Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theoretical Framework: Framing, Issue Dimensions and Political Space

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Framing Climate Change in the EU and US After the Paris Agreement

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

  • 605 Accesses

Abstract

The chapter harnesses the concept of political space and the approach of framing analysis to develop the theoretical framework and hypotheses for the book. Based on the distinction of three major issue categories in debates about climate change related to questions of problem definition, policy evaluation and collective action, the chapter presents a typology of six main climate frames and their specification at different levels of political discourse as a framework for the empirical analysis. The chapter then specifies hypotheses about the structure of discourse, the linkages between frames and their contestation in the two contrasting cases of the EU and US to evaluate their respective debates on climate change. In its concluding part, the chapter outlines the body of policy documents selected for the empirical analysis and the method of dictionary-based automated coding, as well as the main indicators for the subsequent analysis of features of political discourse covered by the comparative hypotheses.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The terms of issue category and issue dimension refer to different analytical concepts, as described in the relevant sections of this chapter: We introduce the term issue category to identify thematically related aspects of controversy about climate change and their respective objects of reference; the concept of issue dimension, however, is discussed to consider the emergence of a politically salient structuring logic of political discourse and contestation with identifiable ideological principles defining competing political positions. In this sense, an issue dimension can emerge within a single or in combination of various frames depending on their respective salience and linkages in political discourse, as elaborated in the subsequent discussion.

  2. 2.

    The automatic coding function of the content analysis software was run several times using gradually refined versions of the dictionary to single out the use of discursive frames; each of these frames and their specification at the paradigmatic, program and policy level was coded when at least one keyword was identified by the software. Coded statements include the sentence containing the keyword and following sentence. This means that a statement can be coded with more than one frame if it contains keywords of several frames, as analyzed more closely in the subsequent discussion of linkages between frames. As an additional check to confirm coding results and to eliminate inadequate assignments of frames as far as possible, several rounds of modification were conducted by reading through result lists of coded documents and adjusting keywords in the dictionary. A more specific survey of the most frequently coded keywords in comparison of both cases is provided in the comparative chapter.

References

  • Ajl, Max. 2021. A People’s Green New Deal. London: Pluto Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Almiron, Núria, and Jordi Xifra i Triadú. 2019. Climate Change Denial and Public Relations: Strategic Communication and Interest Groups in Climate Inaction. Routledge New Directions in Public Relations and Communication Research. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atikcan, Ece Özlem. 2015. Framing the European Union: The Power of Political Arguments in Shaping European Integration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoit, Kenneth, and Michael Laver. 2012. “The Dimensionality of Political Space: Epistemological and Methodological Considerations.” European Union Politics 13 (2): 194–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116511434618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, Marcus. 2009. Paradigms in Public Policy: Theory and Practice of Paradigm Shifts in the EU. Frankfurt am Main [u.a.]: Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daviter, Falk. 2011. Policy Framing in the European Union. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Basingstoke [u.a.]: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diez Medrano, Juan, and Emily Gray. 2010. “Framing the European Union in National Public Spheres.” In The Making of a European Public Sphere. Media Discourse and Political Contention, edited by Ruud Koopmans and Paul Statham, 195–219. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diez, Thomas, and Jill Steans. 2005. “A Useful Dialogue? Habermas and International Relations.” Review of International Studies 31 (1): 127–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210505006339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirikx, Astrid, and Dave Gelders. 2010. “To Frame Is to Explain: A Deductive Frame-Analysis of Dutch and French Climate Change Coverage during the Annual UN Conferences of the Parties.” Public Understanding of Science 19 (6): 732–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509352044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engesser, Sven, and Michael Brüggemann. 2016. “Mapping the Minds of the Mediators: The Cognitive Frames of Climate Journalists from Five Countries.” Public Understanding of Science 25 (7): 825–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515583621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entman, Robert M. 1993. “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 43 (4): 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAZ. 2019. “Merkel verteidigt Klimapaket: „Politik ist das, was möglich ist“.” FAZ.NET, 2019. https://www.faz.net/1.6393990.

  • Gabel, Matthew, and Simon Hix. 2002. “Defining the EU Political Space: An Empirical Study of the European Elections Manifestos, 1979-1999.” Comparative Political Studies 35 (8): 934–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/001041402236309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, Stephen M. 2011. “Climate Justice.” In The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society, edited by John S. Dryzek, Richard B. Norgaard, and David Schlosberg, 309–20. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilman, Nils, Doug Randall, and Peter Schwartz. 2011. “Climate Change and ‘Security.’” Edited by John S. Dryzek. The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society, 251–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199566600.003.0017.

  • Grande, Edgar, Swen Hutter, Alena Kerscher, and Regina Becker. 2016. “Framing Europe: Are Cultural-Identitarian Frames Driving Politicisation?” In Politicising Europe: Integration and Mass Politics, 181–206. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316422991.009

  • Haines, Andy, and Howard Frumkin. 2021. Planetary Helath. Safeguarding Human Helath and the Environment in the Anthropocene. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammack, Phillip L. 2008. “Narrative and the Cultural Psychology of Identity.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 12 (3): 222–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308316892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, Carol Terracina, and Tsuyoshi Oshita. 2013. “Climate Change on Trial: An Analysis of the Media Coverage of Climategate.” Journal of Climate Change ISSN 1865-7156 4: 119–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helbling, Marc, Dominic Hoeglinger, and Bruno Wüest. 2010. “How Political Parties Frame European Integration.” European Journal of Political Research 49 (4): 495–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01908.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoeglinger, Dominic. 2016. Politicizing European Integration: Struggling with the Awakening Giant. Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeglinger, Dominic, Bruno Wüest, and Marc Helbling. 2012. “Culture versus Economy: The Framing of Public Debates over Issues Related to Globalization.” In Political Conflict in Western Europe, 229–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, Liesbet, and Gary Marks. 2018. “Cleavage Theory Meets Europe’s Crises: Lipset, Rokkan, and the Transnational Cleavage.” Journal of European Public Policy 25 (1): 109–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2017.1310279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutter, Swen, Edgar Grande, and Hanspeter Kriesi, eds. 2016. Politicising Europe: Integration and Mass Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inhofe, James M. 2012. The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future, 1st ed. Washington, DC: WND Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karplus, Sebastian Rausch and J. Valerie. 2014. “Markets versus Regulation: The Efficiency and Distributional Impacts of U.S. Climate Policy Proposals.” The Energy Journal 35 (Special Issue). https://econpapers.repec.org/article/aenjournl/ej35-si1-11.htm.

  • Kriesi, Hanspeter, Edgar Grande, Martin Dolezal, Marc Helbling, Dominic Hoeglinger, Swen Hutter, and Bruno Wüest. 2012. Political Conflict in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, George. 2014. Don’t Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, Bruno. 2018. Down to Earth. Politics in the New Climatic Regime. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, Matthew. 2018. “Right-Wing Populism and the Climate Change Agenda: Exploring the Linkages.” Environmental Politics 27 (4): 712–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1458411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lövbrand, Eva, and Johannes Stripple. 2006. “The Climate as Political Space: On the Territorialisation of the Global Carbon Cycle.” Review of International Studies 32 (2): 217–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210506006991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luterbacher, Urs, and Detlef F. Sprinz, eds. 2018. Global Climate Policy: Actors, Concepts, and Enduring Challenges. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHugh, Lucy Holmes, Maria Carmen Lemos, and Tiffany Hope Morrison. 2021. “Risk? Crisis? Emergency? Implications of the New Climate Emergency Framing for Governance and Policy.” WIREs Climate Change 12 (6): e736. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meckling, Jonas. 2011. Carbon Coalitions: Business, Climate Politics, and the Rise of Emissions Trading. Cambridge, MA [u.a.]: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medrano, Juan Díez, and Emily Gray. 2010. “Framing the European Union in National Public Spheres.” In The Making of a European Public Sphere: Media Discourse and Political Contention, edited by Ruud Koopmans and Paul Statham, 195–222. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761010.012.

  • Meyer, Lukas, and Pranay Sanklecha, eds. 2017. Climate Justice and Historical Emissions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuhoff, Karsten. 2011. Climate Policy after Copenhagen: The Role of Carbon Pricing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, Peter, Harriet Bulkeley, Karen Turner, Christopher Shaw, Simon Caney, Elizabeth Shove, and Nicholas Pidgeon. 2015. “Governance Traps in Climate Change Politics: Re-Framing the Debate in Terms of Responsibilities and Rights.” WIREs Climate Change 6 (6): 535–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, Peter John, and Matthew Paterson. 2010. Climate Capitalism: Global Warming and the Transformation of the Global Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, Peter, Matthew Paterson, and Martin Craig. 2021. “The Politics of Green Transformations: An Introduction to the Special Section.” New Political Economy 26 (6): 903–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2020.1810215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, Jari Ilmari. 2008. “The Foundations of Jürgen Habermas’s Discourse Ethics.” The Journal of Value Inquiry 42 (2): 255–68https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-008-9119-7

  • O’Brien, Karen, Asunción Lera St Clair, and Berit Kristoffersen. 2010a. “The Framing of Climate Change: Why It Matters.” In Climate Change, Ethics and Human Security, edited by Karen O’Brien, 3–22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, Karen, Asuncion Lera St. Clair, and Berit Kristoffersen, eds. 2010. Climate Change, Ethics and Human Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oels, Angela. 2012. “From ‘Securitization’ of Climate Change to ‘Climatization’ of the Security Field: Comparing Three Theoretical Perspectives.” In Climate Change, Human Security and Violent Conflict. Challenges for Societal Stability, edited by Jürgen Scheffran, Michael Brzoska, Hans Günter Brauch, Peter MIchael Link, and Janpeter Schilling, 185–205. Hexagon Series on Human and Environmental Security and Peace. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okereke, Chukwumerije. 2011. “Moral Foundations for Global Environmental and Climate Justice.” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements 69: 117–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1358246111000245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. “Equity and Justice in Polycentric Climate Governance.” In Governing Climate Change: Polycentricity in Action? edited by Andrew Jordan, Dave Huitema, Harro van Asselt, and Johanna Forster, 320–37. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Okereke, Chukwumerije, and Philip Coventry. 2016. “Climate Justice and the International Regime: Before, during, and after Paris.” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 7 (6): 834–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, Matthew. 2021a. In Search of Climate Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2021b. “‘The End of the Fossil Fuel Age’? Discourse Politics and Climate Change Political Economy.” New Political Economy 26 (6): 923–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2020.1810218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennings, Paul. 2002. “The Dimensionality of the EU Policy Space: The European Elections of 1999.” European Union Politics 3 (1): 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116502003001004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, Jonathan, and John S. Dryzek. 2019. The Politics of the Anthropocene. Oxford Scholarship Online. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, Tim, and Andrew Jordan. 2013. “The European Union: The Polycentric Climate Policy Leader?” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 4 (2): 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rebich-Hespanha, Stacy, Ronald E. Rice, Daniel R. Montello, Sean Retzloff, Sandrine Tien, and João P. Hespanha. 2015. “Image Themes and Frames in US Print News Stories about Climate Change.” Environmental Communication 9 (4): 491–519https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.983534

  • Rustin, Charles. 1999. “Habermas, Discourse Ethics, and International Justice.” Alternatives 24 (2): 167–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/030437549902400202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer, Mike, and Saffron O’Neill. 2017. “Frame Analysis in Climate Change Communication.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228620-e-487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlichting, Inga. 2013. “Strategic Framing of Climate Change by Industry Actors: A Meta-Analysis.” Environmental Communication 7 (4): 493–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2013.812974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, Vivien A. 2008. “Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse.” Annual Review of Political Science 11 (1): 303–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.060606.135342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. “Taking Ideas and Discourse Seriously: Explaining Change through Discursive Institutionalism as the Fourth ‘New Institutionalism.’” European Political Science Review 2 (1): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175577390999021X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, Donald A., and Martin Rein. 1995. Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractrable Policy Controversies. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjursen, Helene. 2006. “The EU as a ‘Normative’ Power: How Can This Be?” Journal of European Public Policy 13 (2): 235–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500451667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, Nicholas. 2007. The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Surel, Yves. 2000. “The Role of Cognitive and Normative Frames in Policy-Making.” Journal of European Public Policy 7 (4): 495–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760050165334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vliegenthart, Rens. 2012. “Framing in Mass Communication Research—An Overview and Assessment.” Sociology Compass 6 (12): 937–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vreese, Claes H. de. 2012. “New Avenues for Framing Research.” American Behavioral Scientist 56 (3): 365–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426331

  • Weathers, Melinda R., and Brenden E. Kendall. 2016. “Developments in the Framing of Climate Change as a Public Health Issue in US Newspapers.” Environmental Communication 10 (5): 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2015.1050436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehling, Elisabeth. 2016. Politisches Framing: Wie Eine Nation Sich Ihr Denken Einredet - Und Daraus Politik Macht. Edition Medienpraxis. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendler, Frank. 2016. Debating Europe in National Parliaments: Public Justification and Political Polarization. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2022. “Contesting the European Union in a Changing Climate: Policy Narratives and the Justification of Supranational Governance.” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 30 (1): 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2021.1882107.

  • Wittmayer, J. M., J. Backhaus, F. Avelino, B. Pel, T. Strasser, I. Kunze, and L. Zuijderwijk. 2019. “Narratives of Change: How Social Innovation Initiatives Construct Societal Transformation.” Futures 112: 102433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2019.06.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wurzel, Rüdiger, James Connelly, and Duncan Liefferink, eds. 2017. The European Union in International Climate Change Politics: Still Taking a Lead? Routledge Studies in European Foreign Policy. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2017–; ZDB-ID: 2885275–8 1. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis group.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Frank Wendler

Authors
  1. Frank Wendler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frank Wendler .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wendler, F. (2022). Theoretical Framework: Framing, Issue Dimensions and Political Space. In: Framing Climate Change in the EU and US After the Paris Agreement. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04059-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation