Search

This article examines the strategies used by a democratic state to suppress dissent by criminalizing social protest activities. We compile and tabulate new legislation in Australia affecting protest rights from 2010 to 2020. Using data collected from the Facebook pages of 728 environmental groups and climate-related arrests reported in media articles, we then examine connections between climate change protest and protest criminalization in Australia between 2010 and 2019. Australian governments are shown to have criminalized climate protest via large-scale arrests by introducing laws curtailing protest freedoms and expanding police and corporate discretionary power in the application of those laws. State, corporate, and media actors are shown to engage in the rhetorical criminalization of climate protest, portraying protesters as threats to economic and political interests and to national security. However, the ongoing growth of climate change activism indicates that these criminalization strategies seeking to prevent climate protest may have been largely ineffective. Keywords: activism, civil resistance, climate change, criminalization, environmental movements, protest, repression, As global environmental indicators continue to decline, the escalating effects of climate change are being felt through increased wildfires, floods, droughts, and other natural disasters (Ripple et al. 2017). Australia [...]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.03.002 Byline: Kelly S. Fielding (a), Deborah J. Terry (b), Barbara M. Masser (b), Prashant Bordia (b), Michael A. Hogg (b) Abstract: Water quality is a key concern in the current global environment, with the need to promote practices that help to protect water quality, such as riparian zone management, being paramount. The present study used the theory of planned behaviour as a framework for understanding how beliefs influence decisions about riparian zone management. Respondents completed a survey that assessed their behavioural, normative, and control beliefs in relation to intentions to manage riparian zones on their property. The results of the study showed that, overall, landholders with strong intentions to manage their riparian zones differed significantly in terms of their beliefs compared to landholders who had weak intentions to manage their riparian zones. Strong intentions to manage riparian zones were associated with a favourable cost-benefit analysis, greater perceptions of normative support for the practice and lower perceptions of the extent to which barriers would impede management of riparian zones. It was also evident that willingness to comply with the recommendations of salient referents, beliefs about the benefits of riparian zone management and perceptions of the extent to which barriers would impede riparian zone management were most important for determining intentions to manage riparian zones. Implications for policy and extension practice are discussed. Author Affiliation: (a) School of Social Work and Applied Human Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia (b) School of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia Article History: Received 28 January 2004; Revised 11 February 2005; Accepted 2 March 2005

The theory of planned behavior is used as a framework for studying how beliefs influence decisions about riparian zone management. The results reveal that overall, landholders with strong intentions to manage their riparian zones differed significantly in terms of their beliefs compared to landholders who had weak intentions to manage their riparian zones.