Analyze

“The large question this study addresses is the following: How do people make sense of (and cope with) toxic danger? The Martinezes’ story anticipates the complexity of the answer(s): physical and psychological suffering is compounded by doubts, disagreements, suspicions, fears, and endless waiting.” (4)

‘Flammable is a story of people’s confusion, mistakes and/or blindness regarding the toxicity that surrounds them. Flammable is also a story of silent habituation to contamination and of almost complete absence of mass protest against toxic onslaught’ (4)

“Schoolteachers, journalists, and lawyers are also part and parcel of daily life in Flammable. Together, all these actors contribute to what Flammable residents know about their place. They also influence what they ignore, what they want to know, and what they misrecognize. Government officials, company personnel, physicians, teachers, journalists, and lawyers jointly (but hardly cooperatively, given that their opinions don’t count equally) shape locals’ experiences of contamination and risk. This book examines how and why this production of shared knowledge (or lack thereof ) occurs.” (5)

“All in all, confusions, bewilderments, divisions, rumors, frustrations, and hopes are making Flammable residents wait—they wait for more testing, for further and better knowledge, for relocation, and for the “huge” settlement with one of the “powerful companies” that will, in the words of a neighbor, “allow us to move out.” This waiting is, as we will show, one of the ways in which Flammable residents experience submission.” (6) 

“We did our best to learn how to listen, look, and touch with respect and care, knowing with Nancy Scheper-Hughes (1992:28) that “seeing, listening, touching, recording, can be, if done with care and sensitivity, acts of fraternity and sisterhood, acts of solidarity. Above all, they are the work of recognition. Not to look, not to touch, not to record, can be the hostile act, the act of indifference and of turning away.” (14)

‘… the culture of toxic uncertainty is a complex web of meanings and shared understandings’ (108)

Labor of confusion: “During the long period of slowly germinating contamination, the actions of government authorities toward pollution in the neighborhood were less consistent and more contradictory than either the denial or underestimation that has been documented in the existing literature. Those multiple incongruous actions gave shape to what we term, extending the insights of students of ideology and symbolic power (Thompson 1984; Eagleton 1991; Bourdieu 1991), a labor of confusion that has a decisive effect on shared (mis)understandings.” (10)

 Ulrich Beck, social invisibility, lack of “social thinking” about environmental issues (Beck 1992)

Bourdieu, symbolic violence - misrecognition of power structures on part of the oppressed enables domination

Toxic uncertainty: “a way of experiencing toxic suffering that is shaped by what we call, borrowing from Charles Tilly (1996), the interacting “invisible elbows” of external power forces and of everyday routine survival struggles” (6)

Flammable is an account of how people in a particular place make sense of slow, invisible environmental pollution. The people of Flammable live in an Argentinean shantytown located next to petrochemical companies and storage facilities. They have been deeply affected by the rise in unemployment in the 1990s, with most residents subsisting on part-time manual jobs at one of the companies, retirement pensions, state welfare programmes and what else they can find. The area in which these residents live is known and recognized by government experts to be contaminated and unsafe for human habitation–and yet widespread confusion and uncertainty amongst residents and a lack of government actions means that the shantytown continues to exist. Auyero and Swistun explore the multitude of influences that ‘‘shape what people see, what they don’t see, what they know, what they don’t know, and what they would like to know, what they do and what they don’t do’’ (145). They show how residents gradually naturalize their situations, which, combined with the mystification of dominant discourses, contributes to their quiescence in the face of contamination. 

While the organization was founded by Taiwan's citizens to uphold environmental justice movements centered on Taiwanese citizens, its involvement in Vietnam's Formosa case signals that the organization itself may be broadening their scope in future endeavors. In leveraging its resources to seek redress for victims outside of Taiwan, ERF may need to extend their networks to international agencies as well as engage with communities not directly reachable to its workers. As Vietnam's Formosa case also concerns dealings with an authoritarian government, restrictions on speech, police brutality, and censureship on the part of Vietnam's government may render it difficult for ERF and affiliated agencies to obtain all relevant information pertaining to the case.

• Website: https://erf.org.tw/about/

• Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWiSqQq9d56aRjUabg3ZRfg

• Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/ERFTW

• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/erftw/ 

Environmental Rights Foundation (ERF)  was founded due to the result of the court settlement regarding the lawsuit on the 3rd phase expansion of Central Taiwan Science Park (CTSP) between farmers and the government. As such, the organization’s focus remains centered on ensuring community members' environmental rights across different government development plans.

https://erf.org.tw/news/ 

ERF has published over 150 press releases documenting their engagement communities in seeking government actions to address environmental disasters. These press releases include up-to-date news on each relevant environmental justice case the agency is currently working on. One example of a recent press release includes information issued by the Formosa Plastics Vietnam Steel Alliance, which consists of six non-governmental organizations supervising the case. Statements issued within this press release comes from members of Amnesty International Taiwan, Reporters  without Borderes, Environmental Lawyer's Association, and the Environmental Rights Protection Foundation. 

In regards to the Formosa case, ERF has collaborated with the Justice for Formosa Victims (JFFV)- a Vietnamese-American based organization- to coordinate efforts in seeking redress to affected communities.

• Drawn from website,community engagement  activities undertaken by ERF in Taiwan includes:

• At Reservoir Planning Areas: ERF has organized the International Day of Action for Rivers events on March 14 for two consecutive years in 2018 and 2019. The events aim at drawing the society’s attention on reservoir issues through local concerts or speed-walking events.

• At Solar Power Planning Areas: ERF has organized with local indigenous people the Tribe Land and Sunshine Workshop so that the local communities know more about solar energy and the practicing of indigenous peoples’ right of consultation and consent and the right of benefit sharing.

• At So-to-Be-Eliminated Fishing Villages Whose Land is Acquired by the Tourism Industry and Hotels: ERF organizes courses on urban planning procedures and more.

• Near Factories of the High Technology Industry: ERF organizes courses on communities’ right to know, health risk reports, and more.

• The organization has also established the following:

• Citizen Monitoring the Sixth Naphtha Cracker Environmental Rights Promotion Action Platform (Citizen Monitoring the Sixth Naphtha Cracker Platform): The Sixth Naphtha Cracker of Formosa Plastics is the largest petrochemical industrial park in central Taiwan, impacting the local environment and the health of residents greatly. Research has shown that the incidence of cancer is significantly higher in residents living near the petrochemical industrial park. Taixi Village of Changhua even has the name “cancer village”. The platform was co-established by civic organizations and local residents, aiming at urging the government to enhance its capability of environmental governance and conduct adequate environmental monitoring to realize the public’s right to know.

• Legalization of Unregistered Factories on Agricultural Land: At present, there are over 134,500 unregistered factories on agricultural land in Taiwan, occupying an area of 13,859 hectares. ERF has been working with civic organizations since 2017, organizing legal policy lobbying, urging the government to amend laws and regulations, and publicizing data and information for better policy tracking and judgement. 

• Judicial Remedies for Transnational Corporation Pollution (Ocean Pollution of Formosa Ha-Tinh Steel Corporation): ERF organized a lawyer group to assist the 7,875 Vietnamese victims. We filed for a civil lawsuit for compensation against the shareholders and board of directors of Formosa Ha-Tinh Steel Corporation, hoping that transnational corporations bear responsibilities of pollution.

ERF members include lawyers and environmental experts.  The board of directors of the ERF are nominated by governmental authorities, local farmers, lawyers, and environmental experts. Of special note to this case is Hsin-Hsuan Sun, a researcher at ERF. She maintains  an active online presence to educate others on the progress of the Formosa case in Vietnam and raise awareness on international policy developments with direct relevance to environmental justice cases. For example, her recent tweets call for greater involvement of underprivileged and indigenous communities in renewables development.