Is it possible to achieve ecological sustainability with our current democratic system? This question constitutes the democracy-environment nexus which has been a core theme in both the public debate as well as in research ever since the climate issue gained status of being a social problem in the 1970s. We are constantly presented with increasingly alarming science about the consequences of global warming. Yet, the coordinated political responses for effective measures against such consequences, are still missing. The question therefore remains highly relevant. One actor in society that certainly raises frustration about the neglected climate change responses, are the social movements. With a new wave of climate movements, we have seen key figures like Greta Thunberg take a seat at the tables during UN Climate summits. Fridays for Future among many other climate movements are criticizing the current democratic system’s lack of effective environmental policies. It is important to analyze their critique to understand if we need to change the current democratic system in order to tackle climate change. This paper aims to make a contribution to this debate by analyzing statements made by the new Swedish climate movement Återställ Våtmarker. For my analysis I use an analytical chart of the ideal types “ecological democracy” and “environmental democracy”, constructed by Jonathan Pickering, Karin Bäckstrand and David Schlosberg. These ideal types are used as a systematic concept of the democracy-environment nexus. The statements are found in my in-depth interview with one of the organization’s press contacts, on their website as well as in media. By categorizing the statements as either ecological democratic or environmental democratic I intend to conclude whether Återställ Våtmarker has an idea of democracy that poses systemic criticism towards our current system. The findings of this study support that Återställ Våtmarker’s view of democracy has more tendencies towards ecological democracy. In this paper, I have therefore found empirical evidence suggesting that Återställ Våtmarker pose systemic criticism towards our current democratic system.

The aim of this study was to examine and compare how two different climate protest cases were framed in two Swedish newspapers with different political slants, namely, Aftonbladet and SvD. The study also sought to analyze potential differences between the newspapers, and how closely the portrayals aligned with the protest paradigm. The first protest involved the activist group ‘Återställ Våtmarker’, who gathered on the highway and caused a traffic stop in order to advocate for the restoration of Swedish wetlands. In the second case, climate activists, including Greta Thunberg, participated in a blockade at the entrance to the Parliament to promote climate justice. To examine the framing of these protests, a dataset of articles was analyzed using qualitative content analysis in the form of framing analysis, grounded in the theoretical framework of framing theory and the protest paradigm. The protest paradigm is the tendency of news media to portray protests in a negative light, often depicting them as disruptions to the established order. The study found that the protest on the highway was framed more negatively and thus aligned more closely with the protest paradigm than the other protest. The framing of the Parliament protest, which diverged from the paradigm, was more positive, and mostly emphasized the purpose of the action as well as demonstrated stronger support for the activists. No differences were identified between the newspapers' news articles, but it was noted that the opinion pieces about the parliamentary protest differed. While Aftonbladet's opinion pieces praised the activists, SvD's strongly criticized them.

Denna kvalitativa studie ämnar undersöka vilka diskurser, perspektiv och aktörer som speglas i media kring ämnet klimataktivism. Detta har undersökts genom en kritisk diskursanalys i vilken tematisk analys har använts för att analysera 193 stycken medieartiklar från de fyra mest lästa svenska tidningarna. Studien har utförts i en svensk kontext och begränsats till ett tidsspann mellan 2018-2023. Ytterligare presenteras tidigare forskning inom ämnet för ny klimataktivism samt klimataktivism och media. För analysen av resultatet har Foucaults (2003, 2009) teorier kring disciplin, makt och kunskap, ideologi, diskurser, den reglerande apparaten samt olydnad använts som ett övergripande ramverk, vilka kompletteras med begrepp från Mathiesen (1982). Utöver detta har Becks (2009, 2012) teorier om risksamhälle och hot använts, vilka kompletteras med begrepp från Altheide (2013), för att kunna analysera resultatet på omfattande och djupgående sätt, anpassat till det moderna samhället. Medelst detta visar undersökningen en djupgående och omfattande bild genom att rama in mediers speglande av ämnet klimataktivismen i samtiden. Det visades olika, delvis motstridiga, diskurser: ”kampen för klimatet”, ”klimataktivismen som hot” samt ”politiken som hot”, vilka också innefattar olika mindre diskurser om exempelvis ”domedagen” och ”civil olydnad”. Vidare framkom att alla diskurser innefattar positiva och negativa diskursiva aspekter, där dock alla diskurser och aspekter ramas in av en allomfattande ”riskdiskurs” som uttrycks genom de olika perspektiven inom ämnet klimataktivism. Sist förs en avslutande diskussion om konsekvenserna och utkomsterna av denna diskursiva framställning av klimataktivism; en reflektion kring vad som sker och kan ske genom mediers porträttering och vilken vikt media har för produktionen av upplevelser i samhället. / This qualitative study aims to analyse discourses, perspectives and actors which are represented in media within the topic: climate activism. The study was implemented through critical discourse analysis (CDA) in which thematic analysis was used to analyse the material of 193 news articles from the four most read Swedish newspapers. Furthermore, the study was delimited to Sweden and in a timeframe from 2018-2023. Also, previous research about today’s climate activism and climate activism and media is represented. For the analysis of the results, Foucault’s (2009, 2003) theories about discipline, power and knowledge, ideology, discourse, the ruling apparatus, and disobedience have been used. These theories have been completed by concepts from Mathiesen (1982). Moreover Beck’s (2009, 2012) theories of risk society and threat have been used and completed by concepts from Altheide (2013), to be able to analyse the results in an extensive and profound way which fits today’s modern society. Through that, the study shows a deep and including picture that frames how media portraits the topic: climate activism. The study has shown discourses, that in some ways are contradictory: “fight for the climate”, “climate activists as threat” and “politics as threat”. These discourses include several smaller discourses, for instance “doomsday” and “civil disobedience”. Also, it has been shown that all discourses include positive and negative aspects, yet all discourses and aspects of them set in an all-encompassing “risk-discourse”, which takes form through the different perspectives that are included in the subject of climate activism. Lastly, a final discussion is held about the consequences and outcomes of the discursive representation of climate activism; a reflection about what is and what can be happening because of the representation through media and what significance media has in the production of experience in society. / <p>2024-05-30</p>