Introduction
The modern world is characterized by the fast evolution of industries and the manufacturing of a constantly growing number of goods. They are required to meet all customers’ needs and guarantee a high level of comfort for them. However, supporting the consumerist society requires the stable work of industries and the stable supply of resources required for them.
The oil industry is one of the most important spheres in the economies of developed nations, such as the USA and Canada. It determines the states’ abilities to evolve, support their international and domestic policies, and avoid financial crises. For this reason, the government’s influential agencies are interested in supporting the sector’s evolution. However, nowadays, the oil industry causes much harm to the environment, which impacts its image and results in conflict with climate action activists. Thus, the oil industry’s attempts to improve its image by using public relations or extractive populism do not improve the situation, which attracts the attention of climate change activists and results in conflict.
Consumerism and Public Relations
The threats coming from consumerism and the further development of extractive populism are often discussed in the literature. Thus, clients’ choices and desire to buy specific products or services impact the evolution of economies and industries (Thogersen, 2021). Thus, the relationship between climate change and customer behavior is complex and impacted by numerous factors (Thogersen, 2021). Thus, the accurate reflection of carbon footprint, climate-friendly products, and impacts industries have on climate are essential for promoting positive change (Thogersen, 2021).
It means that public relations (PR) acquire the top priority as the method to initiate action and outline the right way (Stavreva, 2023). PR professionals have all the tools necessary for initiating the discussion in media and ensuring individuals are informed about the current state of issues and the need for change (Stavreva, 2023). However, at the corporate level, many barriers still impact how information is provided to clients. Although some corporations have already started offering new guidelines on addressing climate change, some prefer to adhere to the old practices (Stavreva, 2023). As a result, there is a basis for developing the conflict.
Extractive Populism
The idea of extractive populism can be linked to corporate public relations and how relations with customers are built. It implies the focus on the need to continue extracting various natural resources as they are the core of the economy and state’s wealth. Thus, one of extractive populism’s central claims is that the extraction of natural resources, such as oil, gas, and coal, comprises the core of the state’s economy and benefits every citizen (Gunster, 2019).
In such a way, the developed extractive sector is represented as the public good central to the work of the state, generating income and providing millions of individuals with jobs and the ability to earn (Gunster, 2019). For this reason, the main focus of corporate public relations is supporting extractive populism and ensuring it remains the dominant ideology affecting communities and consumers. Furthermore, it helps shape mentalities and behaviors to guarantee that individuals are ready to follow existing patterns and avoid critical change.
Petro-Populism
Petro-populism is another form of extractive populism focused on justifying the need to further develop the oil industry. Thus, the fossil fuel industry and its supporters create aggressive and powerful forms of petro-nationalism, demonizing all critics and presenting them as enemies (Gunster et al., 2021). Emphasizing that extractivism is under attack by using corporate media, the agencies cultivate the fears of external enemies (Gunster, 2019).
It is performed by using various organizations, such as Canada’s Energy Citizens (CEC), created and supported by the petroleum and oil producers to alter the industry’s image and ensure it is supported by the majority (Enoch, 2022). It encourages ordinary citizens to become the industry’s advocates and reduces the pressure on it (Enoch, 2022). In such a way, using corporate resources and available channels, the industry and its representatives try to create the vision that extractivism is essential for economies and that there is no alternative to the further development of the industry.
In such a way, extractive populism is essential to the existing corporate public relations. It is focused on supporting the consumerist behaviors in individuals and transforming them into supporters. For this reason, organizations sponsored by oil and petroleum producers are viewed as forces of climate denial (Enoch, 2022). They support the idea that limits to the further industry’s evolution are betrayal and threats to citizens’ well-being.
At the same time, the current speed of the industry’s development poses a serious threat to the environment. The research states that two-thirds of global industrial greenhouse emissions are associated with the activity of companies belonging to the industry (Grasso, 2019). For this reason, climate change activists emphasize the need to limit the work of the sphere and reduce its negative impact on the environment (Grasso, 2019). However, as stated previously, any attempt to interfere in the work of oil and gas production industries is presented as an attack on the nation’s security and well-being. As a result, there is a basis for the further development of the conflict between the oil industry and climate action.
Conflict Between Oil Industry and Climate Action
Therefore, the differences in the views on the problem trigger public debates and give rise to the opposition. Thus, extractive populism’s third major claim assumes that collective political mobilization is the only way to protect the national interests from the forces threatening it (Gunster, 2019). In many cases, these forces might include environmental protection agencies and parties insisting on addressing climate change issues. Thus, climate action, on the contrary, cultivates the idea of political and social mobilization as the way to recognize the existence of the problem and start debates to ensure its comprehensive investigation and discussion (Han & Ahn, 2020).
Furthermore, the lobbying of oil and petroleum companies is viewed as the central threat to the fair and objective investigation of the theme and offering effective solutions (Han & Ahn, 2020). For this reason, extractive populism, as the trend threatening the environment, is viewed as the undesired one by most climate change agencies. It limits access to social media and its use to cultivate new approaches among consumers and guarantee they realize the scope of change.
Thus, the paradox and the complex situation in the sector can be admitted. The model of the global industry currently in place is not compatible with the Paris Agreement (Halttunen et al., 2020). Additionally, the industry meets two significant and equally important challenges. First, it has to show stable and high financial results to meet obligations to shareholders and support the further development of the state (Halttunen et al., 2020). It requires a further increase in the number of extracted resources.
Second, the industry has to address climate change issues and contribute to reducing its environmental impact (Halttunen et al., 2020). As a result, the companies are offered to perform contradictory measures that might impact their performance and outcomes. The conflict between the interests of extractive populists and climate change activists remains unresolved, and the situation is becoming more complex.
Lack of Understanding and Resources
At the same time, the discussion around the problem of petro-populism often disregards a critical aspect. The fact is that states depending on oil cannot limit extraction and production because of the lack of alternatives, diversification of their economies, and ways to replace the energy source with new, more sustainable ones (Halttunen et al., 2022). It means that although some companies and actors within the sphere might realize the necessity of action, they might lack resources, regulations, and legal framework to shift towards new practices and guarantee they can fulfill the needs of all parties and stakeholders (Halttunen et al., 2022). In such a way, the diversification of economies might be viewed as one way to attain the industry’s sustainable goals and ensure the conflict between parties is resolved. However, there is a lack of tools and capabilities to shift to new approaches and methods.
Furthermore, in many cases, the corporate media is supportive of companies working within the sphere, which complicates the objective discussion of the problem. It acts as the industry advocate, introducing the idea that climate change is not a result of the spheres’ work and increased amounts of extraction but is linked to the activity of third parties sabotaging the economy (Gunster, 2019).
Moreover, in many cases, the defensive responses might imply the transfer of responsibility and projecting tension to other stakeholders (Halttunen et al., 2022). Media supports this incentive and guarantees the situation remains unchanged and the extractive populism remains topical. At the same time, climate change activists and supporters do not have access to such resources and cannot support their claims and make them part of the public discussion. As a result, a disbalance of power is observed due to the existing corporate culture and the model of public relations supported by most media.
Conclusion
Altogether, extractive populism is one of the modern trends impacting communities and the development of consumerist behavior patterns in individuals. It implies the model of corporate public relations emphasizing the necessity of the further development of the industry and its central role in the development of society and the generation of benefits. The major assumptions of the paradigm state that extractivism is central to the nation, that its attack might undermine the public good, and that collective mobilization to protect the sphere is vital.
However, these ideas contradict the core values of climate change activists and create the basis for the development of the conflict. The sphere is one of the major pollutants and causes critical harm to the environment; however, social media controlled by oil producers focuses on creating a positive image and gathering public support. The lack of alternatives and the unequal access to resources make the struggle unequal; however, it is essential to create the basis for future action to avoid critical outcomes.
References
Enoch, S. (2022). The oil industry’s Frankenstein. Briarpatch. Web.
Grasso, M. (2019). Oily politics: A critical assessment of the oil and gas industry’s contribution to climate change. Energy Research & Social Science, 50, 106-115. Web.
Gunster, S. (2019). Extractive populism and the future of Canada. CCPA. Web.
Gunster, S., Fleet, D., & Neubauer, R. (2021). Challenging petro-nationalism: Another Canada is possible? Journal of Canadian Studies, 55(1), 57-87. Web.
Halttunen, K., Slade, R., & Staffell, I. (2020). “We don’t want to be the bad guys”: Oil industry’s sensemaking of the sustainability transition paradox. Energy Research & Social Science, 92. Web.
Han, H., & Ahn, S. W. (2020). Youth mobilization to stop global climate change: Narratives and impact. Sustainability, 12(10), 4127. Web.
Stavreva, S. (2023). Climate change: Can public relations help save the world? Forbes. Web.
Thogersen, J. (2021). Consumer behavior and climate change: Consumers need considerable assistance. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, 9-14. Web.