Argumentative Discourse Analysis Research Articles

Desired or contested futures? Competing discourse-coalitions for sustainable aviation in Sweden

ABSTRACT The future of aviation is a growing subject of debate, with different actors promoting diverse discourses on climate mitigation and sustainability. We employ argumentative discourse analysis to explore competing discourses around the future of aviation in Sweden, focusing empirically on the aviation industry and the flight-free movement. Drawing on thirty interviews, one workshop, and forty-three documents, we show how these actor groups represent two discourse-coalitions that articulate opposing discourses on the future of aviation: ‘Green flying’ and ‘Staying on the ground’. Following a logic of (techno)solutionism, Green flying anticipates aviation to maintain a dominant role in society and assures that technological progress will overcome the sector’s climate concerns in the future. Meanwhile, Staying on the ground follows a logic of prefiguration to demonstrate the desirability of an alternative and less aeromobile future, with actors embodying new norms and practices around avoiding flying in the present. The paper contributes to research in critical policy studies by demonstrating how actors with conflicting interests, values, and worldviews imagine and engage with futures differently in their attempts to shape transition pathways and policy-making in the present.

Disruptive data: How access and benefit-sharing discourses structured ideas and decisions during the Convention on Biological Diversity negotiations over digital sequence information from 2016 to 2022

In 2016, negotiations of the Convention on Biological Diversity on access and benefit-sharing policies were shaken up by the emergence of digital sequence information (DSI) as policy issue. Open access to DSI on genetic resources in genetic databases is standard practice in data-driven biological research, but such access was argued to bypass access and benefit-sharing policies of the Convention. As Parties and observers had to take a position on governing DSI, this research investigated the influence of discourses on the negotiations through argumentative discourse analysis. Actors in international environmental negotiations mobilize ‘background’ discourses – both consciously and unconsciously – to define and ‘foreground’ issues, which in turn shape negotiation and decision-making processes. The analysis shows that existing discourses on access and benefit-sharing and biodiversity structured actors’ statements aimed at defining DSI, thus applying and redefining access and benefit-sharing principles in the context of DSI. Actors with similar and slightly varying interests formed discourse-coalitions on the basis of shared storylines. Developing countries formed a separate discourse-coalition to push for DSI regulation wherein ideas about sustainable development and environmental justice were integrated, and to a lesser extent about biopiracy (the notion that open access to DSI enables the misappropriation of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge). In response, developed countries adopted narratives put forward by industry and research, advocating that open access to DSI is essential for science, biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. A third coalition, consisting of Indigenous peoples and local communities and civil society, also mobilized environmental justice and biopiracy discourses, but more prominently a unique holistic discourse on nature. Finally, holistic and biopiracy discourses were marginalized in official negotiation documents, while scientific and sustainable development discourses were adopted in official negotiation documents. The research provides a novel understanding of the DSI-negotiations as discursive politics, and highlights how different positionalities in discourses structure and are structured by statements in this political arena.

Tapping the Conversation on the Meaning of Decarbonization: Discourses and Discursive Agency in EU Politics on Low-Carbon Fuels for Maritime Shipping

EU politics on decarbonizing shipping is an argumentative endeavor where different policy actors strive try to influence others to see problems and policy solutions according to their perspectives to gain monopoly on the framing and design of policies. This article critically analyzes, by means of argumentative discourse analysis, the politics and policy process related to the recent adoption of the FuelEU Maritime regulation, the world’s first legislation to set requirements for decarbonizing maritime shipping. Complementing previous research focusing on the roles and agency of policy entrepreneurs and beliefs of advocacy coalitions active in the policy process, this paper dives deeper into the politics of the new legislation. It aims to explore and explain the discursive framing and politics of meaning-making. By analyzing the political and social meaning-making of the concept “decarbonizing maritime shipping”, this paper helps us understand why the legislation was designed in the way it was. Different narratives, storylines and discourses defining different meanings of decarbonization are analyzed. So is the agency of policy actors trying to mutate the different meanings into a new meaning. Two discourses developed in dialectic conversation framed the policy proposals and subsequent debates in the policy process, focusing on (i) incremental change and technology neutrality to meet moderate emission reductions and maintain competitiveness, and (ii) transformative change and technology specificity to meet zero emissions and gain competitiveness and global leadership in the transition towards a hydrogen economy. Policy actors successfully used discursive agency strategies such as multiple functionality and vagueness to navigate between and resolve conflicts between the two discourses. Both discourses are associated with the overarching ecological modernization discourse and failed to include issue of climate justice and a just transition. The heritage of the ecological modernization discourse creates lock-ins for a broader decarbonization discourse, thus stalling a just transition.

Educational Politics and Policy Change in Neoliberal Times: An Argumentative Discourse Analysis

<p>With the rise of neoliberal reforms and efforts to privatize education, there is a growing need to examine how actors and groups from the public and private sectors influence educational policy change together. In this article, we advance a critical approach to understanding the changing discursive space of educational politics by following discourses through an expansive policy network that goes beyond its traditional boundaries. Specifically, we draw on argumentative discourse analysis (ADA), which allows for the analysis of how and why various actors and groups come together to assign certain meanings to educational phenomena or problems, leading to policy responses or changes. Rooted in Foucault’s notions of discourse and power, ADA offers a unique approach to discourse analysis that can illuminate policy change through discourse coalitions. Three case studies from educational policy scholarship are discussed to illustrate the value and utility of ADA in future critical education policy studies.</p>

The politics of China's policy processes: A comparative review of the Advocacy Coalition Framework's applications to mainland China

AbstractDrawing on a review of 112 Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) applications to China published during 2006–2022, this article finds that, consistent with ACF assumptions, policy processes in China are complex processes of top‐down decision making, horizontal negotiation, networked influence, and bottom‐up initiation. The review finds policy processes in many subsystems of China inconsistent with one implicit assumption of the framework: the difficulty of reconciling conflicting beliefs between warring coalitions. Compared with the results from a review of the English ACF applications to countries around the globe, policy‐oriented learning and imposition by a hierarchically superior jurisdiction were identified more frequently as pathways to policy change in reviewed applications to China. The Xi Jinping administration encourages between‐coalition learning and negotiation to pursue the ideal of building a well‐off and equitable society. At the same time, his top‐level reforms have changed the long‐time status quo in some subsystems by national policy reforms.Related ArticlesNam, Aerang, and Christopher M. Weible. 2023. “Examining Experts' Discourse in South Korea's Nuclear Power Policy Making: An Advocacy Coalition Framework Approach to Policy Knowledge.” Politics & Policy 51(2): 201–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12522.Nwalie, Martin Ike. 2019. “Advocacy Coalition Framework and Policy Changes in a Third‐World Country.” Politics & Policy 47(3): 545–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12302.von Malmborg, Fredrik. 2023. “Combining the Advocacy Coalition Framework and Argumentative Discourse Analysis: The Case of the ‘Energy Efficiency First’ Principle in EU Energy and Climate Policy.” Politics & Policy 51(2): 222–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12525.

Climate change and security debates in the United Nations Security Council between 2007-2021

ABSTRACT This research’s primary motivation is to understand how the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), responsible for maintaining international peace and security, discursively structured climate change-related security issues and institutionalised them in practices by prioritising its five permanent members – China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. Since its resolutions are legally binding, the UNSC is one of the most critical organs of the 193-member UN system. Therefore, it is worthwhile to conduct an in-depth analysis of the Council’s consideration of the security impacts of climate change. Utilising Marteen Hajer’s Argumentative Discourse Analysis, this article contends that France and the United Kingdom effectively shape the discourses on climate change and security within the Council. Nonetheless, it asserts that the Council maintains a narrow focus on climate change, aligned with the political and economic interests of its permanent members, although Russia, China, and even the United States appear to yield substantial influence in actual policymaking.

The divergence of South Korea's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) from the EU ETS: An institutional complementarity view

AbstractEmissions trading schemes (ETS) have spread across the globe to tackle climate change. However, limited attention has been given to how ETS characteristics and designs differ and why. We use the concept of institutional complementarity to explore how the EU ETS and South Korea's ETS (K‐ETS) adapt to complement established political economy. The EU ETS is characterized as a market with stakeholder ownership, while the K‐ETS is more regulatory in nature with government leadership. The EU ETS complements a decentralized political system with liberalized energy market, and the K‐ETS became compatible with the centralized majoritarian politics and a regulated electricity market. The ETSs have evolved incrementally, and they are not likely to link in the foreseeable future due to divergence. We suggest a strong focus on “how to adapt” an ETS to its own institution rather than adopting the established blueprint model in countries with a strong regulatory style of governance.Related ArticlesCaliskan, Cantay. 2020. “The Influence of Elite Networks on Green Policy Making.” Politics & Policy 48(6): 1104–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12382.Tanaka, Yugo, Andrew Chapman, Tetsuo Tezuka, and Shigeki Sakurai. 2020. “Multiple Streams and Power Sector Policy Change: Evidence from the Feed‐In Tariff Policy Process in Japan.” Politics & Policy 48(3): 464–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12357.von Malmborg, Fredrik. 2023. “Combining the Advocacy Coalition Framework and Argumentative Discourse Analysis: The Case of the ‘Energy Efficiency First’ Principle in EU Energy and Climate Policy.” Politics & Policy 51(2): 222–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12525.

Sustaining business as usual or enabling transformation? A discourse analysis of climate change mitigation policy in Swedish municipalities

AbstractThis article explores how discourses may influence the potential for success in mitigating climate change in Swedish municipalities. We identify dominant discourses in climate change mitigation policy in three Swedish municipalities using argumentative discourse analysis, based on policy documents and interviews as empirical material. Political leadership and adequate organizational preconditions are necessary for working with climate change mitigation in municipalities, but the role of discourse is also significant. Policy discourse constructs preconditions for certain scenarios while rendering others less likely. Previous studies have shown that the ecological modernization (EM) discourse tends to be dominant, something which this study confirms and investigates further. We find that the dominant discourse is strong EM, which largely considers it possible to decouple economic growth and environmental problems through renewable energy and technology. A focus on collaboration between stakeholders is central and a global climate justice perspective is present to some extent. Potential solutions that are not related to the market or technological innovation risk being rendered invisible when this discourse is dominant, but the inclusion of a diversity of actors and an increased focus on climate justice could potentially minimize this risk. Finally, emerging discourses around transformation and circular economy have potential to enable the forging of new paths. This depends, however, on how these concepts are framed and how they are used.

First and last and always: Politics of the ‘energy efficiency first’ principle in EU energy and climate policy

The EU legislators have agreed that the ‘energy efficiency first’ (EE1) principle is made legally binding for Member States, to apply in policy, planning and major investment decisions. Through the EE1 principle, energy efficiency is to be made a priority in European Union (EU) energy and climate policy, providing what has been a missing link in fully implementing two other guiding principles of EU energy and climate policy: cost-effectiveness and consumer protection. In this article, I conduct an argumentative discourse analysis to better understand the politics of the EE1 principle in EU energy and climate policy. Two different discourses with a set of storylines were identified in the negotiations on the EE1 principle. The first focuses on multiple benefits of energy efficiency and a stronger role for the EE1 principle. The other focuses on climate change mitigation and a weaker role for the EE1 principle. The Council Presidency and the European Commission used discursive techniques such as frame polarisation, frame disconnection and frame incorporation to overcome these dualities. The description of storylines, discourse coalitions and discursive interaction strategies can help policymakers and other stakeholders become more aware of their own and others' argumentation on energy efficiency and how these could be changed, thus help policymakers and stakeholders better shape their strategies in future advocacy and policymaking.

Reacting to homophobia in a French online discussion: The fuzzy boundaries between heteronormativity and homophobia

This article analyzes how participants of an online discussion thread related to a YouTube video on homophobia expressed their opposition to homophobia. Both the video and the 403 posts in the discussion thread are in French. On the surface, the data are characterized by strong antagonism between the stances that support and those that are critical of LGBTQ persons. However, a closer look at the posts expressing a pro-LGBTQ stance reveals considerable variation among them: they range from an open deconstruction of homophobia to more ambivalent positions that draw on ideologies circulating within the heteronormative order and are naturalized in the everyday discourse of spontaneous online interactions. We analyze five categories of posts expressing different forms of pro-LGBTQ stances to highlight their fuzzy boundaries with homophobic stances. The analysis draws on argumentative discourse analysis, focusing on process types used to construct arguments and topoi, as well as deictic elements through which the authors of these posts express their distance vis-à-vis homophobia and LGBTQ persons.

What’s ‘fairness’ got to do with it? Discourse coalitions, arguments, and discursive struggles over public funding of Ontario’s private schools

ABSTRACT The establishment of the Commission on Private Schools in Ontario in 1984 renewed long-standing debate over public funding of the Canadian province’s public schools. Engaging Maarten Hajer’s discourse coalition approach and argumentative discourse analysis, we demonstrate how actors with disparate – sometimes even competing – goals and values nevertheless formed coalitions to advocate for (or against) the policy. We also show that the debate at this time was about much more than school funding; it reflected foundational disputes over the appropriate role of government in relation to minoritized groups in Canada. In the struggle to define the meaning of a policy to fund private schools with public money, both coalitions mobilised arguments informed by discourses of Equality and Multiculturalism. However, each coalition ascribed different meanings to these discourses. That is, actors on both sides argued their policy solution promoted equality and supported multiculturalism based on different ideological understandings of these values.

The argumentative salience of technology frames of reference: An analysis of argumentative discourse in the development of a health information exchange initiative

This study examines the impact that the argumentative salience of technology frames of references has on the execution of complex IS implementation projects. It employs Toulmin's argument model to develop argument maps that depict the structure of argumentation that took place during the development and implementation of an interorganizational health information exchange initiative (HIE) that took place in southeast USA. Toulmin's argument model faciliated the portrayal of frame salience in terms of three structural properties (i.e., blindness, indifference, and ownership). The study used these properties to show how the breadth, depth and conspicuity of frame structures changed during the course of the project and demonstrated how these changes impacted both the level of contestation observed in the project as well as project outcomes. In addition to lending insights that are specific to this case, our conceptualization of frame structure lends itself to cross-case comparisons and future theory building as the impact of these argument structures can be evaluated in a multitude of different contexts.

Combining the advocacy coalition framework and argumentative discourse analysis: The case of the “energy efficiency first” principle in EU energy and climate policy

AbstractThis article combines, in a complementary way, the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) with argumentative discourse analysis to analyze the politics of the “energy efficiency first” (EE1) principle as a new legal institute in European Union energy and climate policy. Two different discourses and storylines were identified. The first is where the meaning of energy efficiency policy is to fulfill multiple benefits. It is associated with a strong regulation of EE1. The second is where the purpose of energy efficiency policy is primarily to contribute to mitigating climate change. It is associated with weak regulation of EE1. Four advocacy coalitions with different secondary beliefs regarding the EE1 principle were identified. Analyzing the inter‐discursive communication between different coalitions provides insights to the policy‐oriented learning taking place. It is concluded that studies using the ACF could merit from focusing more on narratives and communication between belief systems.Related ArticlesKanol, Direnç. 2022. “Narrative Strategies for Emerging Disruptive Technologies: A Case Study of Blockchain for Europe.” Politics & Policy 50(5): 952–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12492.Nowlin, Matthew C., Maren Trochmann, and Thomas M. Rabovsky. 2022. “Advocacy Coalitions and Political Control.” Politics & Policy 50(2): 201–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12458.O'Donovan, Kristin T. 2018. “Does the Narrative Policy Framework Apply to Local Policy Issues?” Politics & Policy 46(4): 532–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12265.

Dominant Discourse in Indigenous Consultations

Abstract In Canada, consulting with Indigenous communities over recourse projects, the Crown sometimes avoids critical engagement with them, holding to the same arguments and counterarguments through regulatory and hearing stages. Such hollow moves, produced under the Crown’s rules, become embedded in the dominant argumentative discourse and pass unnoticed. To detect them, I apply Argument Continuities (ac s) – a new category of argumentative discourse analysis. ac s are a set of the same arguments and counterarguments repeatedly produced/reproduced by the dominant arguer through an adversarial reasoning process to dismiss opposing arguments. ac s have a specific life cycle – a chain of reasoning dynamics developing in a path-dependent fashion and increasing the cost of adopting a certain argument/counterargument over time. I test ac s in two institutionally diverse cases of Indigenous consultations and argue for the contingency of ac s upon the rules of consultations in reasoning exchanges. Determining the evidence availability and allocating the burdens of proof in consultations, rules make it more or less likely for a dominant arguer to rebut opposing arguments with acs.

Energy futures reimagined: the global energy transition and dependence on Russian energy as issues in the sociotechnical imaginaries of energy security in Finland

European countries are facing a dual challenge in 2022 with regard to how to reimagine energy security after cutting ties to Russian energy, but without undermining the imperative for a continent-wide energy transition. In this article, a sociotechnical imaginaries framework is utilised to capture the broader sociotechnical dynamics beyond the typical connotation of energy security through supply-side economics. This is implemented by situating discursive struggles over the framing of the global energy transition and energy dependence on Russia vis-à-vis predominant visions of energy security in Finland. By utilising argumentative discourse analysis based on interview and documentary data focusing on debates in Finland during 2015–2019, the article uncovers predominant sociotechnical imaginaries connected to energy security and discursive struggles over potentially reframing them. The identified tensions focused on 1) how future energy security should be governed, 2) whether Russia is a threat or reliable trading partner and supplier of energy, and 3) how to approach the energy transition in relation to energy security. While the focus is on controversies, the analysis also identifies increasing coherence in attaining both security and sustainability goals. There are attempts to imagine energy futures in a more sociotechnical fashion that would capture the societal dynamics more broadly. The predominant ways of imagining societal development coproduced with energy technologies tend to be constrained by techno-economic rationality. Up to the early months of 2022, this typically undermined societal and political risks in favour of interdependence and market-driven liberalism, also widely shared across the European Union.

Argument Continuities in theory and practice

Abstract Argumentation on some public policy issues is conjugated with disagreement and power differentials. Institutionally dominant arguers control the argumentation context through imposing authority rules which sometimes incentivize them to respond to opposing arguers in a fallacious way1 – with “the repeating tokens of the same counterarguments” and without considering the merits of opposing arguments. As produced in accordance with authority rules, such fallacies are embedded in the dominant argumentative discourse and easily pass unnoticed. To detect them, I introduce Argument Continuity (AC) – a new category of argumentative discourse analysis. AC is a set of the same arguments and counterarguments repeatedly produced/reproduced by the dominant arguer through an adversarial reasoning process to disconfirm opposing arguments and dismiss them. ACs are distinguished from other fallacies by their continuous nature and recursive way of production. ACs have their own life cycle – a chain of reasoning dynamics developing in a path-dependent fashion and increasing the cost of adopting a certain argument over time. I test the life cycle of ACs in a single case study – in consultations held by the Crown with Indigenous peoples of Canada over a controversial resource development project. Although ACs are not specific to the Crown-Indigenous relationships, they reveal how dominant arguers treat disagreement from epistemically diverse arguers. Based on observed evidence, I develop three theoretical propositions of ACs, which can serve as guidelines for researching the disconfirming mode of reasoning in other contexts of communication permeated by beliefs clash and power asymmetries.

Impending doom or unnecessary panic? The struggle for discursive hegemony in South Africa’s acid mine drainage policy problem

ABSTRACT This article contributes to the literature on environmental policy controversies. We utilize an Argumentative Discourse Analysis (ADA)-based approachto analyze the struggle for discursive hegemony that took place between competing story-lines in the context of the acid mine drainage (AMD) environmental policy problem, located in the gold mining areas of greater Johannesburg, South Africa. With this article we make a theoretical contribution by presenting and applying an adapted ADA framework strongly focused on the operationalization of key ADA concepts. Our empirical contribution lies in providing a rich and deep analysis of an environmental policy controversy that has not yet been studied from an ADA perspective. In particular, we demonstrate and discuss the complex path to discourse institutionalization followed by the dominant emergent AMD story-line. In conclusion , we recommend steps for updating the ADA approach and developing an accompanying set of guidelines to further enable the operationalization of its concepts.

Shifting meanings: The struggle over public funding of private schools in Alberta, Canada

The government of Alberta, Canada, has provided public funding to eligible private schools since 1967. This policy has always been contested, and in this article, we explain how we applied concepts from argumentative discourse theory and its attendant methodology, argumentative discourse analysis (ADA), to trace the debate over the policy since 1990. Argumentative discourse theory posits that policymaking involves struggles for discursive dominance wherein actors try to convince others to view the policy issue in a particular way. Drawing on 158 media articles, interviews, and secondary sources, we show that although some of the actors in the dispute have changed – and changed sides – their arguments have remained fairly consistent. However, their arguments’ meanings – and of the policy itself – have changed as the dominant discourse in the province shifted. Specifically, in response to the rise and predominance of neoliberalism in Alberta, supporters redefined the policy to fund private schools with public money as one that promoted choice and competition that would improve schooling. Opponents, on the other hand, recast the policy as part of a larger government effort to privatize public education. We demonstrate that argumentative discourse theory and ADA can be used to support the goals of critical policy analysis.

Superweed amaranth: metaphor and the power of a threatening discourse

This paper analyses the use of metaphor in discourses around the “superweed” Palmer amaranth. Most weed scientists associated with the US public agricultural extension system dismiss the term superweed. However, together with the media, they indirectly encourage aggressive control practices by actively diffusing the framing of herbicide resistant Palmer amaranth as an existential threat that should be eradicated at any cost. We use argumentative discourse analysis to better understand this process. We analyze a corpus consisting of reports, policy briefs, and press releases produced by state extension services, as well as articles from professional and popular magazines and newspapers quoting extension specialists and/or public sector weed scientists or agronomists. We show how the superweed discourse is powered by negative metaphors, and legitimizes aggressive steps to eradicate the weed. This discourse reinforces the farmers’ techno-optimism master frame, contributes to deskilling of farmers and sidelines ethical concerns.

Discursive politics and policy (im)mobility: Metro-TOD policies in India

Large investments in metro systems, supported through a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) regime, have become the preferred policy option to achieve sustainable and inclusive urban mobility in India. In this paper, we examine the particular practices and power relations through which metro-TOD policies have emerged and gained discursive dominance in India’s urban transport policies. We do so by bringing together urban policy mobilities (UPM) and argumentative discourse analysis (ADA) to conceptualize (im)mobility as the intense movement of specific discursive framings to the exclusion of others. Our analysis brings out the crucial role played by Urban Mobility India (UMI), an annual conference organized by the Indian federal government, in the (im)mobility of metro-TOD policies across Indian cities. We contribute to the growing literature on the power-laden nature of policy circulation in the Global South and address concerns regarding lack of analytical attention to marginalized policy pathways and immobile elements of mobile policies in UPM literature. We argue that policy mobility scholars can move beyond the analytical binaries of mobile/immobile policies by drawing upon the concepts of ADA which allow close examination of the discursive politics at play in policy related conferences. By studying the intra-national (im)mobility of metro-TOD policies in India, we expand the bounds of UPM literature towards a geography that has received limited attention thus far.