Slow violence is a type of harm that happens slowly over time and may not be easily seen. Unlike sudden or dramatic violence, slow violence develops gradually and changes over many years. It can lead to problems like harm to the environment, long-term pollution, and climate change. Slow violence is also connected to unfair treatment of people in environmental issues, known as environmental racism.

The idea of slow violence began in the 1960s with the concept of structural violence. In 1969, Johan Galtung introduced the idea of structural violence, which describes harm caused by unfair systems. Some people believe structural violence and slow violence are related because unfair systems can lead to slow violence over time. However, slow violence is different because it happens over many years or generations, not just because of unfair systems.

The term "slow violence" was first used by Rob Nixon in his 2011 book Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. Nixon describes slow violence as harm that happens slowly and is not always visible. He explains that people without resources or those living in poverty are most affected by slow violence because it is based on unfair treatment in society. The term has since been used in areas beyond environmental issues.

Different people have different ideas about slow violence. Thom Davies says slow violence is not always hidden from everyone, but may be hidden from certain people. He contrasts this with structural violence, which does not change over time or place. Davies also notes that not understanding how slow violence works can lead to its effects. Ahman explains that both slow violence and how people respond to it involve how time is managed. Shannon O'Lear says slow violence is not direct or obvious and can result from unfair control over how people think or understand issues.

Digital slow violence refers to harm that happens slowly online, such as long-term online harassment or sharing personal information without permission. These actions can harm people’s well-being over time, even if they are not immediately obvious.

Types of slow violence

The concept of slow violence has changed over time and includes the following examples:

Communities living near chemical factories face harmful pollution, which is considered a type of violence. People affected by this type of slow violence notice the effects over time. Thom Davies studied this in Freetown, Louisiana, where 136 chemical plants are located. This situation is an example of environmental racism because the area is mostly home to African Americans.

In 2009, a trash-burning energy project called the Fairfield Renewable Energy Project was planned for Curtis Bay, Maryland. The project aimed to power other areas and was considered a renewable energy source. However, community members, students, activists, and scholar Chloe Ahmann opposed the plan. They argued that the project would worsen existing pollution in the area, which already had many industries, including chemical, oil, and waste facilities. Over time, these industries have caused health problems like certain cancers, asthma, and birth defects in the neighborhood. Some residents felt these conditions were normal, while others were frustrated about the lack of clear connections between their health and the pollution they faced. The project was stopped, but it highlighted other slow violence caused by the industrial environment in Curtis Bay.

In India, the Jharia coalfields are the largest and longest-running coal mines in the country. Coal mining is an extractive process that takes resources from the earth. This process causes slow violence because it harms workers and the environment over time. Workers are exposed to harmful chemicals like sulfur dioxide and methane, which can cause breathing problems and nervous system damage. Before mining began, the area had forests and tribal communities, which were destroyed to make space for the mines. These communities were also forced into low-paying jobs and faced environmental damage, such as polluted soil and water, and unsafe land conditions. Experts say this is due to poor mining practices over many years.

The coal industry supports modern energy use, which improves life by using more efficient energy sources. However, the harm caused by mining is often hidden from people who use the energy. In the Jharia coalfields, the distance between the mines and urban areas makes the effects of slow violence less visible to those who benefit from the energy.

Slow violence has also affected Indigenous peoples in Yuquot, British Columbia. In the late 1960s, the Canadian government moved Indigenous people from Yuquot to another area called Ahaminaquus Indian Reserve 12. A chemical mill was built nearby, causing pollution and damaging the land. Over time, Indigenous people lost their rights to live on the land and to seek help for health issues caused by the pollution. This loss of cultural practices and land degradation is described as modern-day colonialism.

In the United States, police actions have been linked to slow violence against Black and Brown communities. Researchers say that police use racial and class-based harm, which causes deep emotional pain for people of color. This pain affects groups for a long time and changes their future.

In Hyderabad, India, women face slow violence because they live in poor urban areas with limited resources. They struggle with health problems, unemployment, hunger, and poor sanitation. Their movement is restricted due to safety concerns and lack of money. Similar issues are seen in Bangladesh, where slow violence affects women during and after disasters over many years.

Slow violence also includes the long-term effects of women being underrepresented in health care. For example, women are often misdiagnosed or not included in medical research because of old-fashioned ideas that favored men. This lack of representation harms women’s health today. As Rob Nixon explained, slow violence can grow over time and cause serious harm.

Resistance to slow violence

Communities affected by slow violence can fight back using methods called slow resistance. Slow resistance includes actions like protests, using rights in public ways, daily acts of resistance, hunger strikes, and other forms. It acts as a general term that covers both organized and unorganized ways of resisting. An example is global efforts against racial violence during the COVID-19 pandemic, as described by Pain.

Resistance has been studied by scholars like Foucault, who said resistance happens where there is power and violence. Abu-Luhgod believed it is easier to notice resistance than to first understand power. Recognizing resistance, especially slow resistance, can help identify slow violence. Some views say resistance is a deliberate choice made by people with less power through how they speak, but this idea has been criticized for being too limited.

Resistance to slow violence often takes the form of environmental movements. These groups may not separate environmental and social justice issues. For example, Kenya’s Green Belt Movement fights against the slow harm of deforestation and soil erosion. The movement connects environmental protection with women’s rights because environmental damage and the loss of economic resources during colonial times often affected women.

Slow nonviolence, as described by Piedalue, is a way to fight violence by focusing on long-term, small changes. It not only responds to violence but also creates new ideas for peaceful relationships. Methods include protests, media involvement, and public events, but they mostly work through everyday life, like at home or school.

Other studies, like Chloe Ahmann’s report on the Fairfield Renewable Energy Project, describe three ways time can be used to resist slow violence: incrementality, deferral, and concentration. Incrementality works slowly, like small wins in laws or building public awareness over time. Deferral uses long legal or judicial processes to delay harmful actions. Concentration uses deadlines to push for quick decisions.

Environmental photography helps show or stop slow violence. Photos can reveal the hidden effects of slow violence, especially when it happens far from public view. For example, photos of the Jharia coalfields, as described by Meenakshi S. and Krupa Shah, show the slow harm of mining while using the fast impact of images to draw attention. These photos expose the real effects of industries that take resources, helping people resist slow violence by sharing these issues with more people.

Digital slow violence

Rachel Brydolf-Horwitz studies digital slow violence, which builds on Rob Nixon’s idea of slow violence. Traditional views of violence focus on sudden, loud, and visible actions. Slow violence, however, happens slowly and adds up over time. It often goes unnoticed because it is hard to see and happens over a long period. In the digital world, this type of violence is hidden even more because digital tools and the ways people use them are complex and constantly changing.

In her research, Brydolf-Horwitz uses the story of Rehtaeh Parsons from Nova Scotia to show how digital technology can cause slow violence. This includes repeated verbal and written attacks and sharing personal photos without permission. The term "cyberbullying" is often used to describe these actions, but it may not fully explain the long-term harm they cause. Brydolf-Horwitz highlights the need to name these experiences clearly so people can understand and address the hidden effects of digital slow violence. Recognizing victims is important for holding people accountable and helping those affected.

Digital slow violence shows how violence can develop in the digital age. It encourages people to think about the long-term effects of online connections and how they can harm people’s well-being.

The story of Rehtaeh Parsons, as discussed by Brydolf-Horwitz in Embodied and Entangled: Slow Violence and Harm via Digital Technologies, shows how digital slow violence works. This case shows how modern technology can be used to harm people through harassment and abuse, which can lead to serious consequences. In 2011, the suicides of three young women in Nova Scotia, including Parsons, brought cyberbullying into the public eye. This led to the creation of a government group to study bullying and cyberbullying. Digital tools made the abuse against these individuals worse, causing public outrage and government action.

Parsons’ experience shows how cyberbullying and sexual assault can happen together. After an attack at a party, the people involved shared a photo of the incident, leading to ongoing online harassment. This example shows how harm can build up over time through digital means.

In the digital age, social media has become important for raising awareness about environmental issues and encouraging action. An example is the response to the red tide event in Florida, which was not first covered by traditional news. A TikTok video by Paul Cuffaro showed the environmental disaster, reaching over 5.8 million viewers. This event shows how social media can highlight environmental problems that might otherwise go unnoticed. The large online response, including over 27.3 million views of the hashtag "Red Tide" on TikTok, shows how digital activism can help environmental campaigns. This example shows how social media quickly spreads important information and helps people learn more about environmental issues. The shift in media attention, driven by content created by users, shows how online communities can influence public conversations and possibly lead to changes in laws about environmental issues.

In the digital world, surveillance capitalism is a major problem, especially through online behavioral advertising (OBA). This type of advertising tracks people’s online activity to show personalized ads. It has been linked to "slow violence" because it harms users. This section explains how OBA causes harm, based on a study that grouped the negative effects into four areas: mental stress, loss of control, limited choices, and unfair treatment by algorithms.

Mental stress: People often feel worried and uncomfortable about how targeted ads know so much about them. This stress comes from the feeling that their privacy is being invaded constantly, making them anxious about what is being watched or guessed about their lives.

Loss of control: Surveillance capitalism, through OBA, takes away people’s freedom to choose. While users think they have options, their choices are influenced by algorithms that predict and control their actions for profit. This makes people feel powerless and controlled.

Normalizing discomfort: The constant presence of targeted ads makes people accept invasive data practices as normal, even if they are uncomfortable. This acceptance reduces people’s sense of dignity and continues a cycle of being used for profit.

Legal and design changes: To address the harm caused by OBA, two steps are needed: treating privacy violations as real injuries in the law and changing how digital platforms are designed. Instead of focusing on making ads more effective, platforms should prioritize giving users more control and protecting their privacy. This could help reduce the harm caused by surveillance capitalism.