Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 15, Issue 5, pp 1337–1363 | Cite as

Elites, climate change and agency in a developing society: the Chilean case

  • Cristian Parker
  • Mario Letelier
  • Juan Muñoz


Faced with global climate change, local elites are confronted with the main dilemma of a developing country: development requires economic growth, but this effort also requires consideration of environmental factors and sustainable patterns of production and consumption. Based on empirical evidence from qualitative research on businesses and political elites in Chile—a paradigmatic South American middle-income country—this paper explores the extent to which local elites are aware of the severity of challenges posed by global climate change and identify main climate change concerns in their discourse. The degree to which domestic elites are aware of the paradigm shift they must assume toward clean industrial production is a key issue of environmental governance that involves private non-governmental actors. This paper gives clues to a better understanding of what is happening with strategic actors in developing nations and their understanding of their decision-making capacity concerning environmental policy and investments for facing global climate change. The main conclusion of the research is that awareness of climate change in local elites’ discourse is relative. It is not accompanied by a full acceptance of their agency and is not leading to a paradigm shift toward a clean model of development because of domestic elites’ position within globalization processes.


Climate change Elites Environmental governance Sustainable development Agency Developing country 



The authors want to acknowledge the support of FONDECYT (National Fund for Science and Technology, Government of Chile) for its contribution to the research on which this paper is based and the International Research Project ENGOV, Environmental Governance in Latin America and the Caribbean: Developing Frameworks for Sustainable and Equitable Natural Resource, EUROPEAN UNION, ENGOV, FP7-SSH-2010-3, Project, 2011–2015, of which the authors are the Chilean partners. The main results of this paper come from the project FONDECYT No. 1090797; others comes from the project FONDECYT No. 1120662. Some conceptual frameworks’ inputs for this paper are driven from the International Research Project ENGOV from its WP3 and WP4. We thank Cristián Cuevas, Claudia Oliva, Rodrigo Guerra, Gabriela Flores, Rigoberto Muñoz, Claudio Peralta and Luis Peña, who made valuable contributions to the research. We specially thank Benedicte Bull for helping in the conceptualization of elites and the environment and the anonymous advisors that read the manuscript. Their comments have been of real value.


  1. Aberbach, J. D., & Rockman, B. A. (2002). Conducting and coding elite interviews. PS: Political Science and Politics, 35(4), 673–676.Google Scholar
  2. Acquatella, J. (2008). Energía y cambio climático: Oportunidades para una política energética integrada en América Latina y el Caribe. Santiago de Chile: Naciones Unidas, CEPAL, ATZ.Google Scholar
  3. AIDA (Asociacion Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente). (2011). Principal human rights impacts of climate change in Latin America. A report by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense.
  4. Akerlof, K., & Maibach, E. W. (2011). A rose by any other name …? What members of the general public prefer to call “climate change”. Climatic Change Letters, 1, 21.
  5. Alimonda, H. (2011). La naturaleza colonizada, ecología política y minería en América Latina. Buenos Aires: Ciccus, CLACSO.Google Scholar
  6. Arroyo, G., & Suarez, A. (2006). Responsabilidad social corporativa, Una Mirada global. Santiago de Chile: Universidad Alberto Hurtado.Google Scholar
  7. Barthes, R. (1966). Introduction à l’analyse structurale des récits. Communications, 8(8), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baser, H., & Morgan, P. (2008). Capacity, change and performance—Study report. Maastricht: European Centre.Google Scholar
  9. Baud, M., de Castro, F., & Hogenboom, B. (2011). Environmental governance in Latin America: Towards an integrative research agenda. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 90, 79–88.Google Scholar
  10. Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  11. Berry, J. M. (2002). Validity and reliability issues in elite interviewing. PS: Political Science and Politics, 35(4), 679–682.Google Scholar
  12. Binger, A., Georgieva, K., Khosla, A., Makram-Ebeid, M., Savane, M. A., & Umaña, A. (2002). Capacity 21: Evaluation report, 1993–2001. New York: UNDP.Google Scholar
  13. Brammer, S., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1), 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Braun, R. (2010). Social participation and climate change. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 12, 777–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brenner, L., & Job, H. (2012). Challenges to actor-oriented environmental governance: Examples from three Mexican biosphere reserves. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 103(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brinkmann, S. (2007). Could interviews be epistemic? An alternative to qualitative opinion polling. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 1116–1138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bryant, R. L., & Bailey, S. (1997). Third world political ecology. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Bull, B. (2010). The global elite, public–private partnerships and multilateral governance. In J. Clapp & R. Wilkinson (Eds.), Global governance, poverty and indequality (pp. 209–234). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Bull, B., & Sundt Næsse, L. N. (2012). Changing elites, institutions and environmental governance. Analytical framework report. Amsterdam: ENGOV, Proyect 266710, FP7-SSH-2010-3; D.3.1. Available in
  20. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cashore, B. (2002). Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How Non-State Market-Driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule-making authority. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 15(4), 503–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. CEPAL (Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe). (2009). La Economía del Cambio Climático en América Latina y el Caribe, Síntesis 2009. Santiago de Chile: Naciones Unidas.Google Scholar
  23. Clapp, J. (1998). The privatization of global environmental governance: ISO 14000 and the developing world. Global Governance, 4(3), 295–316.Google Scholar
  24. CONAMA (Comisión Nacional del Medio Ambiente). (2006). Cambio Climático: Amenazas y Oportunidades para Chile, Estrategia nacional de cambio climático. Santiago de Chile: Gobierno de Chile, CONAMA.Google Scholar
  25. CONAMA (Comisión Nacional del Medio Ambiente). (2008). Plan de Acción Nacional de Cambio Climático 2008–2012. Santiago de Chile: Gobierno de Chile, CONAMA.Google Scholar
  26. Corporación Latinobarómetro. (2011). Informe 2011. Santiago de Chile: Corporación Latinobarómetro. Available at
  27. Cross, M. K. D. (2012). Rethinking epistemic communities twenty years later. Review of International Studies, 1–24. FirstView Article/October . Available on CJO 2012. doi: 10.1017/S0260210512000034.
  28. Cubillos, A., & Estenssoro, F. (Eds.). (2011). Energía y Medio Ambiente: Una ecuación difícil. Santiago de Chile: Ed. USACH.Google Scholar
  29. Curtis, S., Gesler, W., Smith, G., & Washburn, S. (2000). Approaches to sampling and case selection in qualitative research: Examples in the geography of health. Social Science and Medicine, 50, 1001–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cutlip, L., & Fath, B. D. (2012). Relationship between carbon emissions and economic development: Case study of six countries. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 14, 433–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Devers, K. J., & Frankel, R. M. (2000). Study design in qualitative research—2: Sampling and data collection strategies. Education for Health, 13(2), 263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. DeWit, A., & Tetsunari, I. (2011). The “power elite” and environmental-energy policy in Japan. The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focusl, 9(4), 1–17.Google Scholar
  33. Dummet, K. (2006). Drivers for corporate environmental responsibility. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8, 375–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Dunlap, R. E., & van Liere, K. D. (1984). Commitment to the dominant social paradigm and concern for environmental quality. Social Science Quarterly, 65, 1013–1028.Google Scholar
  35. Elites Parlamentarias de América Latina. (2012). Salamanca: OIR, Observatorio de élites parlamentarias en América Latina. Accessed February 20, 2012.
  36. Enkvist, P., & Vanthournout, H. (2007). How companies think about climate change: A McKinsey global survey. McKinsey Quarterly.
  37. Estenssoro, F. (2008). Medio Ambiente e Ideología, la discusión pública en Chile, 1992–200. Santiago de Chile: Ariadna-USACH.Google Scholar
  38. Fairweather, J., & Rinne, T. (2012). Clarifying a basis for qualitative generalization using approaches that identify shared culture. Qualitative Research, 12(4), 473–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ferreira da Costa, L. (org). (2011). A Quesatao Ambiental na América Latina. Campinas, SP: Ed. Unicamp.Google Scholar
  40. Ford, L. H. (2003). Challenging global environmental governance: Social movement agency and global civil society. Global Environmental Politics, 3(2), 120–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Introduction of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  42. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Gore, A. (2009). Our choice. New York: Melchor Media.Google Scholar
  44. Greimas, A. J. (1966a). Sémantique Structurale. Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar
  45. Greimas, A. J. (1966b). Éléments pour une théorie de l’interprétation du récit mythique. Communications, 8(8), 28–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Greimas, A. J. (1976). Sémiotique et Sciences Sociales. Paris: Du Seuil.Google Scholar
  47. Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35. Scholar
  48. Harvey, W. S. (2011). Strategies for conducting elite interviews. Qualitative Research, 11(4), 431–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hogenboom, B., & Fernández, A. E. (2009). The new left and mineral politics: What’s new? Revista Europea de Estudios Latinoamericanos y del Caribe, 87, 93–102.Google Scholar
  50. Inglehart, R. (1995). Public support for environmental protection: Objective problems and subjective values in 43 countries. PS: Political Science and Politics, 28, 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change). (2007). Climate change, synthesis report. Geneva: IPCC, OMM, PNUMA.
  52. ITC-ILO (International Training Center, International Labor Organization). (2010). Innovative regional strategies for more green jobs. Turin: ITC, ILO.Google Scholar
  53. Joignant, A., & Guell, P. (Eds.). (2011). Notables, Tecnócratas y Mandarines, Elementos de sociología de las elites en Chile, (1990–2010). Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Universidad Diego Portales.Google Scholar
  54. Kellstedt, P. M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Analysis, 28(1), 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Korveboja, T. (1993). The environmental problems and politics of power. Review on the African elite. Nordic Journal of African Studies, 2(1), 140–153.Google Scholar
  56. Krosnick, J. A., MacInnis, B. (2011). National survey of American public opinion on global warming. Stanford University with Ipsos and Reuters. Available online at
  57. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lashof, D. A. (2011, October 23). Shifting attitudes on global warming. The New York Times, Letters to the Editor.Google Scholar
  59. Leff, E. (1994). Ecología y capital: Racionalidad ambiental, democracia participativa y desarrollo sustentable. México: Siglo XXI.Google Scholar
  60. Leiserowitz, A. (2006). Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values. Climatic Change, 77, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Smith, N., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2011). Climate change in the American Mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in November 2011. Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. New Haven, CT: Yale University and George Mason University.
  62. Lorenzoni, I., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2006). Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Climatic Change, 77, 73–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Maassarani, T. (2007). Redacting the science of climate change: An investigative and synthesis report. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Project.
  64. Mansilla, H. C. F., & Collo, M. J. (1997). Economic growth and the environment: Elite perceptions of development in Bolivia. Journal of Third World Studies, XIV(1), 133–162.Google Scholar
  65. Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13, 522–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Martínez, M. (2006). La carrera parlamentaria, ¿la calidad importa? In M. A. Sáez (Ed.), Partidos Políticos en América Latina (pp. 175–214). Madrid: Fund. Carolina, Siglo XXI.Google Scholar
  67. McCarthy, J. (2004). Pivatizing conditions of production: Trade agreements as neoliberal environmental governance. Geoforum, 35, 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Mikecz, R. (2012). Interviewing elites addressing methodological issues. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(6), 482–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Mohai, P., Simões, S., & Brechin, R. S. (2010). Environmental concerns, values and meanings in the Beijing and Detroit metropolitan areas. International Sociology, 25, 778–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Mumme, S. P., Bath, C. R., & Assetto, V. J. (1988). Political development and environmental policy in Mexico. Latin American Research Review, 23, 7–34.Google Scholar
  71. Nath, P. K., & Behera, B. (2011). A critical review of impact of and adaptation to climate change in developed and developing economies. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 13, 141–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Neimeyer, S., Petts, J., Hobson, K., & McGregor, G. (2004). Understanding thresholds in human behavior and responses to rapid climate change. Working paper 04/01. Edgbaston: The University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
  73. Netzer, N. (2011). El nuevo Acuerdo Ecológico Global (Green New Deal Global) ¿Gestión de crisis o cambio sostenible de paradigma?. Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.Google Scholar
  74. Nisbet, M. C. (2009). Communicating climate change: Why frames matter for public engagement. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51(2), 12–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Omer, A. M. (2011). Energy and environment: Applications and sustainable development. British Journal of Environment & Climate Change, 1(4), 118–158.Google Scholar
  76. Paavola, J. (2007). Institutions and environmental governance: A reconceptualization. Ecological Economics, 63, 93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Parker, C. (2008). Science and technology in undergraduate students’ worldview, shaped by globalization: The Chilean case. Perspective on Global Development and Technology, 7, 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Parker, C. (2010). An overview of the IPCC Report in Latin America and the Chilean case. In M.O.R.E. 23/1st CC+I—Seminar of The Geneva Association, Working Paper Series, 356, 1–17.
  79. Parker, C. (2011a). Global warming, elites and energy in Latin America: The Chilean case. Journal of Environmental Science & Engineering, 5(12), 1702–1714.Google Scholar
  80. Parker, C. (2011b). Calentamiento global y elites: Entre las energías convencionales y las energías alternativas. In A. Cubillos & F. Estenssoro (Eds.), Energía y Medio Ambiente : Una ecuación difícil (pp. 103–124). Santiago de Chile: Ed. USACH.Google Scholar
  81. Parker, C., & Muñoz, J. (2012). Elites universitarias y cambio climático. Ambiente & sociedade, 15(2), 195–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Payne, G., & Williams, M. (2005). Generalization in qualitative research. Sociology, 39(2), 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Peritore, N. P. (1993). Environmental attitudes of Indian elites: Challenging western postmodernist models. Asian Survey, 33(8), 804–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Pidgeon, N. (2010). International dimensions of climate change, report 5: Public understanding of and attitudes towards climate change. Cardiff: Cardiff University, Government Office for Science, UK Government.Google Scholar
  85. Pirages, D. C. & Ehrlich, P. R. (1974) Ark II: Social response to environmental imperatives. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  86. Ramus, C. A., & Montiel, I. (2005). When are corporate environmental policies a form of greenwashing? Business & Society, 44, 377–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Richards, D. (1996). Elite interviewing: Approaches and pitfalls. Politics, 16, 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Riley, E. D. (1991). Public opinion in the 1980s: Clear consensus, ambiguous commitment. Environment, 33(8), 10–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Rogner, H. H., Zhou, D., Bradley, R., Crabbé, P., Edenhofer, O., Hare, B., et al. (2007). Introduction. In B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosh, & L. A. Meyer (Eds.), Climate change 2007: Mitigation contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Ross, R. M., & Warren, D. A. (2008). Public awareness. Encyclopedia of global warming and climate change. SAGE.
  91. Samaniego, J. (2009). Cambio climático y desarrollo en América Latina y el Caribe: una reseña. Santiago de Chile: CEPAL, GTZ, Naciones Unidas.Google Scholar
  92. Satterthwaite, D. (2009). The implications of population growth and urbanization for climate change. Environment and Urbanization, 21, 545–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Scerri, A. (2009). Paradoxes of increased individuation and public awareness of environmental issues. Environmental Politics, 18(4), 467–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Silva, P. (2010). En el nombre de la razón. Tecnócratas y política en Chile. Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Universidad Diego Portales.Google Scholar
  95. Stern, N. (2006). Review report on the economics of climate change. UK: HM Treasury.
  96. Taylor, S. J., & Bodgan, R. (1992). Introducción a los Métodos Cualitativos de Investigación. Barcelona: Paidós.Google Scholar
  97. Tironi, E. (1999). La irrupción de las masas y el malestar de las élites. Santiago de Chile: Editorial Grijalbo.Google Scholar
  98. Tomich, D. (2008). The order of historical time: The longue durée and micro-history. Colloquium the longue durée and world-systems analysis. Binghamton: Fernand Braudel Center, Binghamton University, October 24–25.Google Scholar
  99. Tong, Y. (2007). Bureaucracy meets the environment: Elite perceptions in six Chinese cities. China Quarterly, 189, 100–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2007). Human development report 20072008, fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided world. New York: UNDP.
  101. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2011a). Human development report 2011, sustainability and equity: A better future for all. New York: UNDP.Google Scholar
  102. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2011b). Environment and energy and capacity development, practitioner’s guide: Capacity development for environmental sustainability 2011. New York, United Nations Plaza: UNDP.Google Scholar
  103. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) (2010). UNEP year book, new science and developments in our changing environment, 2010. Nairobi: Division of Early Warning and Assessment (DEWA), United Nations Environment Programme, 1–12. Accessed February 9, 2012.
  104. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). (2011). Towards a green economy: Pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradicationA synthesis for policy makers. UNEP.
  105. Van Dijk, T. (2003). Racismo y discurso de las élites. Barcelona: Gedisa.Google Scholar
  106. Van Dijk, T. (2008). El Discurso como estructura y proceso. Barcelona: Gedisa.Google Scholar
  107. World Bank. (2008). Desarrollo y cambio climático Marco estratégico para el Grupo del Banco Mundial, Borrador de consulta. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  108. World Bank (2010a). Informe sobre Desarrollo Mundial 2010, Desarrollo y Cambio Climático, Panorama general un nuevo clima para el desarrollo. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  109. World Bank. (2010b). Public attitudes toward climate change: Findings from a multi-country poll. Washington, DC: World Development Report, World Bank.Google Scholar
  110. WVS. (no date). World value survey. Available online at:
  111. Zuckerman, H. (1972). Interviewing an ultra-elite. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Advanced StudiesUniversidad de Santiago de ChileSantiago de ChileChile
  2. 2.CICESUniversidad de Santiago de ChileSantiago de ChileChile

Personalised recommendations