Villains, Victims & Heroes: Seals as Stakeholders in Policy Conflicts

• In Event: Policy Narratives and Discourse

Abstract

Animals occupy a contingent position in public policy contests. Animals frequently bear the burdens and occasionally receive the benefits of policy decisions. Yet, stakeholder theory generally does not recognize animals as “stakeholders.” Debates over the stakeholder status of animals and the non-human natural environment have emerged in recent years, particularly in environmental planning (Reed et al. 2009; Tryggestad, Justesen, and Mouritsen 2013) and business ethics (Jacobs 2003; Molavi and Meijboom 2018; Starik 1995). The consideration of animals as stakeholders has been limited in policy research thus far, but is of particular relevance in view of the “political turn” in animal ethics and increased attention to the inclusion of animal interests in political decision-making (Donaldson and Kymlicka 2011; Garner and O’Sullivan 2016; Milligan 2015).

Using policy design and policy narrative frameworks, this paper draws upon historical documents, news reports, records of public debates, and surveys to trace evolving social constructions of and public policy about seals. These data include a 2016 survey of the attitudes of voters, anglers, and tourists on Nantucket, Massachusetts toward seals and seal management, which was administered to voters by mail and to anglers and tourists on-site. Nantucket is located 6 miles from Muskeget Island, which is home to the largest grey seal breeding colony in the United States, and is at the center of the seal controversy. By examining competing policy narratives around seals and the relationship of these narratives to public opinion and policy, this paper adds a new dimension to empirical exploration of the power of non-human characters in policy narratives and contributes to the discussion of animals as stakeholders.

Social construction approaches to policy analysis, particularly the work of Stone (1988, 2012), Rochefort and Cobb (1994) and Schneider and Ingram (1997) and the growing body of work associated with the narrative policy framework (Jones, Shanahan, and McBeth 2014), provide a lens for examining the role of animals in policy contests. Problem definition and narrative frameworks have posited the influence of problem definitions and, specifically, policy narratives, on agenda-setting, public attitudes, political strategy and policy outcomes. These narratives convey a causal story with a setting, characters (heroes, villains and victims), plot, and moral. Policy narratives are strategic: they shape interests, political mobilization, and alliances and encode policy solutions. Competing problem definitions vie for recognition.

Policy design theory posits that dominant problem definitions become embedded in policy and that benefits and burdens are allocated based upon the social constructions and political power of target groups (Schneider, Ingram and deLeon 2014). Target groups are defined as deserving or undeserving and, depending on their political power, are treated as advantaged (positively constructed, powerful), contenders (negatively constructed, powerful), dependents (positively constructed, powerless) or deviants (negatively constructed, powerless). Policy designs, in turn, have feed-forward effects that influence elite and public opinion. Animal species are among the policy targets whose fates are shaped by interactions between social constructions and political power (Czech, Krausman, and Borkhataria 1998). Social constructions and public policy, however, can change.

The story of seal extirpation and recovery in New England is a character-driven narrative in which public policy has reflected shifts in the social construction of seals over the past 150 years. The problematization of seals began in the 1800’s. Fishermen along the New England coast viewed seals as competition for commercially valuable fish stocks. Within this policy narrative, seals were viewed as villains. Bounties for seals embedded this negative social construction of seals as deviants, who bore the lethal burdens of this policy. With the near elimination of seals from the Northwest Atlantic and the rise of the environmental movement, seal advocates successfully shifted the narrative. Seals became victims. The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) embedded in federal policy protections for marine mammals, including seals, as dependents.

While the MMPA has continued to protect seals, their positive social construction has been increasingly contested as populations have rebounded. The “nuisance” narrative lingers as a degenerative social memory (Schneider, Ingram and deLeon 2014) and has gained increased traction with the growing political power of interests hostile to wildlife protection. At the same time, scientific knowledge about the complexity of the marine food web and the role of seals in the ecosystem provides a new competing narrative of seals as heroes. In policy narratives, the hero character has been found to be particularly influential in shaping public opinion (Jones 2014).

Author

• Jennifer Jackman, Salem State University