IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v56y2019i8p1681-1700.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protesting iconic megaprojects. A discourse network analysis of the evolution of the conflict over Stuttgart 21

Author

Listed:
  • Melanie Nagel

    (University of Constance, Germany)

  • Keiichi Satoh

    (University of Constance, Germany)

Abstract

The past decades witnessed enormous transformations in the built environment of cities, and one of these trends is the development of iconic megaprojects. Public protests against these projects occur frequently, and scholars in urban governance have diagnosed this as an emerging ‘post-political’ condition, that is, as a sign of a deficient democratic politics. Others criticise this kind of reasoning as a ‘post-political-trap’ (Beveridge and Koch, 2017), and demand more research. This article responds to this debate with an empirical study of the popular protests against the infrastructural public transport project Stuttgart 21 in Germany. We apply discourse network analysis to investigate the evolution of the discourse, illuminate multiple dynamic connections between issues and actors, and apply factor analysis to identify the key issues of the conflict. Our study complicates and qualifies the arguments for a ‘post-political’ state of urban politics.

Suggested Citation

  • Melanie Nagel & Keiichi Satoh, 2019. "Protesting iconic megaprojects. A discourse network analysis of the evolution of the conflict over Stuttgart 21," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(8), pages 1681-1700, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:56:y:2019:i:8:p:1681-1700
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098018775903
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098018775903
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098018775903?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dana Fisher & Philip Leifeld & Yoko Iwaki, 2013. "Mapping the ideological networks of American climate politics," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 116(3), pages 523-545, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Growe & Mark Baker & Abbas Ziafati Bafarasat, 2020. "The Legitimation of Planning Processes as a Challenge to Metropolitan Governance," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Governing wickedness in megaprojects: discursive and institutional perspectives," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 131-147.
    3. Camerin, Federico, 2019. "From “Ribera Plan” to “Diagonal Mar”, passing through 1992 “Vila Olímpica”. How urban renewal took place as urban regeneration in Poblenou district (Barcelona)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    4. Sebastian Haunss & Jonas Kuhn & Sebastian Padó & Andre Blessing & Nico Blokker & Erenay Dayanik & Gabriella Lapesa, 2020. "Integrating Manual and Automatic Annotation for the Creation of Discourse Network Data Sets," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 326-339.
    5. Fabrizio Coticchia & Marco Di Giulio, 2023. "Nonuse and hypocritical use of strategic narratives in Megaprojects: the case of the Florence high-speed railway," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 164-183.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ghinoi, Stefano & Wesz Junior, Valdemar João & Piras, Simone, 2018. "Political debates and agricultural policies: Discourse coalitions behind the creation of Brazil’s Pronaf," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 68-80.
    2. Xinsheng Liu & Arnold Vedlitz & James Stoutenborough & Scott Robinson, 2015. "Scientists’ views and positions on global warming and climate change: A content analysis of congressional testimonies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(4), pages 487-503, August.
    3. Matthew C. Nowlin, 2022. "Who should “do more” about climate change? Cultural theory, polycentricity, and public support for climate change actions across actors and governments," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 468-485, July.
    4. Caroline Bhattacharya, 2020. "Gatekeeping the Plenary Floor: Discourse Network Analysis as a Novel Approach to Party Control," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 229-242.
    5. Dana R. Fisher & Philip Leifeld, 2019. "The polycentricity of climate policy blockage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 469-487, August.
    6. Ghinoi, S. & Piras, S. & Wesz, V.J.J., 2018. "Political debates and agricultural financing policies. Evaluating the crea-tion of Brazil s Pronaf through Discourse Network Analysis," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277274, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Holtmaat, Ellen Alexandra & Adolph, Christopher & Prakash, Aseem, 2020. "The global diffusion of environmental clubs: how pressure from importing countries supports the chemical industry’s Responsible Care® program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    8. Allison Ford & Kari Marie Norgaard, 2020. "Whose everyday climate cultures? Environmental subjectivities and invisibility in climate change discourse," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 43-62, November.
    9. Kate O’Neill & Erika Weinthal & Patrick Hunnicutt, 2017. "Seeing complexity: visualization tools in global environmental politics and governance," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(4), pages 490-506, December.
    10. Simon Schaub & Florence Metz, 2020. "Comparing Discourse and Policy Network Approaches: Evidence from Water Policy on Micropollutants," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 184-199.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:56:y:2019:i:8:p:1681-1700. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.