Role play action scene titled: "In 40 Years"

Characters: A citizen seeking resources to meet the community’s needs, citizens defending the community, a public administration employee representing public authorities, and a privileged employer.

The scene takes place in a shared garden. There are minerals to collect, drinking water to obtain, and a public authority office issuing resource exploitation permits. Pressures and threats are heard, bodies shift, the pace accelerates, and defenses are organized against the privileged leader who claims the majority of resources, while public authorities attempt in vain to open a space for dialogue. Gradually, the community grows discouraged in the face of the leader, who accumulates all resources through privatization. Citizens’ feelings of frustration intensify, potential endangerment of bodies arises, and even extreme sacrificial gestures are evoked. Public authorities give up and fall silent. Only the person working the land seems able to escape the urgency. On the other side of the spectrum, the leader also inhabits an untouchable sphere but behaves in a far more aggressive manner.

At a later point in time, several free associations are proposed:

Pollution and resource scarcity: pollution and climate change are already leading today to the scarcity or degradation of essential resources (breathable air, fertile soil, drinking water). Among the characters, a fear of shortage is observed, prompting the privileged individual to accumulate and protect their assets. There is also evident dismay regarding resources (“don’t know where to look”), symbolizing ecological uncertainty. Finally, the difficulty for citizens in reconciling individual and collective needs is very present. Pollution thus creates a climate of competition rather than cooperation, a backdrop of generalized mistrust.

Social polarization and inequalities rising: the privileged character embodies those who already have advantaged access to resources and who, in a crisis context, seek to protect their holdings. Opposing them, the citizens represent the majority, suffering both from pollution and from resource appropriation. The play demonstrated power dynamics crystallizing around scarce resources, with initial silent attempts at citizen resistance evolving into more physical and organized actions, and a gradual radicalization (violence, barricades, siege), reflecting social tensions that can arise when pollution and environmental degradation exacerbate inequalities. This illustrates a very real risk: in a society affected by pollution, social fractures deepen, and trust between groups erodes.

Public authorities, powerlessness and loss of legitimacy: the role of public authorities in the play illustrates the difficulty institutions face in responding to a major ecological crisis. There is a willingness to engage in dialogue but an inability to impose a solution, with recourse to higher authorities (the prefecture, Europe) → a sign of bureaucratic deflection. Citizen-characters perceive public authorities as ineffective and disconnected. In a society affected by pollution, this deficit of political legitimacy can be amplified. This leads to a loss of trust in institutions, a rise in frustration or cynicism (“blah blah blah” in the play), and sometimes the circumvention of rules through citizen self-organization.

Latent violence and collective despair: the episode of the chair wielded as a weapon and a participant’s final testimony (“it’s hard not to come to blows”) show that pollution not only causes material degradation but also social stress. As living conditions deteriorate, interpersonal tensions increase, and the fear of losing essential resources (water, food, air) can justify aggressive behavior. Despair (“I feel useless, powerless,” from public authorities; “I don’t know where to look,” regarding resources) takes over collective creativity. Pollution thus acts as a factor of psychological and social vulnerability.

Spaces of resistance and alternative imaginaries: despite everything, some characters tried to resist in other ways. Some remain in the shared garden to sow seeds, harvest gently, and seek to maintain a space for observation and care. These behaviors symbolize resilience strategies observed today: local initiatives, permaculture, community gardens, short supply chains, and citizen mutual aid. While they are not always enough to halt resource-hoarding dynamics, they offer both symbolic and tangible spaces of resistance against the destructive effects of pollution.

F=Facilitator, P=Participant