Taming collective action in wicked problem: Advancing “collectively generative action framing” in climate management research

This paper addresses the emerging conflicts surrounding the right direction for the field in both management science (Nyberg & Wright, 2022b, 2022a; Wohlgezogen et al., 2022) and climate governance (Keohane, 2016; Klinsky et al., 2017). Through an emancipatory style of theorizing (Cornelissen et al., 2021), we investigate the requisite properties of theoretical frames to propel climate mitigation research and practice forward. Intertwining three prevalent literature strands - wicked problems, grand challenges, and framing literature - this study builds upon foundational properties delineated in robust wicked problem management and the generative potential (and limitations) of framing climate change. While robust wicked problem management extensively examines the process of knowledge revision and acknowledges a problem frame/solution nexus, it overlooks how a lack of generativity within the problem frame can constrain the exploration of innovative forms of collective action. Conversely, framing literature probes the connection between climate change framing and innovative collective action but struggles to pinpoint frame properties that ensure robustness. By amalgamating these perspectives, this study advocates for a focus on the framing of mitigation instead of climate change and introduces the concept of "collectively generative action frames" as a requisite to foster robust, innovative, and actionable climate research. To elucidate this theoretical construct, a non-collectively generative action frame: "climate mitigation as a collective action problem", is juxtaposed with a collectively generative action frame: "climate mitigation as a rescue action." Through this comparative analysis, the study illuminates the properties of such concepts and their potential to unveil implicit hypotheses of current theoretical perspectives and invigorate climate mitigation efforts.