Activity 4.2 Environmental Policy Frameworks.

Frame

Source

Explanation

Identity Frame

Davis & Lewicki (2003)

This frame focuses on how parties perceive themselves and others within the conflict. Stakeholders may frame their identity in terms of roles (eg, land steward, regulator) or values ​​(eg, environmentalist vs. developer), which influences how they interpret actions and attribute motives.

Characterization Frame

Davis & Lewicki (2003)

This frame involves how individuals or groups describe and assess the other parties in a conflict. Often laden with assumptions, these frames can lead to polarization or mistrust when opponents are viewed in a negative light (eg, as greedy or uninformed).

Contextual/Strategic Frame

Bryan (2003)

This frame highlights how actors use framing deliberately as a negotiation strategy, influenced by institutional, political, and historical contexts. Participants may shift frames strategically to gain advantage or align with dominant narratives, adapting as conflicts evolve.

Frame

Explanation

Identity & Values ​​Framework

Captures how stakeholders' self-concepts, cultural backgrounds, and deeply held values ​​influence their positions and perceptions in environmental disputes.

Narrative & Experience Frame

Focuses on the personal and community stories that shape how people understand environmental change and conflict, often rooted in lived experience and local knowledge.

Power & Access Frame

Analyzes the dynamics of who has access to resources, decision-making, and representation in policy processes, revealing inequalities and structural imbalances.

Science & Evidence Frame

Highlights how data, scientific knowledge, and expert opinions are used, contested, or ignored in framing environmental problems and solutions.

Strategic Adaptation Framework

Emphasizes how actors adjust their framing based on context, opportunity, or threat, strategically reshaping their narratives to influence policy outcomes or build coalitions.



The Integrated Conflict Frame Model (ICFM) presents a multi-faceted approach to the study of environmental policy conflicts. It uses the main concepts of Davis & Lewicki (2003) and Bryan (2003) and extends the framework to incorporate practical and justice-based viewpoints.

The Identity & Values ​​Frame expands Davis & Lewicki's identity framing to encompass moral and cultural values. Stakeholders enter environmental conflicts with not only positions, but self-concepts like environmental steward, landowner, or regulator that frame the way that issues are interpreted. Values ​​underpin the emotional and moral basis of those concepts, and are therefore highly relevant to be considered in political dialogue.

The Narrative & Experience Framework focuses on personal and shared narratives that construct knowledge of environmental change. Drawing inspiration from Bryan's emphasis on context, this frame emphasizes the connection that people make to issues related to the environment via lived experience—narratives of place, loss, resilience, or injustice. Policymakers are able to better communicate and meaningfully connect with locals by recognizing these narratives.

The Power & Access Framework focuses on the people exerting power, the people being listened to, and the people excluded from power. Climate change conflicts tend to mirror underlying systemic imbalances—governments and Indigenous peoples, corporations and civil society. This frame highlights structural imbalances that can elevate the potential for conflict and erode legitimacy.

The Science & Evidence Framework addresses the way in which science data are applied, accepted, or challenged. Scientific knowledge in practice tends to be politicized or ignored based on the situation and level of credibility. The framework also calls for an exploration of alternative knowledge systems, such as Indigenous and local knowledge, and broader policy design.

Finally, the Strategic Adaptation Framework articulates Bryan's concept that framing is dynamic and responsive. Stakeholders frequently change their frames in response to shifting political conditions, new alliances, or new threats. Pointing to this strategic adaptability assists in anticipating stakeholder action and designing flexible, responsive policies.

Combined, the five frames provide a holistic, pragmatic conceptualization of approaches to understanding and responding to environmental conflicts. The ICFM prioritizes empathy, inclusion, and flexibility—essential to resolve sophisticated, value-oriented environmental conflicts in the complex, multiverse policy climate of today.


Reference:

Davis, C.B., & Lewicki, R.J. (2003). Environmental conflict resolution: Framing and intractability--an introduction. Environmental Practice, 5 (3), 200-206. DAVISandLEWICKI_2003_Environmental_conflict_resolution__Framing.pdf

Bryan, T. (2003). Context in environmental conflicts: Where you stand depends on where you sit. Environmental Practice, 5 (3), 256-264. BRYAN_2003_Context_in_environmental_conflict Framing.pdf

Comentarios

Publicar un comentario

Entradas populares de este blog

Activity 4.2.1 – Applying My Environmental Policy Frameworks

  Problem Statement The city of Seattle, like many metropolitan areas, faces severe traffic congestion that contributes to environmental degradation, economic inefficiencies, and reduced quality of life. One proposed solution is congestion pricing—a policy approach that charges drivers for road usage during peak times to reduce traffic volumes, lower emissions, and fund infrastructure improvements. While this strategy has been successful in cities like London and Stockholm, Seattle has encountered strong public resistance. The 2014 article by Cohen et al. explores this opposition through a case study of Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct and the broader implications of congestion pricing in a politically liberal yet practically resistant urban environment. Using five interpretive frames, this summary reveals the multidimensional complexity of the problem and the conflicting values ​​and assumptions underlying various stakeholder positions. 1. Economic Framework Perspective : From an eco...
Leer más

Activity 2.3.2 Ranches as Grassland Conservation

1. Exploratory Jim Howell, CEO of Grasslands LLC and co-founder of the Savory Institute, advocates for Holistic Management, a grazing approach that mimics natural patterns to restore grasslands. He notes that their ranches become measurably healthier, more productive, more biodiverse, and more financially successful after just a few years of implementing this method. Holistic Management involves using livestock to replicate the natural grazing behaviors of wild herbivores, which is essential for the health and resilience of grasslands. 2. Diagnosis Why does Holistic Management lead to healthier grasslands? Grasslands evolved alongside grazing animals; their health depends on periodic grazing followed by rest. Modern grazing often lacks this balance, leading to overgrazing or undergrazing. Holistic Management addresses this by planning grazing patterns that allow for recovery, promoting soil health and biodiversity. 3. Cause and Effect If Holistic Management is implemented, what happens...
Leer más

Activity 3.2.1 – Natural Resources Review

Imagen
  Natural resources are essential to our everyday lives, often in ways we may not immediately realize. Take a pencil, for example—it's made of wood, which comes from trees that grow on the Earth just like the video stated. Trees are just one of the many examples of the many living organisms that inhabit the planet, alongside animals. Beyond that, the Earth itself is rich in natural materials such as rocks, granite, and marble. These materials have been used throughout history in construction, art, and technology. Without these resources, our lives would not be as they are today. Over time, we have learned to harness the power of these natural resources, particularly for energy. By using wind, solar, and water power, we’ve been able to generate energy that sustains our daily routines. The importance of conserving these resources has become more apparent as we recognize their limited availability, pushing us toward more sustainable practices to ensure a better future. Cite Jerome, B....
Leer más