Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10071/25701 |
Resumo: | How do adherents to hegemonic discourses construe and respond to radical arguments by activists? To address the question, we examined how adherents to hegemonic climate change discourses react to a climate activist’s arguments. In interviews conducted with corporate actors of low-carbon transitions, we used a video excerpt to elicit critical reactions to an activist’s argumentation on carbon offsetting. We used the critical reactions as an index of interviewees’ reception of the activist’s case and pragma-dialectical theory to analyze them. We found that interviewees advanced four types of criticism concerning individual agency, awareness-raising, neutralization, and financial instruments. We discuss their inter-relations and how interviewees construed the activist’s argumentation in ways that evaded his more antagonistic claims. |
id |
RCAP_888cdccf00353401c356095c57c14467 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/25701 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debateActivist discourseArgument receptionFrame contractionEvasion strategiesCarbon offsettingHow do adherents to hegemonic discourses construe and respond to radical arguments by activists? To address the question, we examined how adherents to hegemonic climate change discourses react to a climate activist’s arguments. In interviews conducted with corporate actors of low-carbon transitions, we used a video excerpt to elicit critical reactions to an activist’s argumentation on carbon offsetting. We used the critical reactions as an index of interviewees’ reception of the activist’s case and pragma-dialectical theory to analyze them. We found that interviewees advanced four types of criticism concerning individual agency, awareness-raising, neutralization, and financial instruments. We discuss their inter-relations and how interviewees construed the activist’s argumentation in ways that evaded his more antagonistic claims.Taylor and Francis2022-09-01T00:00:00Z2022-01-01T00:00:00Z20222022-06-24T16:20:28Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/25701eng1051-143110.1080/10511431.2021.1971381Üzelgün, M. A.Fernandes-Jesus, M.Küçükural, O.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-09T17:49:44Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/25701Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T22:24:27.868046Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate |
title |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate |
spellingShingle |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate Üzelgün, M. A. Activist discourse Argument reception Frame contraction Evasion strategies Carbon offsetting |
title_short |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate |
title_full |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate |
title_fullStr |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate |
title_full_unstemmed |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate |
title_sort |
Reception of climate activist messages by low-carbon transition actors: argument evasion in the carbon offsetting debate |
author |
Üzelgün, M. A. |
author_facet |
Üzelgün, M. A. Fernandes-Jesus, M. Küçükural, O. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fernandes-Jesus, M. Küçükural, O. |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Üzelgün, M. A. Fernandes-Jesus, M. Küçükural, O. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Activist discourse Argument reception Frame contraction Evasion strategies Carbon offsetting |
topic |
Activist discourse Argument reception Frame contraction Evasion strategies Carbon offsetting |
description |
How do adherents to hegemonic discourses construe and respond to radical arguments by activists? To address the question, we examined how adherents to hegemonic climate change discourses react to a climate activist’s arguments. In interviews conducted with corporate actors of low-carbon transitions, we used a video excerpt to elicit critical reactions to an activist’s argumentation on carbon offsetting. We used the critical reactions as an index of interviewees’ reception of the activist’s case and pragma-dialectical theory to analyze them. We found that interviewees advanced four types of criticism concerning individual agency, awareness-raising, neutralization, and financial instruments. We discuss their inter-relations and how interviewees construed the activist’s argumentation in ways that evaded his more antagonistic claims. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-09-01T00:00:00Z 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z 2022 2022-06-24T16:20:28Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/25701 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/25701 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
1051-1431 10.1080/10511431.2021.1971381 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Taylor and Francis |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Taylor and Francis |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799134806898900992 |