Critical discourse analysis of climate justice at the COP27
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30872/jbssb.v10i1.23097Abstract
This study examines how climate justice was discursively constructed in official statements delivered at the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Egypt. It aims to identify and compare the discursive strategies used by a representative developed actor, the European Union, and a developing actor, Pakistan speaking for the Group of 77 and China, and to analyze how linguistic features frame Loss and Damage as either historical responsibility and compensation or as a technical capacity issue. Employing a descriptive qualitative design grounded in Norman Fairclough's three-dimensional model of Critical Discourse Analysis, the research analyzes textual data from the two actors' public statements using a systematic procedure that includes keyword identification, grammatical and lexical analysis, and contextual interpretation. The findings reveal a clear discursive divergence: Pakistan constructs climate justice as a demand for reparative justice based on historical responsibility. In contrast, the European Union frames the issue as a capacity gap, privileging procedural solutions, and funding arrangements that depoliticize liability. The conference outcome to establish a Loss and Damage fund constituted a symbolic success for justice claims but adopted flexible, non-binding arrangements that preserve developed actors' influence.References
Åberg, A., & Jeffs, N. (2022). Loss and Damage finance in the climate negotiations.
Dikici-Bilgin, H. (2009). Civil society and state in Turkey: A gramscian perspective. In Gramsci and Global Politics (pp. 121-132). Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Language and power. Routledge.
Gramsci, A. (1971). The modern prince. Selections from the prison notebooks, 123-205.
Klinsky, S., Waskow, D., BEVINS, W., Northrop, E., Kutter, R., Weatherer, L., & JOFFE, P. (2014). Building climate equity. World Resources Institute.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2014). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (Vol. 8). Verso books.
Lucas, A. (2021). Risking the earth Part 2: Power politics and structural reform of the IPCC and UNFCCC. Climate risk management, 31, 100260.
Leung, L. E. (2020). The Greta Effect: How does Greta Thunberg use the discourse of youth in her movement for climate justice. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation].]. University of Calgary. https://bit. ly/38HcgPe.
McNamara, K. E., Bronen, R., Fernando, N., & Klepp, S. (2018). The complex decision-making of climate-induced relocation: adaptation and loss and damage. Climate Policy, 18(1), 111-117.
Mouffe, C. (Ed.). (2014). Gramsci and Marxist Theory (RLE: Gramsci). Routledge.
Newell, P., Srivastava, S., Naess, L. O., Torres Contreras, G. A., & Price, R. (2021). Toward transformative climate justice: An emerging research agenda. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 12(6), e733.
Pakistani Delegation. (2022). Post COP27 report. Ministry of Climate Change, Government of Pakistan. http://www.example-url.com/post-cop27-report.pdf
Pauw, P., Mbeva, K., & Van Asselt, H. (2019). Subtle differentiation of countries’ responsibilities under the Paris Agreement. Palgrave Communications, 5(1).
Peralta, M. (2019). Climate justice in International Climate change negotiations.
Pottier, A., Méjean, A., Godard, O., & Hourcade, J. C. (2017). A survey of global climate justice: from negotiation stances to moral stakes and back. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 11(1), 1-53.
Susan, E. (2022). A Call for Justice: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Climate Justice at the COP26.
Timmermans, F. (2022, November 7). Speech at COP27: Time to stop looking away. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_22_6927
Van Dijk, T. A., & van Dijk, T. A. (Eds.). (1997). Discourse as social interaction (Vol. 2). Sage.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford university press
Wikinson, D. (2008). Hêgemonía: Hegemony, classical and modern. Journal of World-Systems Research, 119-141.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Every work in Ilmu Budaya: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Seni, dan Budaya is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
