This paper investigates the debate surrounding the climate proclamation that 301 scientists gave to the danish politicians in an opinion piece published in the Danish newspaper, Politiken, May 11th 2018. In this contribution the scientists proclaims that the politicians should take the climate changes more seriously, and they call for a new ‘climate realism’. Amongst others the scientists wishes to break with the image showing Denmark as a so-called ‘green’ country. They claim that wealth is equal to CO2-emissions, and that the Danish people are therefore amongst the ‘greatest sinners’, when it comes to climate changes. Therefore they claim that politics on climate issues should be prioritised before economic growth. We seek to investigate the positions and debate around this specific issue, and therefore approach the debate by looking at discourses that define these positions in the climate proclamation and the debate and discourses that came in the following aftermath of the opinion piece. To extract the discourses we use the approach, ‘critical discourse analysis’, defined by Norman Fairclough and Thomas Brecks definition of risk communication. With this approach we seek to analyze and discuss these discourses, and how they define the debate and positions on climate changes between the Danish scientists and politicians.
We conclude that the discourses of the climate debate goes in many directions and have opposing opinions. Especially when it comes to the question about economic priority, the question about Denmark as a pioneer on the climate change mitigation and the defining on understanding the risks of climate change.
|Uddannelser||Kommunikation, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||3 jan. 2019|