ABSTRACT
This chapter explores how a situated social conflict surrounding the construction of several large dams in the Pyrenees became globalized as a result of the efforts of those who considered themselves adversely affected. In this globalized conflict, a new kind of discourse developed in which notions such as ‘equity’, ‘general interest’ and ‘minority and human rights’ played a fundamental role. The point of departure here is the emergence of a social movement whose raison d’être is preventing the construction of large dams in one specific territory, namely the Spanish Pyrenees. This chapter focuses on the discourses that this movement has constructed and sheds light on some of the concepts that sustain it, equity being a case in point. The movement directs criticism at the public administration in charge of water policy in Spain for the way in which it has been equating democracy with the concept of general interest. The effects of controversial water dam projects in Spain surpass the locally bounded implications of such projects. This conflict involves diverse and antagonistic political and civil society parties, who all use arguments of democracy, each in their own way and according to varying interpretations, with the aim of managing the conflict according to their interests and eventual triumph. The argumentative strategies employed by the opposing parties merit analysis in that they raise significant challenges for the way in which we understand and practise democracy.
