Plural and hybrid environmental values: a discourse analysis of the wind energy conflict in Australia and the United Kingdom

Jessup, Brad

doi:10.1080/09644010903396069

Cited by 58 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The discourse coalitions we found are similar to those found in other studies, as is the general tendency for the argumentative language to become technical and rational [1,10,[64][65][66]. By employing the analytical framework presented in Section 2, regarding types of argumentation, we are, over time, able to systematically analyze how this tendency has manifested, both within each of the respective discourse coalitions and across them.…”

Section: Types Of Argumentations In Discourse Coalitions and Planningsupporting

confidence: 55%

“…The analytical framework presented in Table 1 is informed both by our readings of Marcuse, from which we draw the realm of justification categories "facts-based" and "values-based" arguments, and by the data that we collected in the field, where we found two basic standpoints concerning the topic of the discourse: (1) how to make decisions about wind farm siting, which we here call "means" and (2) what these decisions should be, which we here call "ends" [18]. Juxtaposing these two axes provides us with four possible types of argumentation: (1) Values-Ends-arguments concerning the end result of where and according to what criteria wind mills are located, based on justifications that reflect social values and desires such as a moral imperative to protect the natural environment; (2) Facts-Ends-end result oriented arguments based on technical criteria, such as wind speeds, and/or compatibility with the status quo, e.g.…”

Section: Value-based Arguments Concerning End Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Juxtaposing these two axes provides us with four possible types of argumentation: (1) Values-Ends-arguments concerning the end result of where and according to what criteria wind mills are located, based on justifications that reflect social values and desires such as a moral imperative to protect the natural environment; (2) Facts-Ends-end result oriented arguments based on technical criteria, such as wind speeds, and/or compatibility with the status quo, e.g. grid connections; (3) Values-Means-value-based arguments concerning the means to be used for reaching decisions about end results, i.e.…”

Section: Value-based Arguments Concerning End Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Wind Farm Siting and Protected Areas in Catalonia: Planning Alternatives or Reproducing 'One-Dimensional Thinking'?

Ariza-Montobbio

Farrell

2012

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Wind energy is an emblem of sustainability with the potential to promote a qualitative alternative to current energy systems and nuclear options for CO 2 reduction. However, wind farm siting often conflicts with aspirations to conserve traditional landscapes and wildlife habitats. In this paper we adopt a Critical Theory perspective, informed by Herbert Marcuse`s work, to study the discourse concerning wind energy siting in Catalonia, Spain. We give particular attention to how tensions between potentially conflicting sustainability objectives are addressed and by whom. Based on a review of this siting discourse and the application of Marcuse's theory, we find that the Catalan wind energy siting discourse is both influenced by and reproducing what Marcuse referred to as the 'one-dimensional thinking' of technology as ideology: erasing the possibility of critical dialectical thought by subsuming the question of "what should be" under the question of "what is". This has implications both for how these conflicts are investigated and for the sustainability of decisions taken. We conclude that closer attention to the role of 'one-dimensional thinking' in wind energy siting discourses could improve not only the understanding of their logic but might also have the potential to help make them more democratic.

show abstract

Section: Types Of Argumentations In Discourse Coalitions and Planningsupporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Value-based Arguments Concerning End Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Value-based Arguments Concerning End Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Wind Farm Siting and Protected Areas in Catalonia: Planning Alternatives or Reproducing 'One-Dimensional Thinking'?

Ariza-Montobbio

Farrell

2012

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As in Jessup's (2010) paper on wind energy discourse coalitions, the storylines are summarised and organisation membership of attendant discourse coalitions in shown in Table 2. It must be noted that such coalitions are neither definitive, nor complete -the fluidity and context sensitivity of discourse coalitions means that actors and institutions can move within and between storylines and so discourse coalitions shift and re-emerge in different configurations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our empirical analysis uses an argumentative discourse analytic approach (hereafter ADAA) (Fischer, 1995;Hajer and Versteeg, 2005;Majone, 1989), which has previously proved valuable in uncovering the linguistic relationships embedded in numerous energy policy analyses; for example in relation to nuclear power, coal, onshore wind and solar energy (Bern and Winkel, 2013;Hunold and Leitner, 2011;Jessup, 2010;Mander, 2008;Szarka, 2004;Usher, 2013). The ADAA presents a framework for interrogating environmental discourses: heterogeneous and shared ways of apprehending the natural world which inherently draw out contestation for capturing the terms of environmental policy making (Dryzek, 1997).…”

Section: Argumentative Discourse Analysis Of Shale Gas Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Shale gas policy in the United Kingdom: An argumentative discourse analysis

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shale gas has become an energy policy priority in the United Kingdom in light of profitable extraction activities in the United States. Since 2012, the UK Government has created key economic drivers to encourage shale exploration, whilst growing activism in affected site communities has stirred significant media and academic commentary. This study examines the growing national debate as a matter of discourse; adopting an argumentative discourse analytic approach to assess data collected from stakeholder interviews (n=21) and key policy actor statements quoted in broadsheet newspapers. We explore three dominant 'storylines' emerging in relation to shale gas policy.

show abstract

Beyond Mandated Participation: Dealing with hydropower in the context of the water framework directive

Feichtinger

Pregernig

2016

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines public–private interactions in the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). Empirically, the study analyses the processes of master planning in the highly contested arena of hydropower in Austria and Bavaria. While the WFD foresees various legally required, ‘mandated’ types of participation, the instrument of master plans was sought and employed as an additional participatory mechanism to develop strategies for mitigating water pressures caused by hydropower. In theoretical terms, the article contributes to the debate on participatory governance and public–private interactions. An analytical framework is developed and applied that recognizes four forms of public–private interaction: state governing, consultative governance, collaborative governance and lobbying. The study shows that in Bavaria the planning process showed some elements of consultation in the early phases, but later on governmental actors backed out and conventional state governing prevailed. In Austria, state governing and traditional lobbying were found to be the dominant patterns of interaction throughout the process. Neither water administration nor hydropower stakeholders opted for more far‐reaching forms of collaboration. The low levels of participation observed in both case study regions can be explained, on the one hand, by the strategic motivations and interests of the involved actors and, on the other hand, by the distinctive politico‐historical context with special discursive dynamics in energy and climate policy. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

show abstract

Plural and hybrid environmental values: a discourse analysis of the wind energy conflict in Australia and the United Kingdom

Cited by 58 publications

References 39 publications

Wind Farm Siting and Protected Areas in Catalonia: Planning Alternatives or Reproducing 'One-Dimensional Thinking'?

Wind Farm Siting and Protected Areas in Catalonia: Planning Alternatives or Reproducing 'One-Dimensional Thinking'?

Shale gas policy in the United Kingdom: An argumentative discourse analysis

Beyond Mandated Participation: Dealing with hydropower in the context of the water framework directive

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About