Skip to main content
Login | Suomeksi | På svenska | In English

Browsing by Subject "discourse analysis"

Sort by: Order: Results:

  • Sademies, Jenni (2018)
    In my thesis I analyzed the ongoing discussion about the relationship between economic growth and the environment by the means of content analysis and discourse analysis. As the continuously growing use of natural resources has a connection to many environmental problems, the functioning of the economy is essential when discussing the alternative solutions to environmental problems. I wanted to investigate what the discussion about the relationship between economic growth and the environment includes, and what kind of phenomenon is economic growth represented as. Theoretical frameworks I used were the environmental discourse analyses of Hajer (1995) and Dryzek (2005). I also paid attention to the organizations behind the discourses by classifying the writers due to the organization they represented. The material I used were texts published in the Internet, with no limitations concerning the form of the publication or the publisher. The only limiting factors I used, were the search terms. The material was taken from a database called “Economy and the Environment” (translation from Finnish), and it was not originally collected for this thesis, but for any scientific or educational purposes. I analyzed three discourses in the discussion concerning the relationship of economic growth and the environment: “Belief in growth”, “Green growth” and “Growth critique”. In Belief in growth, economic growth was an intrinsic goal. Pursuit for higher material standard of living was unquestionably a good thing. Belief in growth seemed to be the discourse especially for business interest groups. There were quite many academic writers too, but the academics were not mainly writing in belief in growth discourse, but were also presented in great numbers among the writers of all three discourses. In Green growth discourse economic growth was not an intrinsic goal, but was considered necessary for financing the welfare state. There were hopes that technological development, ecoefficiency and a transformation towards service and information economy would lessen the adverse environmental effects of economic growth. Technology had a major role in Green growth, and it was even seen as a major force itself, solving environmental problems without any role from the users. Amongst the writers of Green growth, Officials and members of the political Green party of Finland were presented in large numbers. In Growth critique discourse endless economic growth was seen impossible on a finite planet, and the ongoing strive for economic growth was seen to cause environmental and social problems. The discourse wanted to change our economic system, so that the pursuit for growth could be abandoned. Abandoning the pursuit for growth was seen also as a question of global equality: the rich countries were hoped to abandon the pursuit for growth, so that the developing countries would have resources left for growth. Compared to other discourses, amongst the writers of Growth critique, NGO’s, social movements, and civilians were presented in large numbers. The discussion about the relationship of economic growth and the environment constituted as a whole in such a way that in the discourses there were expressed opinions about other discourses and their writers. On the other hand, the discussion included many disconnecting elements. This was for example due to the underlying perceptions of environmental problems, and the nature itself, which differed clearly among the three discourses. This finding is convergent with the discourse analyses of Hajer and Dryzek. In Belief in growth environmental problems were local, and mostly described as pollution, which can be removed with the means of cleaning technology. Nature, in this discourse, was a collection of elements which can be used and organized by humans how ever needed. Also in Green growth environmental problems were mostly described as pollution, but the existence of other kinds of environmental problems were recognized as well. In this discourse the global scale existed, as there was a lot of discussion about climate change. In Growth critique environmental problems were seen as one big global crisis, caused by the excessive use of natural resources by humanity. In both, Green growth and Growth critique, nature was seen as a system of which humans are strongly dependent on. The weakest points in the discussion were related to the use of concepts of economics and environmental sciences, and weakly justifiable arguments. In Growth critique, some complicated concepts of economics and environmental sciences were used, which seemed to be poorly understood by the writers of other discourses. Green growth seemed to be suffering of a lack of historical perspective, especially considering the discussion about ecoefficiency, where strong presumptions about the significance of ecoefficiency in reducing the adverse effects of economic growth were made without any historical perspective. In Belief in growth there was incoherence with the concept of economic growth, and means and ends got mixed in the discussion about economic growth and wellbeing. In both Green growth and Belief in growth there were very weakly justified arguments about hopes for information technology and services creating immaterial economy. Interesting topics for future research in Finnish environmental discourse would be the discourse of Green politics, discussion about immaterial economy and the weaknesses in the arguments related to ecoefficiency.
  • Karlsson, Thomas Malte Molnár (2021)
    The way environmental issues are discursively constructed matters for how they are understood and what possibilities there are to solve them. This makes it relevant to investigate discourses around environmental issues and their proposed solutions. One such solution is ecological compensation, which has been widely implemented as a way to avoid environmental degradation and achieve no net loss of biodiversity. Compensation is also a contested mechanism, however, which has been shaped by the interplay of various discourses with diverging understandings of nature conservation. In this study, I investigate how ecological compensation is constructed by experts in Finland. Using the concept of storylines (Hajer 1995) I analyse 9 interviews conducted with experts involved in the discussion around ecological compensation, which is currently being implemented into Finnish legislation. Three storylines are identified which construct ecological compensation either as 1) a way to enable private actors to take environmental responsibility, 2) additional legislation to fill a “gap” in current conservation practices, or 3) a possibility to modify the relationship with nature by fostering local deliberations. This shows diverging understandings of ecological compensation among the experts and contestation over the way it should be implemented. What is at stake in the discussion are questions of how nature conservation should be understood, which makes ecological compensation pivotal for reconfiguring the field of nature conservation by shifting understandings of the roles and responsibilities involved. At the same time, consensus exists about the need to implement ecological compensation, which the experts all agree is the only possibility to stop biodiversity loss in Finland. This is traced to the interpretative flexibility of the ecological compensation concept which accommodates conflicting understandings and enables the experts to agree about the need for ecological compensation while contesting the “details” of how the implementation should take place. In that way, the implementation is supported despite contestation, and the discussion is focused on how – rather than whether – ecological compensation should be implemented.