This article analyzes the extent to which two institutional logics around climate change—the climate change “convinced” and the climate change “skeptical” logics—are truly competing or talking past each other in a way that can be described as a logic schism. Drawing on the concept of framing from social movement theory, it uses qualitative field observations from the largest climate deniers conference in the United States and a data set of almost 800 op-eds from major news outlets over a 2-year period to examine how convinced and skeptical arguments of opposing logics employ frames and issue categories to make arguments about climate change. This article finds that the two logics are engaging in different debates on similar issues with the former focusing on solutions while the latter debates the definition of the problem. It concludes that the debate appears to be reaching a level of polarization where one might begin to question whether meaningful dialogue and problem solving has become unavailable to participants. The implications of such a logic schism is a shift from an integrative debate focused on addressing interests, to a distributive battle over concessionary agreements with each side pursuing its goals by demonizing the other. Avoiding such an outcome requires the activation of, as yet, dormant “broker” categories (technology, religion, and national security), the redefinition of existing ones (science, economics, risk, ideology), and the engagement of effective “climate brokers” to deliver them.
Adam, D. ( 2010, April 14). Scientists cleared of malpractice in UEA’s hacked emails inquiry. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/14/oxburgh-uea-cleared-malpractice
2.
Barton, J. ( 2009, May 11). Democrats cap & trade plan: Sending us back to 1875 (Press Release from the office of U.S. Congressman Joe Barton). Retrieved from http://joebarton.house.gov/NewsRoom.aspx?FormMode=Detail&ID=486
3.
Bazerman, M., & Hoffman, A. ( 1999). Sources of environmentally destructive behavior: Individual, organizational and institutional perspectives. Research in Organizational Behavior, 21, 39-79.
4.
Bazerman, M., & Neale, M. ( 1992). Negotiating rationally. New York, NY: Free Press.
5.
Benford, R. ( 1993). You could be the hundredth monkey: Collective action frames and vocabularies of motive within the nuclear disarmament movement . Sociological Quarterly, 34, 195-216.
6.
Benford, R.D., & Snow, D.A. ( 2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611-639.
7.
Biggart, N.W., & Lutzenhiser, L. (2007). Economic sociology and the social problem of energy efficiency. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 1070-1086.
8.
Blee, K., & Creasap, K. ( 2010). Conservative and right-wing movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 269-286.
9.
Bolin, B., Houghton, J.T., Filho, G.M., Watson, R.T., Zinyowera, M.C., Bruce, J., . . . Sundararaman, N. (1995). IPCC second assessment: Climate change 1995. A report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . New York, NY: UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved from http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/climate-changes-1995/ipcc-2nd-assessment/2nd-assessment-en.pdf
10.
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. ( 1992). Invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Boykoff, M., & Boykoff, J. ( 2007). Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of US mass-media coverage. Geoforum, 38, 1190-1204.
12.
Boykoff, M., & Rajan, S. ( 2007). Signals and noise: Mass-media coverage of climate change in the USA and the UK. EMBO Reports, 8, 207-211.
13.
Creed, W., Scully, M., & Austin, J. ( 2002). Clothes make the person: The tailoring of legitimating accounts and the social construction of identity. Organization Science, 13, 475-496.
14.
Davis, G.F., & Marquis, C. ( 2005). Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16, 332-344.
15.
Davis, G., McAdam, D., Scott, W. R., & Zald, M. (Eds.). (2005). Social movements and organization theory. New York, NY : Cambridge University Press.
16.
Derbyshire, D. ( 2009, October 24). US belief in climate change is cooling fast . The Mail. Retrieved from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1222510/Poll-U-S-belief-global-warming-coolingdown.html#
17.
DiMaggio, P. ( 1995). Comments on what theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 391-397.
18.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. ( 1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
19.
Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. ( 1982). Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
20.
Dunlap, R., & McCright, A. ( 2010). Climate change denial: Sources, actors and strategies . In C. Lever-Tracy (Ed.), Routledge handbook of climate change and society (pp. 240-259). London, England: Routledge.
21.
Durkheim, É. (1982 ). The rules of sociological method. New York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published 1895)
22.
Earle, T., & Cvetkovich, G. (1995). Social trust: Toward a cosmopolitan society. Westport, CT: Praegers.
23.
Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. ( 1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology , 103, 962-1023.
24.
Farganis, J. ( 2004). Readings in social theory: The classic tradition to post-modern . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
25.
Fisher, R., & Shapiro, D. ( 2006). Beyond reason: Using emotions as you negotiate. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
26.
Fiss, P., & Hirsch, P. ( 2005). The discourse of globalization: Framing and sense making of an emerging concept. American Sociological Review, 70, 29-52.
27.
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. ( 1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 232-266). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Gamson, W. ( 1992). Talking politics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Goodall, A. ( 2008). Why have the leading journals in management (and other social sciences) failed to respond to climate change? Journal of Management Inquiry, 17, 408-420.
30.
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. ( 1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21, 1022-1054.
31.
Guillen, M. ( 2006). The Taylorized beauty of the mechanical: Scientific management and the rise of modernist architecture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. ( 1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929-964.
33.
Hoffman, A. ( 2010). Climate change as a cultural and behavioral issue: Addressing barriers and implementing solutions. Organizational Dynamics , 39, 295-305
34.
Hoffman, A. (in press). The culture and discourse of climate skepticism. Strategic Organization.
35.
Hoffman, A., & Jennings, P.D. (in press). The BP Oil Spill as a Cultural Anomaly? Institutional Context, Conflict and Change. Journal of Management Inquiry.
36.
Hoffman, A., & Ocasio, W. ( 2001). Not all events are attended equally: Toward a middle-range theory of industry attention to external events. Organization Science, 12, 414-434.
37.
Hulme, M. ( 2009). Why we disagree about climate change: Understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
38.
Hulme, M. ( 2010). The idea of climate change: Exploring complexity, plurality and opportunity. Gaia, 19, 171-174.
39.
Kahan, D., Braman, D., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (2010). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, September, 1-28.
40.
Kuhn, T. ( 1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
41.
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., & Roser-Renouf, C. (2008). Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ climate change beliefs, attitudes, policy preferences, and actions (Yale Project on Climate Change). Retrieved from http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/images/files/Climate_Change_in_the_American_Mind.pdf
42.
Lord, C., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. ( 1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098-2109.
43.
McAdam, D., & Scott, W.R. ( 2005). Organizations and movements. In D. McAdam & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 4-40). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
44.
McCormick, S. ( 2009). From politico-scientists to democratizing science movements: The changing climate of citizens and science. Organization & Environment, 22, 34-51.
45.
McCright, A., & Dunlap, R. ( 2000). Challenging global warming as a social problem: An analysis of the conservative movement’s counter-claims. Social Problems, 47, 499-522.
46.
McCright, A., & Dunlap, R. ( 2003). Defeating Kyoto: The conservative movement’s impact on U.S. climate change policy. Social Problems, 50, 348-373.
47.
McCright, A., & Dunlap, R. ( 2010). Anti-reflexivity: The American conservative movement’s success in undermining climate science and policy. Theory, Culture & Society, 27, 100-133.
48.
Meyer, D., & Staggenborg, S. (1996). Movements, counter movements, and the structure of political opportunity. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 1628-1660.
49.
Montopoli, B. ( 2010, February 23). Bernie Sanders: Climate change skeptics like those who downplayed Nazism. CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6236161-503544.html
50.
National Research Council. (2010). Limiting the magnitude of future climate change. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
51.
Nerlich, B. ( 2010). Climategate: Paradoxical metaphors and political parties . Environmental Values, 19, 419-442.
52.
Nigam, A., & Ocasio, W. ( 2010). Event attention, environmental sensemaking, and change in institutional logics: An inductive analysis of the effects of public attention to Clinton’s health care reform initiative. Organization Science, 21, 823-841.
53.
Norgaard, K. ( 2006). We don’t really want to know: The information-deficit model, environmental justice and socially organized denial of global warming in Norway. Organization & Environment, 19, 347-370.
54.
Oreskes, N. ( 2004). The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306, 1686.
55.
Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. ( 2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.
56.
Painter, J. ( 2010). Summoned by science: Reporting climate change at Copenhagen and beyond. Oxford, England: Rueters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
57.
Parry, M., Canziani, O., Palutikof, J., van der Linden, P., & Hanson, C. (Eds.). (2007). Contribution of Working Group II to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
58.
Pew Research Center. (2009). Fewer Americans see solid evidence of global warming: Modest support for cap and trade policy. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Retrieved from http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1386/cap-and-trade-global-warming-opinion
59.
Pielke, R. ( 2007). The honest broker: Making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
60.
Raiffa, H. ( 1985). The art and science of negotiation. Boston, MA: Belknap Press.
61.
Rao, H., & Giorgi, S. ( 2006). Code breaking: How entrepreneurs exploit cultural logics to generate institutional change. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, 279-314.
62.
Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. ( 2003). Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisines an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 795-843.
63.
Rao, H., Morrill, C., & Zald, M. ( 2002). Power plays: How social movements and collective action create new organizational forms. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 239-282.
64.
Rayner, S. ( 1992). Cultural theory and risk analysis. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Sociological theories of risk (pp. 83-115). Westport, CT: Praeger.
65.
Rosa, E., & Dietz, T. ( 1998). Climate change and society: Speculation, construction and scientific investigation. International Sociology, 13, 421-455.
66.
Schrader-Freschette, K. ( 1997). Elite folk science and environmentalism. Organization & Environment, 10, 23-25.
67.
Scott, W.R. ( 2001). Institutions and organizations. London , England: SAGE.
68.
Suddaby, R., & Greenwood, R. ( 2005). Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 35-67.
69.
Swidler, A. ( 1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51, 273-286.
70.
Thornton, P. ( 2002). The rise of the corporation in a craft industry: Conflict and conformity in institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 81-101.
71.
Thornton, P. ( 2004) Markets from culture: Institutional logics and organizational decisions in higher education publishing. Stanford, CA : Stanford University Press.
72.
Thornton, P., & Ocasio, W. ( 2008). Institutional logics. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 99-129). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
73.
Tushman, M., & O’Reilly, C. (2007). Research and relevance: Implications of Pasteur’s quadrant for doctoral programs and faculty development. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 769-774.
74.
Wade-Benzoni, K., Hoffman, A., Thompson, L., Moore, D., Gillespie, J., & Bazerman, M. ( 2002). Barriers to resolution in ideologically based negotiations: The role of values and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 27, 41-57.
75.
Wardekker, J., Petersen, A., & van der Sluijs, J. (2009). Ethics and public perception of climate change: Exploring the Christian voices in the US public debate . Global Environmental Change, 19, 512-521.
76.
Weber, K., Heinze, K., & DeSoucey, M. ( 2008). Forage for thought: Mobilizing codes in the movement for grass-fed meat and dairy products. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 529-567.
77.
Wilkinson, K. ( 2010). Climate’s salvation? Why and how American evangelicals are engaging with climate change. Environment, 52, 47-57.
78.
Zald, M., & Useem, B. ( 1987). Movement and countermovement interaction: Mobilization, tactics, and state involvement. In M. N. Zald & J. D. McCarthy (Eds.), Social movements in an organizational society (pp. 247-273). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
79.
Zucker, L. ( 1983). Organizations as institutions. In S. Bacharach (Ed.), Research in the sociology of organizations (pp. 1-47). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
