While the subject of framing has achieved considerable recognition recently among social scientists and policy analysts, less attention has been given to how societies arrive at stable, collective frames of meaning for environmental values and policy. This paper proposes four models of societal processes by which framing occurs: narration, modelling, canonisation and normalisation. These four models are developed, compared, and explored in detail through a case study of the framing of the impacts of climate change on human societies in US science policy from the 1960s through the 1990s. I conclude by offering a number of potentially fruitful avenues for further research into the dynamics of framing.
AndersonB.1983. Imagined Communities.London: Verso Press.
2.
BrickmanR., JasanoffS. and IlgenT.1985. Controlling Chemicals: The Politics of Regulation in Europe and the United States.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
3.
BrockingtonD. and HomewoodK.1996. ‘Wildlife, Pastoralists, and Science: Debates Concerning the Mkomazi Game Reserve, Tanzania’. In The Lie of the Land: Challenging Received Wisdom on the African Environment, ed. LeachM. and MearnsR.. London: International African Institute.
4.
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)1974. Potential Implications of Trends in Food, Population, and Climate.Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
5.
CollinsH.M. and PinchT.J.1982. Frames of Meaning: The Social Construction of Extraordinary Science.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
6.
CoontzS.1992. The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap.New York: Basic Books.
7.
CrononW.1991. Nature's Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West.New York: W.W. Norton.
8.
CrononW.1992. ‘A Place for Stories: Nature, History, and Narrative’. Journal of American History, March: 1347–76.
9.
DearP.1995. Discipline and Experience: The Mathematical Way in the Scientific Revolution.Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
10.
DouglasMary, and WildavskyAaron1982. Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
11.
FairheadJ. and LeachM.1996. ‘Rethinking the Forest-Savanna Mosaic: Colonial Science and its Relics in West Africa’. In The Lie of the Land: Challenging Received Wisdom on the African Environment, ed. LeachM. and MearnsR.. London: International African Institute.
12.
Fisher-VandenKaren1997. ‘International Policy Instrument Prominence in the Climate Change Debate: A Case Study of the United States’. ENRP Discussion Paper E-97-06, Environment and Natural Resources Program, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, June.
13.
FoucaultM.1973. The Birth of the Clinic.New York: Pantheon Books.
14.
FoucaultM.1977. Discipline and Punish.New York: Pantheon Books.
15.
FujimuraJ.1996. Crafting Science: A Sociohistory of the Quest for the Genetics of Cancer.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
FussellP.1975. The Great War in Modern Memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
GEA Project1997. A Critical Evaluation of Global Environmental Assessments: The Climate Experience.Calverton, MD: CARE.
18.
GierynThomas F.1996. ‘Boundaries of Science’. In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. JasanoffSheila, MarkleGerald E., PetersenJames C. and PinchTrevor. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19.
GierynThomas F.1999. Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
HajerM.A.1995. The politics of environmental discourse: ecological modernization and the policy process.Oxford: Clarendon Press.
21.
HambidgeGove1941. ‘Climate and Man – A Summary’. In Climate and Man, ed. HambidgeGove, DrownMarion J., ReichelderferF.W., BeanLouis H., KincerJoseph B., PageLarry F., RossbyC.G., SarleCharles F., ThornthwaiteC. Warren and WoolardEdgar W.. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
22.
HoughtonJ.T., JenkinsG.J., and EphraumsJ.J. (eds) 1990. Climate Change: The
