Literature DB >> 33596217

Understanding the sustainability debate on forest biomass for energy in Europe: A discourse analysis.

Zachary James Mather-Gratton1,2, Søren Larsen3, Niclas Scott Bentsen2.   

Abstract

The legislative process before the adoption of the revised European Union renewable energy directive mobilised various actors around the forest biomass issue in Europe. Which storylines do actors use to discuss and define the sustainability of forest biomass, how are the differences between the existing storylines explained, and can distinct 'discourse coalitions' of actors be observed as following each storyline? These questions are addressed through a discourse analysis to critically evaluate the debate around the utilisation of forest biomass for European renewable energy to identify persistent storylines adopted by discourse coalitions as they communicate their understanding of the issue, and compete to influence the policymaking and public perception. The hypotheses are that there are more than the hypothetical binary arrangement of pro versus anti storylines, and that some actors follow multiple storylines. Locating the methodological approach on the two dimensions; text versus context and critical versus constructivist, this study pays closer attention to context rather than on individual linguistic elements of texts. Regarding the second dimension, this study builds upon constructivist epistemology, being concerned with understanding which truths these storylines produce for their speakers, and their external influences upon alternative storylines and actors. The three storylines presented here represent three competing discourses regarding forest biomass usage in European renewable energy: forestry prioritised, climate focussed and critical. Each of these are promoted by actors aiming to gain discursive hegemony on the issue, both in terms of the impact of their discourse upon EU policy making and in the eyes of the public. Despite the discursive differences created by these deeply held opposing views of what sustainability and nature are and what this means for forest biomass, there were several points where narrative elements overlapped. These can provide insight for developing a more constructive debate on the sustainability of forest biomass.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33596217      PMCID: PMC7888638          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246873

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  3 in total

1.  Climate change. Fixing a critical climate accounting error.

Authors:  Timothy D Searchinger; Steven P Hamburg; Jerry Melillo; William Chameides; Petr Havlik; Daniel M Kammen; Gene E Likens; Ruben N Lubowski; Michael Obersteiner; Michael Oppenheimer; G Philip Robertson; William H Schlesinger; G David Tilman
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Biomass for energy in the European Union - a review of bioenergy resource assessments.

Authors:  Niclas Scott Bentsen; Claus Felby
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2012-04-30       Impact factor: 6.040

Review 3.  Bioenergy production and sustainable development: science base for policymaking remains limited.

Authors:  Carmenza Robledo-Abad; Hans-Jörg Althaus; Göran Berndes; Simon Bolwig; Esteve Corbera; Felix Creutzig; John Garcia-Ulloa; Anna Geddes; Jay S Gregg; Helmut Haberl; Susanne Hanger; Richard J Harper; Carol Hunsberger; Rasmus K Larsen; Christian Lauk; Stefan Leitner; Johan Lilliestam; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Bart Muys; Maria Nordborg; Maria Ölund; Boris Orlowsky; Alexander Popp; Joana Portugal-Pereira; Jürgen Reinhard; Lena Scheiffle; Pete Smith
Journal:  Glob Change Biol Bioenergy       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 4.745

  3 in total
  1 in total

1.  Towards sustainable management of forest residues in the southern Apennine Mediterranean mountain forests: a scenario-based approach.

Authors:  Maria Teresa Pergola; Luigi Saulino; Maria Castellaneta; Angelo Rita; Giovanni Pecora; Mario Cozzi; Nicola Moretti; Osvaldo Pericolo; Domenico Pierangeli; Severino Romano; Mauro Viccaro; Francesco Ripullone
Journal:  Ann For Sci       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 2.583

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.