Discursive resistance towards low-carbon transitions: Analysing counter storylines associated with Austrian climate policies

Moving towards a low-carbon society implies a radical transformation of our current modes of consumption and production (Köhler et al. 2019). This poses social challenges through risks of disruptions and distributive injustice (Fankhauser and Jotzo, 2017; Markkanen and Anger-Kraavi, 2019), fears about losses in e.g., social networks, emotional attachments, or mental well-being (Green and Gambhir, 2019) and more generally, fears inspired by subjectively perceived losses (Tschakert et al. 2017). In the meantime, discourse coalitions use discourses of denial and doubt to hinder the transition to carbon neutral societies (Schlichting 2013, Supran and Oreskes 2017). Discursive strategies employing delay have increasingly replaced those of denial, especially in mainstream media (Lamb et al. 2020, McKie 2021, Pringle and Robbins 2022, p.78). In our study, we followed this line of research and analysed shared perspectives on ambitious climate policies in Austria such as fossil fuel phase out and carbon taxation while also discussing the question of intentionalism (Lamb et al. 2020, Pringle and Robbins 2022) and accounting for social justice concerns. “Counter storylines” were examined at policy, expert and mass media levels by conducting expert interviews and collecting material from news articles and social media entries. Eventually, this will allow (i) shedding light on the ‘politics’ behind the policy discourse (Kern and Rogge, 2018; Lee and Hess, 2019; Avelino et al. 2016), (ii) contributing to the growing body of literature on just transitions (Jasanoff, 2018; Kortetmäki and Huttunen, 2022) and discourses of delay and (ii) informing policy recommendations to increase stakeholder acceptance and alleviate losses for vulnerable stakeholder groups.