Abstract
This article examines competing political discourses surrounding shale
extraction in the UK. It asks how these meanings are communicated and why certain
understandings of the issue gain prominence. Drawing on discourse analysis and
framing studies, the article first distinguishes two competing coalitions (pro- and antishale)
and their shared narratives or ‘storylines’ (shale opportunity versus shale threat).
Through a systematic examination of press reports, websites and public documents, it
identifies opposing discursive frames used to shape understanding, meaning and
debates, and assesses their resonance and power. The article builds on existing interpretive
studies by providing a finer-grained analysis of discourse success, and a greater emphasis
on the coalition members who shape and deliver the agreed storyline. It argues that the
anti-shale coalition in the UK has thus far enjoyed greater discourse success for two
reasons: firstly, because the pro-shale coalition lacks trustworthy messengers; secondly,
because shale opponents have successfully expanded the debate beyond economic or
environmental concerns to include potent issues of local power and democracy.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 72-88 |
Journal | Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning |
Volume | 19 |
Issue number | 1 |
Early online date | 10 Jun 2015 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2 Jan 2017 |
Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)
- Shale gas
- fracking
- discourse coalitions
- frames
- UK
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Shale we drill? Discourse dynamics in UK fracking debates'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Profiles
-
Elizabeth Bomberg
- School of Social and Political Science - Personal Chair of Enviromental Politics
- Global Environment and Society Academy
- Global Justice Academy
Person: Academic: Research Active