanese company is looking for locations to site a new film and plastics company, which would directly employ 600 workers and provide $30 million in direct tax revenues. Estimates of the "multiplier" effects of employment and taxes run up to seven times these figures. However, the investors are shopping around to several communities looking for the best deal. They would like to avoid paying for all the factory's locating costs, and would like special exemptions on environmental and labor laws. The plant will produce air, water, and solid waste emissions, some highly toxic. Emissions control devices cost tens of millions of dollars.
What package of environmental and economic concessions would you offer to the company? Discuss in groups of four. Be explicit, and be ready to bargain.