Sveriges livsmedelssystem står inför stora utmaningar såsom negativ miljöpåverkan och beroendet av att importera både livsmedel och insatsvaror. Livsmedelsproduktionen, som idag domineras av det konventionella jordbruket, har bland annat inneburit utarmade jordar och exploaterade resurser samt utsläpp av gifter. Studien syftar till att sammanställa och jämföra den vetenskapliga forskningen och samhällsdebatten angående alternativ livsmedels-produktion. Studien är avgränsad till att redogöra för produktionssystemen regenerativa jordbruk och akvaponiska system. Den vetenskapliga forskningen angående regenerativa jordbruk och akvaponiska system sammanställdes i ett kunskapsläge. En kvalitativ innehållsanalys utfördes för att identifiera och sammanställa samhällsdebatten kring systemen. Samhällsdebatten rörande de två alternativa livsmedelsproduktionssystemen bildade följande teman: den samordnande rösten, den offentliga rösten, forskarens röst, den operativa rösten, samt den övriga rösten. Inom dessa teman identifierades följande sex kodord: livsmedelsförsörjning, miljömässiga aspekter, ekonomiska aspekter, sociala aspekter, utmaningar samt möjligheter. I vår undersökning har vi inte formulerat några nya begrepp, däremot har vi funnit samband såväl som avvikelser och glapp mellan samhällsdebatten och den vetenskapliga forskningen. / Sweden's food system faces major challenges such as negative environmental impact and is dependent on importing both food and intermediate goods. Food production, which today is dominated by conventional agriculture, has meant, among other things, depleted soils and exploited resources as well as emissions of toxins. This study aims to compile and compare the scientific research and the public debate regarding alternative food production systems. The study is limited to account for the production systems regenerative agriculture and aquaponic systems. The scientific research regarding regenerative agriculture and aquaponic systems was compiled in a state of knowledge. A qualitative content analysis was performed to identify and compile the public debate about the systems. The public debate concerning alternative food production systems formed the following themes: the coordinating voice, the public voice, the researcher's voice, the operational voice, and the miscellaneous voice. Within these themes, the following six code words were identified: food supply, environmental aspects, economic aspects, social aspects, challenges and opportunities. In our study, we have not formulated any new concepts, however, we have found connections as well as discrepancies and gaps between the public debate and the scientific research.

The topic of the master thesis is putting together two subjects that always sharply polarize academic, but also political and public debate - euroscepticism and Nobel Peace Prize. Through an analysis of primarily negative debate that followed after awarding Nobel Peace Prize to European Union in 2012 the master thesis is aiming to answer the question to what extent it was the topics typical for euroscepticism that shaped this debate. The paper is operating with a hypothesis that it was this critical phenomenon, typical only for EU, being the main component of the negative debate overshadowing expected criticism with regard to the purpose of the award. For the second hypothesis which anticipates that the topics of euroscepticism make the EU specific laureate is necessary to compare this case with three other international organizations (and their criticism) that were recently awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize. These organizations include Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (laureate in 2013), Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) and United Nations (2001). The first chapter introduces the Nobel Peace Prize and its specifications. The topics typical for euroscepticism are generated in the second part through academic debate on both party politics euroscepticism and public...

Comme de nombreux grands projets industriels, Énergie Saguenay a généré sa part de controverse. En effet, de 2014 à aujourd’hui, différents acteurs ont publiquement partagé leurs conceptions du projet. Ils l’ont défini à leur manière, s’opposant et se rejoignant parfois sur certains points. Mon objectif de recherche général est donc de décrire le processus de dispute propre à Énergie Saguenay dans ses caractéristiques rhétoriques et ses effets propres. Pour rendre compte de cet objectif, je mobilise trois littératures scientifiques. Premièrement, la littérature sur les controverses sociotechniques m’a permis de concevoir comment, d’un côté, des réseaux d’acteurs se forment et évoluent par et tout au long d’une controverse et de l’autre, comment les controverses agissent comme un lieu d’apprentissage et d’expression. Deuxièmement, je me suis inspirée de la problématisation, première étape du modèle de la traduction (Callon, 1986), pour identifier les points passages obligés (PPO) de la controverse Énergie Saguenay, soit ses principaux enjeux auxquels les acteurs doivent consentir pour sceller des alliances. Finalement, j’ai fait appel à la théorie des arguments de définition mise de l’avant par Schiappa (2003) et Zarefsky (1997) pour définir dans quel genre de controverse s’inscrit Énergie Saguenay et comment les définitions particulières d’un phénomène, en particulier le gaz en tant qu’énergie de transition, participent à la formulation de PPO. Dans l’ensemble, mon travail de recherche contribue à rendre compte des manières dont les pratiques de définition nous aident à comprendre comment, sur le plan rhétorique, se créent des points de passage obligés dans une controverse. Plus spécifiquement, par l’analyse des mémoires déposés au BAPE par les acteurs qui composent les groupes sociaux qui ont participé à la controverse, mon étude met de l’avant les différentes pratiques de définition et conceptions du gaz naturel qui existent en ce moment au Québec comme autant de PPO permettant aux acteurs de s’allier ou de s’opposer les uns aux autres, tout au long de la controverse. / Like many large industrial projects, Énergie Saguenay has generated its share of controversy. Indeed, from 2014 to today, various groups of social actors have publicly shared their conceptions of the project. They defined it in their own way, agreeing on some points and disagreeing on others. My general research objective is therefore to describe the dispute process specific to Énergie Saguenay in its rhetorical characteristics and its own effects. To account for this objective, I will mobilize three scientific literatures. First, the literature on socio-technical controversies has allowed me to conceive how on the one hand, networks of social actors are formed and evolve during a controversy and on the other, how controversies create a space for learning and expression. Second, I was inspired by problematization, the first stage of the translation model (Callon, 1986), to identify the obligatory points of passage (OPP) of the Énergie Saguenay controversy, i.e., these main issues to which the various groups of social actors must agree to seal alliances. Finally, I appealed to the theory of definition arguments put forward by Schiappa (2003) and Zarefsky (1997) to define what category of controversy Énergie Saguenay fits into and how the specific definitions of a phenomenon (in particular gas as a transition energy) participate in the formulation of OPP. Overall, my research helps capture the ways in which defining practices help us understand how, at the rhetorical level, OPPs are created in controversy. More specifically, by analyzing the briefs submitted to the BAPE by the actors who make up the social groups who had participated in the controversy, my study puts forward the different definition practices that contributed to the conceptions of natural gas that currently exist in Québec, as so many OPPs allow the actors to align or oppose each other throughout the controversy.