Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Constructions of climate justice in German, Indian and US media

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Collective action on climate change is easier when the involved actors share an understanding of climate justice, that is, if they agree on the morally right way of dealing with the issue. Such understandings have been shown to vary, however. Based on German, Indian and US media coverage, we develop a typology of different constructions of climate justice. The five patterns we identify differ considerably across several dimensions, including the valuation of certain goods and rights, the definition of moral in-groups, and the basic principles for climate governance. These patterns can be found in all three countries, but their importance varies between them. The US debate is especially conflictive, with some actors emphasizing freedom from state intervention and others demanding provident political action. Although the positions in Germany and India are less divergent, there is also no agreement on how to address climate change in a just way in these countries. In particular, the conflict between global and intergenerational justice demands – reflecting the nature of climate change – and the enduring relevance of traditional conceptions focusing on contemporary and national communities are intricate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This is not to say that other levels, including the local and regional, are not important. The mitigative and adaptive potential of cities, for example, is considerable (Castán Broto and Bulkeley 2013). However, much of the legislative powers rests with national bodies (Lidskog and Elander 2010; Townshend et al. 2013).

  2. Of course, actors may employ arguments for different reasons. They may represent stakeholders' ‘real’ perceptions of climate change and their deeply held moral convictions. However, they may also be used strategically, based on self-interest. While we cannot confirm such intentions from analyzing media coverage, our results shed light on which justice perceptions are prevalent and recognized on the societal level.

  3. Quotes are referenced by the abbreviated name of the newspaper, publication date and information on the speaker, which consists of country or institution (ISO 3166 standard), societal sphere (adm[inistration], bus[iness], [‘ordinary] citiz[ens], environ[mental organization], intellect[ual (without scientific affiliation)], journal[ist], lab[or union], pol[itician], rel[igious representative], sci[entific actor], tt [think tank]) and sometimes political orientation (com[munist], soc[cial democratic/progressive], lib[eral, center-right], con[servative/Christian democratic], nat[ionalist]). Quotes from German newspapers have been translated by the authors.

  4. There is considerable evidence that perceptions on climate change and related policy preferences vary substantially between liberal and conservative publics in the United States (Hart and Nisbet 2012; Kahan et al. 2012).

  5. It is noteworthy that we did not find much evidence for “civic environmentalism” (Bäckstrand and Lövbrand 2007) and “green radicalism” (Dryzek 2005) perspectives, which would advance alternative forms of coordination resting upon the civil society and bottom-up processes. In part, this might be a consequence of the research focus on climate governance. However, other studies (Hart and Feldman 2014) have also shown that media focus on the responsibility and capability of collective actors rather than individual initiatives. There is, however, some evidence for the attribution of individual responsibility for climate action (see Berglez et al. 2009; Anderson 2011).

References

  • Anderson A (2011) Sources, media, and modes of climate change communication. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 2(4):535–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arlt D, Wolling J (2012) Die Presseberichterstattung über die Weltklimakonferenz in Kopenhagen. Stud Commun Media 1(2):283–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bäckstrand K, Lövbrand E (2007) Climate Governance Beyond 2012. In: Pettenger ME (ed) The Social Construction of Climate Change. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp. 123–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck U (2006) Living in the world risk society. Econ Soc 35(3):329–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berglez P, Höijer B, Olausson U (2009) Individualisation and Nationalisation of the Climate Issue. In: Boyce T, Lewis J (eds) Climate Change and the Media. Lang, New York, pp. 211–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlin I (2013) The Crooked Timber of Humanity. In: Alleged Relativism in Eighteenth Century European Thought. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 73–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Billett S (2010) Dividing climate change. Clim Chang 99(1):1–16

  • Boden T, Andres B, Marland G (2013) Fossil-fuel CO2 emissions. http://dx.doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2013. Accessed 09 April 2014

  • Boltanski L, Thévenot L (2006) On Justification. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulkeley H, Andonova L, Bäckstrand K, Betsill MM, Compagnon D, Duffy R, Kolk A, Hoffmann MJ, Levy DL, Newell P, Milledge T, Paterson M, Pattberg P, VanDeveer S (2012) Governing climate change transnationally. Environ Plan C 30(4):591–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho A, Burgess J (2005) Cultural circuits of climate change in u.k. broadsheet newspapers, 1985–2003. Risk Anal 25(6):1457–1469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cass LR (2006) The Failures of American and European Climate Policy. State University of New York Press, Albany

    Google Scholar 

  • Castán Broto V, Bulkeley H (2013) A survey of urban climate change experiments in 100 cities. Glob Environ Chang 23(1):92–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin JM (2003) Grounded Theory. In: Bohnsack R, Marotzki W, Meuser M (eds) Hauptbegriffe Qualitative Sozialforschung. Leske + Budrich, Opladen, pp. 70–75

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dannenberg A, Sturm B, Vogt C (2010) Do equity preferences matter for climate negotiators? Environ Resour Econ 47(1):91–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daub SJ (2010) Negotiating sustainability: climate change framing in the communications, energy and paperworkers union. Symb Interact 33(1):115–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson A (2010) Climate justice: the emerging movement against green capitalism. South Atl Q 109(2):313–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Gregorio M, Brockhaus M, Cronin T, Muharrom E, Santoso L, Mardiah S, Büdenbender M (2013) Equity and REDD+ in the Media. Ecol Soc 18(2):Art. 39

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolšak N (2009) Climate change policy implementation. Rev Pol Res 26(5):551–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek JS (2005) The Politics of the Earth, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilders C (2002) Conflict and consonance in media opinion. Eur J Commun 17(1):25–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsasser SW, Dunlap RE (2013) Leading voices in the denier choir. Am Behav Sci 57(6):754–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferree MM, Gamson WA, Gerhards J, Rucht D (2002) Shaping Abortion Discourse. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freedom House (2011) Freedom in the World 2011. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2011. Accessed 07 May 2014

  • Gampfer R (2014) Do individuals care about fairness in burden sharing for climate change mitigation? Clim Chang 124(1–2):65–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamson WA, Meyer DS (1999) Framing political opportunity. In: McAdam D (ed) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 275–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentzkow M, Shapiro JM (2010) What drives media slant? Econometrica 78(1):35–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grasso M (2007) A normative ethical framework in climate change. Clim Chang 81(3):223–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hans-Bredow-Institut (2009) Internationales Handbuch Medien, 28th edn. Baden-Baden, Nomos

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart PS, Feldman L (2014) Threat Without Efficacy? Climate Change on U.S. Network News. Sci Commun 36(3):325–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart PS, Nisbet EC (2012) Boomerang effects in science communication. Commun Res 39(6):701–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hediger V (2007) Asien. In: Thomaß B (ed) Mediensysteme im internationalen Vergleich. UVK, Konstanz, pp. 299–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Institut für Medien- und Kommunikationspolitik (IfM) (2010) Die führenden internationalen Zeitungen im Vergleich. http://www.mediadb.eu/tageszeitungen/50-zeitungen.html. Accessed 08 April 2014

  • IP International Marketing Committee (IP IMC) (2008) Television 2008, Köln

  • Jogesh A (2012) Handbook of Climate Change and India. In: Dubash NK (ed) A Change in Climate? earthscan, London, pp. 266–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Peters E, Wittlin M, Slovic P, Ouellette LL, Braman D, Mandel G (2012) The Polarizing Impact of Science Literacy and Numeracy on Perceived Climate Change Risks. Nat Clim Chang 2(10):732–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasa S, Gullberg A, Heggelund G (2008) The Group of 77 in the International Climate Negotiations. Int Environ Agreements 8(2):113–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ki-moon B (2008) Address at the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the japan society and the 50th anniversary of the korea society. http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspeeches/search_full.asp?statID=275. Accessed 01 April 2014

  • Klinsky S, Dowlatabadi H (2009) Conceptualizations of justice in climate policy. Clim Pol 9(1):88–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laksa U (2014) National discussions, global repercussions: ethics in british newspaper coverage of global climate negotiations. Environ Commun 8(3):368–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lange A (2006) The impact of equity-preferences on the stability of international environmental agreements. Environ Resour Econ 34(2):247–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lidskog R, Elander I (2010) Addressing climate change democratically. Sustain Dev 18(1):32–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Lindquist E, Vedlitz A (2011) Explaining media and congressional attention to global climate change, 1969–2005. Polit Res Q 64(2):405–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhtakallio E, Ylä-Anttila T (2011) Julkisen oikeuttamisen analyysi sosiologisena tutkimusmenetelmänä. Sosiol 48(1):34–51

    Google Scholar 

  • McCright AM, Dunlap RE (2011) The politicization of climate change and polarization in the american public’s views of global warming, 2001–2010. Sociol Q 52(2):155–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merkens H (2003) Auswahlverfahren, Sampling, Fallkonstruktion. In: Flick U, von Kardorff E, Steinke I (eds) Qualitative Forschung. Rowohlt, Reinbek bei Hamburg, pp. 286–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaelowa K, Michaelowa A (2012) India as an Emerging Power in International Climate Negotiations. Clim Pol 12(5):575–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrice D (2000) The Liberal-communitarian Debate in Contemporary Political Philosophy and its Significance for International Relations. Rev Int Stud 26(02):233–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller B (1999) Justice in Global Warming Negotiations. Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbet MC (2011) ClimateShift. American University School of Communication, Washington, DC

  • Nyberg D, Wright C (2013) Corporate corruption of the environment. Br J Sociol 64(3):405–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okereke C, Dooley K (2010) Principles of justice in proposals and policy approaches to avoided deforestation. Glob Environ Chang 20(1):82–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (2010) Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Glob Environ Chang 20(4):550–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ott K (2012) Domains of Climate Ethics. In: Honnefelder L, Sturma D (eds) Jahrbuch für Wissenschaft und Ethik. de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 95–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter J, Ashe T (2012) Cross-national comparison of the presence of climate scepticism in the print media in six countries, 2007–10. Environ Res Lett 7(4):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfetsch B (2003) Politische Kommunikationskultur. VS, Wiesbaden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reese SD, Danielian LH (1989) Intermedia Influence and the Drug Issue. In: Shoemaker PJ (ed) Communication campaigns about drugs. L. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp. 29–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Reusswig F (2010) The New Climate Change Discourse. In: Gross M, Heinrichs H (eds) Environmental Sociology. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 39–57

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rootes C, Zito A, Barry J (2012) Climate Change, National Politics and Grassroots Action. Environ Pollut 21(5):677–690

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampei Y, Aoyagi-Usui M (2009) Mass-media coverage, its influence on public awareness of climate-change issues, and implications for Japan’s national campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Glob Environ Chang 19(2):203–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt A (2012) Bewegungen, Gegenbewegungen, NGOs: Klimakommunikation zivilgesellschaftlicher Akteure. In: Neverla I, Schäfer MS (eds) Das Medien-Klima. Springer VS, Wiesbaden, pp. 69–94

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt A (2015) Moralvorstellungen in der öffentlichen Debatte: Konzeptionelle und methodische Überlegungen zu Relevanz und empirischer Untersuchung [Morality in the public debate: Conceptual and methodological considerations on its relevance and empirical investigation]. Stud Commun Media 4(2):69–134

  • Schmidt A, Schlichting I (2014) Sustainability and Climate Change: Interpretations and Claims by Societal Actors from Germany, India and the United States. In: Müller MM, Hemmer I, Trappe M (eds) Nachhaltigkeit neu denken. Oekom, München, pp. 141–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt A, Ivanova A, Schäfer MS (2013) Media Attention for Climate Change around the World: A Comparative Analysis of Newspaper Coverage in 27 Countries. Glob Environ Chang 23(5):1233–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidtke H, Nullmeier F (2011) Political Valuation Analysis and the Legitimacy of International Organizations. Ger Policy Stud 7(3):117–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Sikor T, Newell P (2014) Globalizing environmental justice? Geoforum 54:151–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverstone R (2008) Mediapolis. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson H (2011) India and international norms of climate governance. Rev Int Stud 37(03):997–1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaker J, Leiserowitz A (2014) Shifting discourses of climate change in india. Clim Chang 123(2):107–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thévenot L, Moody M, Lafaye C (2000) Forms of Valuing Nature. In: Lamont M, Thévenot L (eds) Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 229–272

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Townshend T, Fankhauser S, Matthews A, Feger C, Liu J, Narciso Thais (2011) GLOBE Climate Legislation Study. GLOBE International; Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. http://www.globeinternational.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/GLOBE-CLIMATE-LEGISLATION-STUDY.pdf. Accessed 16 May 2011

  • Townshend T, Fankhauser S, Aybar R, Collins M, Landesman T, Nachmany M, Pavese C (2013) How national legislation can help to solve climate change. Nat Clim Chang 3(5):430–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderheiden S (2008) Atmospheric Justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wallbott L (2014) Indigenous peoples in un redd+ negotiations. Ecol Soc 19(1):21

  • Wardekker JA, Petersen AC, van der Sluijs JP (2009) Ethics and public perception of climate change. Glob Environ Chang 19(4):512–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wessler H, Brüggemann M (2012) Transnationale Kommunikation. Springer VS, Wiesbaden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilke J (1999) Leitmedien und Zielgruppenorgane. In: Wilke J (ed) Mediengeschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschlafnd. BPB, Bonn, pp. 302–329

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research presented here was supported by the Cluster of Excellence ‘CliSAP’ (EXC177), Universität Hamburg, funded through the German Research Foundation (DFG) and by funds from the Center for a Sustainable University (University of Hamburg). We thank Tjado Barsuhn for his assistance with several steps of the project. Moreover, we are grateful for constructive comments by Gregor Betz and three anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. German Aeorspace Center (DLR), Project Management Agency, Bonn, Germany

    Andreas Schmidt

  2. University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Mike S. Schäfer

Authors
  1. Andreas Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mike S. Schäfer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Schmidt.

Additional information

This article is part of a Special Issue on “Climate Justice in Interdisciplinary Research” edited by Christian Huggel, Markus Ohndorf, Dominic Roser, and Ivo Wallimann-Helmer.

This paper is linked to the following contribution of this special issue: Betz, doi 10.1007/s10584-015-1489-9

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 256 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schmidt, A., Schäfer, M.S. Constructions of climate justice in German, Indian and US media. Climatic Change 133, 535–549 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1488-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1488-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation