Clearing the air: the contribution of frame analysis to understanding climate policy in the United States

Abstract

Frame analysis illuminates the politics of climate change and generates ideas about discursive strategies that can assist national governments to take effective action on climate change. The nature of frame analysis and its links to discourse theory and social constructivist epistemology are discussed, and this framework used to show how climate change politics in the USA under the second Bush Presidency (2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008) have been viewed through at least three contrasting frames: scientific scepticism; climate change as a security threat; and climate change as an economic opportunity. The last of these frames, which uses the Apollo metaphor to liken the task of controlling climate change to the effort during the 1960s to put a man on the moon, is especially promising due to the wide appeal of its positive framing of climate policy in terms of technological achievement, industrial transformation and economic opportunity.

The presidential politics of climate discourse: Energy frames, policy, and political tactics from the 2016 Primaries in the United States

“…Relatedly, content analysis is useful in understanding how actors use language to mobilise key stakeholders, shape public opinion and build consensus on solutions whilst sustaining media attention on the specific issue (Fletcher, 2009). …”

Mapping the ideological networks of American climate politics

“…1 Social scientists have attempted to understand this lack of a federal climate change policy in many ways, focusing on various aspects of the issue (e.g. Christiansen, 2003;Fisher, 2004;Fletcher, 2009;Harris, 2000;Hovi and Skodvin, 2008;Jacques et al, 2008;Lisowski, 2002;Lutzenhiser, 2001;McCright and Dunlap, 2000;Rabe, 2004;2010;Rudel, 2001;Selin and VanDeveer, 2007;Victor, 2004; see also Gelbspan, 1997;Leggett, 1999;Ward, et al, 2008 for more popular accounts). On the one hand, there have been numerous studies that focus on climate change politics in the US to understand how national politics contribute to the American position in international negotiations and within the global climate change regime (for recent accounts, see particularly Bang et al, 2007;Paterson, 2009;Skodvin and Andresen, 2009).…”

Using a Triangulated Theoretical Framework and Mixed Methods: Frame, Institutional and Network Analyses

“…Because it is the task of making sense of complex, information-rich situations, framing necessitates selectivity and organisation (Schön & Rein, 1994). Consequently, different frames direct attention to different aspects of a situation and tell a different story about what is going on and what should be done (de Boer, et al, 2010:464;Dewulf, et al, 2004;Dewulf, et al, 2007;Dewulf, et al, 2011:53;Fletcher, 2009;Isendahl, et al, 2010;Spence & Pidgeon, 2010). As Dewulf (2011:53) argues, it may often look like everybody is talking about the same thing, but they frame that 'same thing' in very different ways.…”