Cover not available

Introduction published In: Environmental Argumentation
Edited by Marcin Lewiński and Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1] 2019
► pp. 1–11

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required
Introduction

Environmental argumentation

 | ArgLab, Universidade Nova de Lisboa
 | ArgLab, Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Published online: 14 February 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.00004.int
Article outline
  • Environmental argumentation in context
  • Overview of the issue
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (33)
References
Aakhus, M., & Lewiński, M. 2017. Advancing polylogical analysis of large-scale argumentation: Disagreement management in the fracking controversy. Argumentation, 31(1), 179–207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baber, W. F., & Bartlett, R. V. 2005. Deliberative environmental politics: Democracy and ecological rationality. Cambridge: MIT press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chakrabarty, D. 2009. The climate of history: Four theses. Critical Inquiry, 35(2), 197–222. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. 2000. Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2013. The politics of the Earth: Environmental discourses. 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S., & Pickering, J. 2019. The politics of the Anthropocene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eemeren, F. H. van, Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F., Verheij, B., & Wagemans, J. H. M. 2014. Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, F., & Forester, J. (Eds.) 1993. The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Durham: Duke University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, F., & Gottweis, H. (Eds.) 2012. The argumentative turn revisited. Durham: Duke University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fløttum, K. (ed.) 2017. The role of language in the climate change debate. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fløttum, K., & Dahl, T. 2011. Climate change discourse: Scientific claims in a policy setting. Fachsprache, 3–41, 205–219.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gardiner, S. M. 2011. A perfect moral storm: The ethical tragedy of climate change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gjerstad, Ø. 2017. Competing climate change narratives: An analysis of leader statements during COP21 in Paris. In K. Fløttum (ed.), The role of language in the climate change debate (pp. 31–48). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, J. 2019. Sophistical refutations in the climate change debates. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), 40–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1989. The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society (transl. by T. Burger). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1962).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansson, S. O., & Hirsch Hadorn, G. (Eds.) 2016. The argumentative turn in policy analysis: Reasoning about uncertainty. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harré, R., Brockmeier, J., & Mühlhäusler, P. 1999. Greenspeak: A study of environmental discourse. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hulme, M. 2009. Why we disagree about climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackson, S. 2015. Design thinking in argumentation theory and practice. Argumentation, 29(3), 243–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Laar, J. A., & Krabbe, E. C. W. 2019. Criticism and justification of negotiated compromises: The 2015 Paris agreement in Dutch parliament. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), 91–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Latour, B. 2004. Politics of nature: How to bring sciences into democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lewiński, M. 2016. Shale gas debate in Europe: Pro-and-con dialectics and argumentative polylogues. Discourse & Communication, 10(6), 553–575. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2018. Practical argumentation in the making: Discursive construction of reasons for action. In S. Oswald, T. Herman & J. Jacquin (Eds.), Argumentation and Language. Linguistic, cognitive and discursive explorations (pp. 219–241). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lewiński, M., & Mohammed, D. 2016. Argumentation theory. In K. B. Jensen, R. Craig, J. Pooley & E. Rothenbuhler (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy (pp. 1–15). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nerlich, B., & Jaspal, R. 2012. Metaphors we die by? Geoengineering, metaphors, and the argument from catastrophe. Metaphor and Symbol, 27(2), 131–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palsson, G., Szerszynski, B., Sörlin, S., Marks, J., Avril, B., Crumley, C., Hackmann, H., Holm, P., Ingram, J., Kirman, A., Buendía, M. P., Weehuizen, R. 2013. Reconceptualizing the ‘Anthropos’ in the Anthropocene: Integrating the social sciences and humanities in global environmental change research, Environmental Science and Policy, 281, 3–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pearce, W., Brown, B., Nerlich, B., & Koteyko, N. 2015. Communicating climate change: Conduits, content, and consensus. WIREs Climate Change, 6(6), 613–626. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodrigues, S., Lewiński, M., & Üzelgün, M. A. 2019. Environmental manifestoes: Argumentative strategies in the Ecomodernist Manifesto . Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), 12–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Üzelgün, M. A., Lewiński, M., & Castro, P. 2016. Favorite battlegrounds of climate action: Arguing about scientific consensus, representing science-society relations. Science Communication, 38(6), 699–723. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Üzelgün, M. A., Mohammed, D., Lewiński, M., & Castro, P. 2015. Managing disagreement through yes, but… constructions: An argumentative analysis. Discourse Studies, 17(4), 467–484. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Buhagiar, Luke J. & Gordon Sammut
2023. The Minimal Model of Argumentation: Qualitative data analysis for epistemic speech, text and policy. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 53:4 ► pp. 535 ff. DOI logo
Egres, Dorottya
2021. Strategic maneuvering in extended polylogues. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:2 ► pp. 145 ff. DOI logo
Gâță, Anca
2021. Characteristics of a detached argumentative style in public policy analysis. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:1 ► pp. 46 ff. DOI logo
Üzelgün, Mehmet Ali & João Rui Pereira
2020. Beyond the co-production of technology and society: The discursive treatment of technology with regard to near-term and long-term environmental goals. Technology in Society 61 ► pp. 101244 ff. DOI logo
Lewiński, Marcin & Dima Mohammed
2019. The 2015 Paris Climate Conference. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1 ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue