IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v50y2017i2d10.1007_s11077-016-9274-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The narrative properties of ideology: the adversarial turn and climate skepticism in the USA

Author

Listed:
  • Raul P. Lejano

    (New York University)

  • Jennifer Dodge

    (University at Albany, State University of New York)

Abstract

A central concern in policy studies is understanding how multiple, contending groups in society interact, deliberate, and forge agreements over policy issues. Often, public discourse turns from engagement into impasse, as in the fractured politics of climate policy in the USA. Existing theories are unclear about how such an “adversarial turn” develops. We theorize that an important aspect of the adversarial turn is the evolution of a group’s narrative into what can be understood as an ideology, the formation of which is observable through certain textual-linguistic properties. Analysis “of” these narrative properties elucidates the role of narrative in fostering (1) coalescence around a group ideology, and (2) group isolation and isolation of ideological coalitions from others’ influence. By examining a climate skeptical narrative, we demonstrate how to analyze ideological properties of narrative, and illustrate the role of ideological narratives in galvanizing and, subsequently, isolating groups in society. We end the piece with a reflection on further issues suggested by the narrative analysis, such as the possibility that climate skepticism is founded upon a more “genetic” meta-narrative that has roots in social issues far removed from climate, which means efforts at better communicating climate change science may not suffice to support action on climate change.

Suggested Citation

  • Raul P. Lejano & Jennifer Dodge, 2017. "The narrative properties of ideology: the adversarial turn and climate skepticism in the USA," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 195-215, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:50:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11077-016-9274-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-016-9274-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-016-9274-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-016-9274-9?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorien Jasny & Joseph Waggle & Dana R. Fisher, 2015. "An empirical examination of echo chambers in US climate policy networks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 782-786, August.
    2. Sartori, Giovanni, 1969. "Politics, Ideology, and Belief Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(2), pages 398-411, June.
    3. Raul P. Lejano & Anne Taufen Wessells, 2006. "Community and Economic Development: Seeking Common Ground in Discourse and in Practice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(9), pages 1469-1489, August.
    4. John Boswell, 2013. "Why and How Narrative Matters in Deliberative Systems," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(3), pages 620-636, October.
    5. Carl Grafton & Anne Permaloff, 2005. "Liberal and conservative dissensus in areas of domestic public policy other than business and economics," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 38(1), pages 45-67, March.
    6. Greg Hampton, 2009. "Narrative policy analysis and the integration of public involvement in decision making," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(3), pages 227-242, August.
    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. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    2. Kris Hartley & Minh Khuong Vu, 2020. "Fighting fake news in the COVID-19 era: policy insights from an equilibrium model," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 735-758, December.

    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. Prasad, Ajnesh & Holzinger, Ingo, 2013. "Seeing through smoke and mirrors: A critical analysis of marketing CSR," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1915-1921.
    2. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    3. Alexandre Morin-Chassé & Erick Lachapelle, 2020. "Partisan strength and the politicization of global climate change: a re-examination of Schuldt, Roh, and Schwarz 2015," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(1), pages 31-40, March.
    4. Shaw, Christopher & Nerlich, Brigitte, 2015. "Metaphor as a mechanism of global climate change governance: A study of international policies, 1992–2012," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 34-40.
    5. Meg Holden & Andy Scerri & Azadeh Hadizadeh Esfahani, 2015. "Justifying Redevelopment ‘Failures' Within Urban ‘Success Stories': Dispute, Compromise, and a New Test of Urbanity," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 451-470, May.
    6. Richard Thomas Watson & Kirk Plangger & Leyland Pitt & Amrit Tiwana, 2023. "A Theory of Information Compression: When Judgments Are Costly," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1089-1108, September.
    7. Melvin J. Hinich & Michael C. Munger, 1992. "A Spatial Theory of Ideology," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 5-30, January.
    8. Valeria Burdea & Jonathan Woon, 2023. "Getting it Right: Communication, Voting, and Collective Truth Finding," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 443, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    9. Soojong Kim, 2019. "Directionality of information flow and echoes without chambers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Dana R. Fisher & Philip Leifeld, 2019. "The polycentricity of climate policy blockage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 469-487, August.
    11. Berg, Annukka & Hukkinen, Janne I., 2011. "The paradox of growth critique: Narrative analysis of the Finnish sustainable consumption and production debate," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 151-160.
    12. Katharina Momsen & Markus Ohndorf, 2023. "Expressive voting versus information avoidance: experimental evidence in the context of climate change mitigation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 45-74, January.
    13. Youtie, Jan & Bozeman, Barry & Jabbehdari, Sahra & Kao, Andrew, 2017. "Credibility and use of scientific and technical information in policy making: An analysis of the information bases of the National Research Council’s committee reports," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 108-120.
    14. Kozitsin, Ivan V., 2024. "Optimal control in opinion dynamics models: diversity of influence mechanisms and complex influence hierarchies," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    15. Abhishek Samantray & Paolo Pin, 2019. "Credibility of climate change denial in social media," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    16. Jennifer Dodge, 2014. "Civil society organizations and deliberative policy making: interpreting environmental controversies in the deliberative system," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(2), pages 161-185, June.
    17. Frederick Armah & Isaac Luginaah & Justice Odoi, 2013. "Artisanal small-scale mining and mercury pollution in Ghana: a critical examination of a messy minerals and gold mining policy," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 3(4), pages 381-390, December.
    18. Sténs, Anna & Mårald, Erland, 2020. "“Forest property rights under attack”: Actors, networks and claims about forest ownership in the Swedish press 2014–2017," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    19. Denghang Chen & Yanlong Guo & Chenyang Wang & Yinrui Xu & Han Zhang, 2022. "Dispersion and Disparity: Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis of Research on Climate Change Science Communication," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-17, November.
    20. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2016. "Agricultural development policy debates: who has the better story?," 2016 Fifth International Conference, September 23-26, 2016, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 249284, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).

    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:kap:policy:v:50:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11077-016-9274-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.