The rise of authoritarian populism has disrupted the patterns of party competition in many Western societies. Related to this development, the current debates in the United States and European Union illustrate how empirical science on climate change may become intensely politicized, and all ambitious climate policies challenged in the contemporary political landscape. We set out an analytical framework with three ideal types of political strategies for opposing climate policies: climate science denialism, climate policy nationalism, and climate policy conservativism. Empirically, the article investigates populist resistance to ambitious climate change policy in the Nordic context, where countries have sought to assume global leadership in climate politics and have considerable public support for climate action. In an analysis of the evolving positions of populist parties in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden in recent elections, the article sheds light on the interconnection between populism and climate change policy.
AnshelmJ.HultmanM. (2014). A green fatwā? Climate change as a threat to the masculinity of industrial modernity. Norma, 9(2), 84-96.
2.
BäckstrandK.KronsellA (2015). Rethinking the green state: Environmental governance towards climate and sustainability transitions. Routledge.
3.
BoussalisC.CoanT. G. (2016). Text-mining the signals of climate change doubt. Global Environmental Change, 36(1), 89-100.
4.
BrownM. B. (2014). “Climate science, populism, and the democracy of rejection”. In CrowD. A.BoykoffM. T. (Eds.), Culture, politics and climate change: How information shapes oud future. Routledge.
5.
CannH. W.RaymondL. (2018). Does climate denialism still matter? The prevalence of alternative frames in opposition to climate policy. Environmental Politics, 27(3), 433-454.
DubashN. (2019). “The Nationalist Hindrance to Climate Actions”. The Hindu. 23 September 2019.
8.
FischerF. (2019). Knowledge politics and post-truth in climate denial: On the social construction of alternative facts. Critical Policy Studies, 13(2), 133-152.
9.
ForchtnerB.KølvraaC. (2015). The nature of Nationalism: Populist radical right parties on countryside and climate. Nature and Culture, 10(2), 199-224.
10.
ForchtnerB.KronederA.WetzelD. (2018). “Being skeptical? Exploring far-right climate-change communication in Germany”. Environmental Communication, 12(5), 589-604.
11.
GemenisK.KatsanidouA.VasilopoulouS. (2012). The politics of anti-environmentalism: positional issue framing by the European radical right. In 62nd Annual political studies association conference 2012, Belfast, United Kingdom.
12.
HatakkaN.VälimäkiM (2019). The allure of exploding bats: The Finns Party’s populist environmental communication and the media. In ForchtnerB (Ed.), The Far Right and the Environment: Politics, Discourse and Communication. Routledge.
13.
HoffmanA. J. (2011). Talking past each other? cultural framing of skeptical and convinced logics in the climate change debate. Organization & Environment, 24(1), 3-33.
14.
HuberR. (2020). “The role of populist attitudes in explaining climate change skepticism and support for environmental protection”. Environmental Politics, 29(6), 1–24.
15.
HuberR. A.MaltbyT.SzuleckiK.CetkovicS. (2021). “Is populism a challenge to European energy and climate policy? Empirical evidence across varieties of populism”. Journal of European Public Policy(forthcoming).
16.
HultmanM.BjörkA.ViinikkaT (2019). Denouncing environmental challenges via anti-establishment rhetoric, marketing of doubts, industrial/breadwinner masculinities enactments and ethno- nationalism”. In ForchtnerB (Ed.), The far right and the environment: politics, discourse and communication. Routledge.
17.
IPCC (2018). “Global warming of 1.5 degrees”. IPCC Special Report. Available at. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/.
18.
JacquesP. (2006). “The rearguard of modernity: environmental skepticism as a struggle of citizenship. Global Environmental Politics, 6(1), 76–101.
19.
JacquesP. J.RileyE. D.FreemanM. (2008). “The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism”. Environmental Politics, 17, 349-385.
20.
Jenkins-SmithH. C.RipbergerJ. T.SilvaC. L.CarlsonD. E.GuptaK.NinaC. A. T. M.DunlapR. E. (2020). “Partisan asymmetry in temporal stability of climate change beliefs”. Nature Climate Change, 10, 322-328.
21.
KjærsgaardP.CarlsenJ. (2013). Fordi jeg var nødt til det. People’s Press, Copenhagen.
22.
KrangeO.KaltenbornB.HultmanM. (2019). Cool dudes in Norway: Climate change denial among conservative Norwegian men. Environmental Sociology, 5(1), 1-11
23.
KuckartzU. (2014). Qualitative text analysis: A guide to methods, practice and using software. Sage Publishing.
24.
LaclauE. (1977). “Towards a theory of populism. In Politics and ideology in Marxist Thought: Capitalism, Fascism, Populism. New Left Books.
25.
LaclauE. (2005). On populist reason. Verso.
26.
LewandowskyS.NaomiO.JamesS. R.BenR. N.SmithsonM. (2015). “Climate change denial and its effect on the scientific community”. Global Environmental Change, 33(1), 1-13.
27.
LockwoodM. (2018). “Right-wing populism and the climate change agenda: exploring the linkages”. Environmental Politics, 27(4), 712-732.
28.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2011). The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American publicʼs views of global warming, 2001-2010. The Sociological Quarterly, 52(2), 155-194.
29.
McKieR. E. (2019). Climate change counter movement neutralization techniques: A typology to examine the climate change counter movement. Sociological Inquiry, 89(2), 288-316.
30.
MuddeC.KaltwasserC. R. (2017). Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
31.
MüllerW. J. (2017). What is Populism?University of Pennsylvania Press.
32.
NisbetM. (2009). “Communicating climate change: Why frames matter for public engagement”. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51(2), 12-23.
33.
NorrisP.InglehartR. (2019). Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge University Press.
34.
OreskesN.ConwayE. M. (2011). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Bloomsbury Publishing.
PoortingaW.SpenceA.WhitmarshL.CapstickS.PidgeonN. F. (2011). Uncertain climate: An investigation into public scepticism about anthropogenic climate change. Global Environmental Change, 21(3), 1015-1024.
SchallerS.CariusA. (2019), Convenient truths: Mapping climate agendas of right-wing populist parties in Europe. Adelphi.
39.
Schmid-PetriH. (2017), “Politicization of science: how climate change skeptics use experts and scientific evidence in their online communication”. Climatic Change, 145(3-4), 523-537.
40.
SkoglundA.StrippleJ. (2019). From climate skeptic to climate cynic. Critical Policy Studies, 13(3), 345-365.
TranterB.BoothK. (2015). Scepticism in a changing climate: A cross-national study. Global Environmental Change, 33(1), 154-164.
47.
TurkkilaM. (2019). “Lapsi, joka komensi paavia – järki ja tunteet ilmastokeskustelussa”. In Ympäristörealistin Käsikirja. Suomen Perusta.
48.
Van RensburgW.(2015). Climate change sceptical frames: A Conceptual Re-Evaluation. SAGE Open, 5(1), 1-13.
49.
Van RensburgW.HeadB. W. (2017). Climate change sceptical frames: The case of seven Australian sceptics. Australian Journal of Politics & History, 63(1), 112-128.
50.
WeinertF. (1996). “Weberʼs ideal types as models in the social sciences”. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, 41, 73-93.
51.
Ylä-AnttilaT. (2017). The populist toolkit: Finnish populism in action 2007-2016. (University of Helsinki).
