home    about    browse    search    latest    help 
Login | Create Account

Enlisting Biodiversity: Steering Public Discourse to Win Support for Policies on Biodiversity Challenges

Home, Robert; Schleiffer, Mirjam; Frick, Rebekka; Sabir, Ghezal; Bredin, Yennie Katarina; Singsaas, Frode Thomassen; Karner, Sandra; Smith, Barbara and Bonetti, Marta (2026) Enlisting Biodiversity: Steering Public Discourse to Win Support for Policies on Biodiversity Challenges. International Journal of the common, 20 (1), pp. 43-59.

[thumbnail of Home_etal_2026_commons.pdf]
Preview
PDF - English
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

725kB

Document available online at: https://thecommonsjournal.org/articles/10.5334/ijc.1479


Summary

Discourses are linguistic expressions of socially constructed understandings of phenomena, which drive power dynamics by implicitly conveying values that may either support or suppress the interests of involved actors. Proponents of specific discourses often seek to establish their interpretation of a phenomenon as the predominant or sole narrative with the aim of furthering their own interests. This is particularly concerning when applied to complex public issues, such as biodiversity loss, in a post truth age in which alterative facts and misinformation can shape public debate and social perceptions more powerfully than objective evidence or rational argument. This paper examines how interest groups perceive and communicate about biodiversity, which sheds light on the underlying worldview, interests, and strategies behind their messaging. We examined documents from two biodiversity-relevant actor groups in Europe: political parties in Italy, Switzerland, Norway, and Austria; and environmental NGOs in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Norway. Text elements within the documents were categorised according to their rhetorical functions, including ‘warning’, ‘calling for action (or inaction)’, ‘informing’, ‘persuading’, ‘accusing’, ‘entertaining’, ‘othering’, and ‘raising hope’. The analysis reveals that political parties predominantly employ a rhetoric centred on ‘persuading’, ‘accusing’, and ‘othering’, aiming to rationalise and gain political support their stances and/or to assert themselves as solutions to biodiversity challenges. Environmental NGOs, on the other hand, use rhetoric focussed on ‘informing’, ‘warning’, and ‘persuading’, with consequences of action or inaction often linked to human impacts, to appeal to potential and actual supporters of their activities. These findings reveal the strategic use of biodiversity discourse by different actors to influence their targeted audiences, which provides insights for those interested in creating interventions to influence stakeholder perceptions and behaviours.


EPrint Type:Journal paper
Keywords:biodiversity, discourse, environmental policy, political parties, environmental NGOs, PLANET4B, Abacus, FiBL35243
Agrovoc keywords:
Language
Value
URI
English
biodiversity
http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_33949
English
environmental policies
http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_2597
Subjects: Environmental aspects > Biodiversity and ecosystem services
Food systems > Policy environments and social economy
Research affiliation: Switzerland > FiBL - Research Institute of Organic Agriculture Switzerland > Society > Agri-food policy > Policy analysis
Switzerland > FiBL - Research Institute of Organic Agriculture Switzerland > Society > Agri-food policy > Policy development
European Union > Horizon Europe > PLANET4B
Horizon Europe or H2020 Grant Agreement Number:101082212
DOI:https://doi. org/10.5334/ijc.1479
Related Links:https://www.fibl.org/en/themes/projectdatabase/projectitem/project/2379
Deposited By: Augustiny, Eva
ID Code:56965
Deposited On:25 Feb 2026 08:02
Last Modified:25 Feb 2026 08:03
Document Language:English
Status:Published
Refereed:Peer-reviewed and accepted

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics