The blending of discourses in Sweden’s “urge to go ahead” in climate politics

Mathias Zannakis ()

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 2015, vol. 15, issue 2, 217-236

Abstract: This paper investigates what made possible Sweden’s “urge to go ahead” in climate policy, an issue particularly interesting given the problem with non-compliance in the climate regime. The material reveals that there was tension regarding how great burden Sweden should shoulder and to what extent emissions reductions should be made domestically. Despite this tension, Sweden decided to have a more ambitious national target (−4 %) than required by the EU burden sharing agreement (+4 %), which allocated the EU’s Kyoto Protocol targets within EU-15. It was also decided that emissions reductions should not account for the flexible mechanisms or carbon sinks. Importantly, the national −4 % target was over-implemented (−16 % in 1990–2011). These decisions were institutionalized until the center-right government in 2009 formulated the 2020 targets. Using argumentative discourse analysis, I conclude that what made possible Sweden’s comparatively ambitious climate policy was the discourse coalitions (although different in character) formed around primarily two story lines that were blended: Opportunity (in line with the discourse on ecological modernization) and Ecological Justice (in line with the discourse on civic environmentalism). However, the latter was de-emphasized by the center-right government that came to power in 2006, reflecting the influence of a Sacrifice story line and the increased importance of the norm of cost-efficiency. Convincing others about the truthfulness of the Opportunity story line would possibly be effective for making others willing to commit to obligations and actually implement them. However, the diminishing importance of the Ecological Justice story line may affect negatively how Sweden is viewed internationally. If the overarching aim is to get as many countries as possible to commit to and comply with quantitative commitments within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, then it might not only be of importance whether Sweden can “deliver” but possibly also how one delivers. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Keywords: Climate responsibility; UNFCCC; Discourse; Story lines; Environmental leaders; Sweden (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10784-013-9235-0 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:15:y:2015:i:2:p:217-236

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10784

DOI: 10.1007/s10784-013-9235-0

Access Statistics for this article

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics is currently edited by Joyeeta Gupta

More articles in International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().