Conflicting Imaginary Places in a Local Environmental Dispute

Elizabeth Eddy

On 18 September 2001, a public meeting on the Sunshine Coast debated the proposed plans to develop a three kilometer un-sealed local road. The meeting was convened by representatives of the Maroochy Shire Council (MSC), and had been catalysed by the local university's public opposition to the development of this road over the previous twelve months. At this public meeting, a University representative made an impassioned speech about the 'natural values' that would be destroyed by the sealing of the road. He argued in favour of an amended proposal which would significantly change the proposed road's route, thus allowing the unsealed road space to continue as a 'wildlife corridor' between the University and the National Park. However, the University representative failed to rally residents' support for this plan to re-route the road. The residents largely ignored the natural values arguments and instead supported the developer's intentions to build the road as originally planned. This paper explores the grounds of disagreement between the University and residents over the fate of the road, in relation to the 'imaginary places' which were at stake in the dispute. The notion of 'imaginary places' recognises the necessarily culturally mediated experiences we have of the environments we inhabit. From this perspective, the environment is not simply an objective phenomenon which we all experience in the same way. Instead, we attribute meanings which are often mistaken for something that is objectively real, which can contribute to a failure to recognise the validity of meanings attributed by others. This perspective challenges the false dichotomy between the notions of the 'natural' environment and the 'built' environment that is often at the heart of urban and other environmental issues , and calls into question what actually constitutes the 'the environment' and what is truly 'natural' (Irwin 3-5). Thus not only is the environment as an objective phenomenon being called into question, so too are ideas of 'objective' environmental problems (see for instance: Hajer; Hannigan; Harre; Liberatore; Murphy; Redclift and Woodgate). From this perspective, the conflict was underpinned by two quite distinct imaginary places to which both the University and residents had strong commitments. The failure of the University and residents to recognise each other's imaginary places fuelled their respective convictions of holding the 'high moral ground' in the debate. While the MSC and developer undoubtedly had various political, commercial and other agendas underpinning their involvement in this dispute, the focus of this discussion is the University and the residents, and specifically, their two distinct 'imaginary places' that were at play. These imaginary places are not spatially identical, and the meanings given to the respective spaces varied considerably. Accordingly, the road and its fate also differ in meaning in relation to these imaginary places.

Conflicting Imaginary Places in a Local Environmental Dispute

Files and links (1)

Abstract

Details

Metrics