Abstract
The legislative process before the adoption of the revised European Union renewable energy directive mobilised various actors around the forest biomass issue in Europe. Which storylines do actors use to discuss and define the sustainability of forest biomass, how are the differences between the existing storylines explained, and can distinct ‘discourse coalitions’ of actors be observed as following each storyline? These questions are addressed through a discourse analysis to critically evaluate the debate around the utilisation of forest biomass for European renewable energy to identify persistent storylines adopted by discourse coalitions as they communicate their understanding of the issue, and compete to influence the policymaking and public perception. The hypotheses are that there are more than the hypothetical binary arrangement of pro versus anti storylines, and that some actors follow multiple storylines. Locating the methodological approach on the two dimensions; text versus context and critical versus constructivist, this study pays closer attention to context rather than on individual linguistic elements of texts. Regarding the second dimension, this study builds upon constructivist epistemology, being concerned with understanding which truths these storylines produce for their speakers, and their external influences upon alternative storylines and actors. The three storylines presented here represent three competing discourses regarding forest biomass usage in European renewable energy: forestry prioritised, climate focussed and critical. Each of these are promoted by actors aiming to gain discursive hegemony on the issue, both in terms of the impact of their discourse upon EU policy making and in the eyes of the public. Despite the discursive differences created by these deeply held opposing views of what sustainability and nature are and what this means for forest biomass, there were several points where narrative elements overlapped. These can provide insight for developing a more constructive debate on the sustainability of forest biomass.
Highlights
EU forest biomass policyFor decades, biomass has consistently provided around two thirds of annual European renewable energy production [1]
Along with the optimism by which forest biomass was initially included in EU renewable energy policy [6], a complex array of sourcing and usage scenarios explains the weaknesses in its regulation to date relative to other bioenergy types [10]
The three storylines presented here represent three competing discourses regarding forest biomass usage in European renewable energy: forestry prioritised, climate focussed and critical. Each of these are promoted by actors aiming to gain discursive hegemony on the issue, both in terms of the impact of their discourse upon EU policy making and in the eyes of the public
Summary
EU forest biomass policyFor decades, biomass has consistently provided around two thirds of annual European renewable energy production [1]. Optimism surrounded the EU’s initial adoption of biomass within renewable energy policy [6], with multiple touted benefits including energy system diversification, greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction, rural employment, decreased oil prices, and furthering the “EU’s technological leadership”. While the RED (Renewable Energy Directive: Directive 2009/28/EC) [9] originally focused on environmental sustainability of liquid biofuels, the REDII introduced sustainability criteria for forest biomass and GHG savings thresholds for solid and gaseous biomass fuels. Along with the optimism by which forest biomass was initially included in EU renewable energy policy [6], a complex array of sourcing and usage scenarios explains the weaknesses in its regulation to date relative to other bioenergy types [10]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
