The analytical method used within this research thus builds on a number of different approaches to analysing discourses of the environment (Gamson and Modigliani , 1989; Hajer , 1995; Dryzek , 2005; Carvalho, 2008). When considered as a whole, two com- ponents of discourses, discursive elements and discursive practices, can be identified within the literature (although termed in different ways). This analytical separation cuts through my analysis, the details of which are set out below.
CHAPTER 3
actors within the discourse. Gamson and Modigliani (1989) show how discursive el- ements are used to frame the issue of nuclear power within ‘media packages’. They distinguish between framing devices, which influence what is thought about an issue (e.g., exemplars, metaphors, images and depictions) and reasoning devices, which justify what should be done about an issue (e.g., causal arguments, consequences and moral claims). More recently, Carvalho (2002) developed a framework for media discourse analysis that incorporated a number of similar elements. Developed from a critical discourse analysis perspective, Carvalho’s framework for textual discourse analysis assessed articles based on: morphological characteristics of the article; the ontological content of the article; the use of linguistic and rhetorical devices; the voices of actors represented; ideological viewpoints; and the discursive strategies employed. For the purposes of this study, not all these dimensions were adopted within the analytical framework adopted here. The morphological characteristics of the article (such as word count, location in newspaper etc.) were omitted, as due to the small sample size (and general lack of coverage on this issue) all articles were given equal weight within the analysis. In addition, the language and rhetoric of the articles was largely excluded. A common focus of analysis and critical discourse analysis more broadly (e.g., van Dijk , 1995), the linguistic features of the text, such as semantics and syntax were not considered in this analysis, as an analysis at this level of detail would have meant a significant reduction in the amount of data that could be analysed within the scope of this project.
This first stage of analysis led to a range of codes, representing the different discursive elements listed above. These included: framing devices, for example, the meta-code Problem frames, within which sat the codes Climate change and Energy security, and the meta-code Solution frames, within which sat codes such as Domestic renewable energy and Retrofitting existing homes; and rhetorical devices, for example codes relat- ing Metaphors and Imagery (as well as the meta-code Discursive strategies discussed below). Following the approach of Dryzek (2005), the next stage of the analysis was
identifying groups of these elements within the discourse that cohered together. Due to the more contained nature of the discourse surrounding low carbon housing (in comparison to the broad and multi-dimensional discourses of the environment), Hajer ’s (1995) concept of storylines, was adopted as a central aspect of the analysis. A storyline was seen to be identified when a group of the discursive elements described above could be seen to cohere together, so as to allow the concept of low carbon housing to be understood or interpreted in a way that was shared across the discourse, in multiple source articles and at different points in time.
In contrast, discursive practices represent the ways in which actors use these elements to promote their own positions and understandings of an issue. Storylines can be used and manipulated to re-order understandings and gain discursive credibility and can be taken up by diverse actors, forming discourse coalitions (Hajer , 1995). While discursive practices are a key feature of the environmental policy discourse literature (due to the focus on discourse as a form of practice), it is not clear from the literature what this term means in relation to media. Previously omitted from analysis within media discourse re- search, Carvalho (2008) develops a framework for investigating the discursive strategies used to actively frame an issue, object or actor. Her explication of discursive strategies was adopted within this thesis, in order to incorporate this important aspect of discourse analysis. A number of strategies are thus considered relevant to this research, including: the legitimisation and/or contestation of other actor’s positions; the appropriation of existing arguments or objects within the discourse; analytical or relational reframing (the redefinition/repositioning of objects and problems, or of actors and responsibility respectively).
One innovative aspect of Carvalho’s (2005) analytical framework was to investigate dis- course at both a ‘comparative-synchronic’ level, through an in depth analysis of the dis- courses within the different newspaper sources, as well as from a ‘historical-diachronic’ perspective, which focused this analysis on critical discourse moments throughout the development of the discourse. While this approach is particularly successful in inves-
CHAPTER 3
tigating discursive changes over a long time period (e.g., Carvalho, 2005; 2007; 2010), this aspect of the analysis was not adopted in full, due to the recent development of the concept of low carbon housing and the small sample size (234 articles, in comparison to the thousands relating to climate change more broadly). Whilst this meant that sampling through time was not possible (or necessary), attention was still paid to any discursive shifts over the short time period considered within this analysis, with any differences between the four source newspapers also identified.
3.5.4 Phases 2 & 3 data analysis: Investigating expert and public dis-