IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i3p882-d312742.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Frame Disputes or Frame Consensus? “Environment” or “Welfare” First Amongst Climate Strike Protesters

Author

Listed:
  • Kajsa Emilsson

    (School of Social Work, Lund University, Box 23, 221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Håkan Johansson

    (School of Social Work, Lund University, Box 23, 221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Magnus Wennerhag

    (School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University, 141 89 Huddinge, Sweden)

Abstract

Present debates suppose a close linkage between economic, social, and environmental sustainability and suggest that individual wellbeing and living standards need to be understood as directly linked to environmental concerns. Because social movements are often seen as an avant-garde in pushing for change, this article analyzes climate protesters’ support for three key frames in current periods of social transformation, i.e., an “environmental”, an “economic growth”, and a “welfare” frame. The analyzed data material consists of survey responses from over 900 participants in six Global Climate Strikes held in Sweden during 2019. The article investigates the explanatory relevance of three factors: (a) political and ideological orientation, (b) movement involvement, and (c) social characteristics. The results indicate that climate protesters to a large degree support an environmental frame before an economic growth-oriented frame, whereas the situation is more complex regarding support for a welfare frame vis-á-vis an environmental frame. The strongest factors explaining frame support include social characteristics (gender) and protestors’ political and ideological orientation. Movement involvement has limited significance. The article shows how these frames form a fragment of the complexity of these issues, and instances of frame distinctions, hierarchies, and disputes emerge within the most current forms of climate change demonstrations.

Suggested Citation

  • Kajsa Emilsson & Håkan Johansson & Magnus Wennerhag, 2020. "Frame Disputes or Frame Consensus? “Environment” or “Welfare” First Amongst Climate Strike Protesters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:882-:d:312742
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/882/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/882/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel W. O’Neill & Andrew L. Fanning & William F. Lamb & Julia K. Steinberger, 2018. "A good life for all within planetary boundaries," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(2), pages 88-95, February.
    2. Mattias Wahlström & Magnus Wennerhag & Christopher Rootes, 2013. "Framing “The Climate Issue”: Patterns of Participation and Prognostic Frames among Climate Summit Protesters," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 13(4), pages 101-122, November.
    3. Martin Fritz & Max Koch, 2019. "Public Support for Sustainable Welfare Compared: Links between Attitudes towards Climate and Welfare Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, August.
    4. Rhodes, Ekaterina & Axsen, Jonn & Jaccard, Mark, 2017. "Exploring Citizen Support for Different Types of Climate Policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 56-69.
    5. Ian Gough, 2017. "Heat, Greed and Human Need," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16991.
    6. David Schlosberg & Lisette B. Collins, 2014. "From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 359-374, May.
    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. Muscat, A. & de Olde, E.M. & Candel, J.J.L. & de Boer, I.J.M. & Ripoll-Bosch, R., 2022. "The Promised Land: Contrasting frames of marginal land in the European Union," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    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. Katharina Bohnenberger, 2020. "Money, Vouchers, Public Infrastructures? A Framework for Sustainable Welfare Benefits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Buch-Hansen, Hubert & Koch, Max, 2019. "Degrowth through income and wealth caps?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 264-271.
    3. Martin Fritz & Max Koch, 2019. "Public Support for Sustainable Welfare Compared: Links between Attitudes towards Climate and Welfare Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, August.
    4. Tuuli Hirvilammi & Max Koch, 2020. "Sustainable Welfare beyond Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-8, February.
    5. Aila-Leena Matthies & Ingo Stamm & Tuuli Hirvilammi & Kati Närhi, 2019. "Ecosocial Innovations and Their Capacity to Integrate Ecological, Economic and Social Sustainability Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Daniele Malerba, 2022. "The Effects of Social Protection and Social Cohesion on the Acceptability of Climate Change Mitigation Policies: What Do We (Not) Know in the Context of Low- and Middle-Income Countries?," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(3), pages 1358-1382, June.
    7. Tuuli Hirvilammi, 2020. "The Virtuous Circle of Sustainable Welfare as a Transformative Policy Idea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, January.
    8. Maria Petmesidou & Ana M. Guillén, 2022. "Europe’s green, digital and demographic transition: a social policy research perspective," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 28(3), pages 317-332, August.
    9. Richard Bärnthaler & Andreas Novy & Leonhard Plank, 2021. "The Foundational Economy as a Cornerstone for a Social–Ecological Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-19, September.
    10. Eloi Laurent & Jean Jouzel, 2018. "The Well-being Transition: Measuring what counts to protect what matters," Sciences Po publications 35, Sciences Po.
    11. Gatti, Donatella, 2022. "Going green and (un)equal ? Political coalitions, redistribution, and the environment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    12. Rostami-Tabar, Bahman & Ali, Mohammad M. & Hong, Tao & Hyndman, Rob J. & Porter, Michael D. & Syntetos, Aris, 2022. "Forecasting for social good," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1245-1257.
    13. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    14. Olatz Azurza-Zubizarreta & Izaro Basurko-PerezdeArenaza & Eñaut Zelarain & Estitxu Villamor & Ortzi Akizu-Gardoki & Unai Villena-Camarero & Alvaro Campos-Celador & Iñaki Barcena-Hinojal, 2021. "Urban Energy Transitions in Europe, towards Low-Socio-Environmental Impact Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-29, October.
    15. Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Schleich, Joachim & Tu, Gengyang & Whitmarsh, Lorraine & Whittle, Colin, 2022. "Household acceptability of energy efficiency policies in the European Union: Policy characteristics trade-offs and the role of trust in government and environmental identity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    16. Castro, Damaris & Bleys, Brent, 2023. "Do people think they have enough? A subjective income sufficiency assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    17. Gough, Ian, 2020. "The case for Universal Basic Services," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 107815, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. zu Ermgassen, Sophus & Drewniok, Michal & Bull, Joseph & Walker, Christine Corlet & Mancini, Mattia & Ryan-Collins, Josh & Serrenho, André Cabrera, 2022. "A home for all within planetary boundaries: pathways for meeting England’s housing needs without transgressing national climate and biodiversity goals," OSF Preprints 5kxce, Center for Open Science.
    19. Sueur, Cédric & Fourneret, Eric & Espinosa, Romain, 2023. "Animal capital: a new way to define human-animal bond in view of global changes," OSF Preprints svg7x, Center for Open Science.
    20. Ragnheiður Bogadóttir, 2020. "The Social Metabolism of Quiet Sustainability in the Faroe Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:882-:d:312742. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.