Gonzalez-Hidalgo and Zografos (2020) contend environmental conflicts are?

• A. They are only material with no emotional dimension.
• B. They are both rational and emotional, with affect shaping conflicts.
• C. Emotions are irrelevant to environmental advocacy.
• D. They are purely cultural phenomena unrelated to policy.

Answer: (B)

The main idea here is that environmental conflicts unfold through both rational analysis and emotional engagement, and feelings actively shape how these conflicts develop. Gonzalez-Hidalgo and Zografos show that people weigh scientific facts, costs, and benefits, but their judgments are filtered through values, identities, and emotions. Emotions like concern, fear, pride in place, or anger about injustice influence how problems are framed, which stakeholders feel entitled to speak, and how willing they are to compromise or resist policy changes. So even when data and economics point in a certain direction, the way people experience and care about an issue can drive different actions and outcomes.

For example, a water-use dispute might rely on technical assessments of supply and demand, but the final intensity of the conflict often hinges on community attachments to a river, trust in authorities, and fears about future livelihoods. That blend of rational considerations and emotional investment is what makes such conflicts complex and dynamic. This is why the best answer acknowledges both aspects and the central role of affect in shaping how conflicts arise, escalate, or de-escalate.