This article was downloaded by: [University of Wollongong] On: 30 October 2014, At: 21:55 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Environmental Communication Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/renc20

Climate Refugees or Migrants? Contesting Media Frames on Climate Justice in the Pacific Tanja Dreher & Michelle Voyer Published online: 04 Jul 2014.

To cite this article: Tanja Dreher & Michelle Voyer (2014): Climate Refugees or Migrants? Contesting Media Frames on Climate Justice in the Pacific, Environmental Communication, DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2014.932818

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.932818

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms- and-conditions

Climate Refugees or Migrants? Contesting Media Frames on Climate Justice in the Pacific Tanja Dreher & Michelle Voyer

Climate justice is rarely encountered in Australian media coverage of issues around climate change. The rare coverage of climate justice issues often focuses on Small Island Developing States (SIDS) such as Kiribati and commonly makes use of four main media frames: SIDS as “proof” of climate change, SIDS as “victims” of climate change, SIDS communities as climate “refugees,” and SIDS as travel destinations. Yet these frames undermine the desire of SIDS communities to be seen as proactive, self- determining, and active agents of change. This paper explores the way in which Pacific Islanders view the existing media coverage of their concerns over climate change and how they would prefer the media to tell their stories. Through an action research collaboration with a climate change non-governmental organization working in Kiribati and Australia, participants proposed alternative frames for climate justice media, including frames of human rights, active change agents, and migration with dignity.

Keywords: framing; climate change; climate justice; media interventions

A Climate Justice approach will amplify the voices of those people who have done least to cause climate change, but who are affected most severely by it—Mary Robinson, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights 1997–2002. (Robinson, 2010)

Despite the prominence of climate change debates in global and national media, the climate justice approach advocated by former UN Human Rights High Commis- sioner Mary Robinson is all too rare. A central contention of the climate justice approach is that those who are most severely affected by global warming are not only those who have done the least to cause it—some of the least developed nations of the Global South (Doyle, 2011)—but are also those whose voices are least likely to be

Tanja Dreher, Ph.D., is the Program Convenor, International Media and Communication, Faculty of Arts, University of Wollongong, Australia. Michelle Voyer, Ph.D., is a Research Assistant with the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia. Correspondence to: Tanja Dreher, Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Arts, University ofWollongongWollongong, NSW2522, Australia. Email: [email protected]

Environmental Communication, 2014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.932818

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

U ni

ve rs

ity o

f W

ol lo

ng on

g] a

t 2 1:

55 3

0 O

ct ob

er 2

01 4

heard in international debates and negotiations around the impacts of climate change. “Climate justice” refers to claims for greater equality in both the distribution of climate change impacts, and among the participants in negotiations on suitable responses (Schmidt, 2012, p. 10). A key challenge for climate justice, therefore, is to ensure a hearing for those people and countries that face the impacts of global warming in their daily lives. In this paper we examine the media intervention work of Pacific Calling Partnership (PCP), a non-governmental organization (NGO) working with Pacific Island communities severely affected by climate change and aiming to amplify their voices.

Lakoff argues that the environmental movement needs effective and coherent framing in order to mobilize political action (2010). While much recent research examines the framing of environmental politics in various countries of the Global North (e.g. Brulle, 2010; Lakoff, 2010) this paper analyzes media frames advocated by an NGO working with people in the Global South who are directly impacted by climate change—specifically the people of Kiribati, a Small Island Developing State (SIDS) in the Pacific. This paper seeks to explore the way in which Pacific Islanders view the existing media coverage of their concerns over climate change and how they would prefer the media to tell their stories. This paper addresses the following research questions: how do people working at the forefront of climate change impacts in the Pacific respond to climate justice media coverage? What are their preferred media frames for representing climate change impacts for SIDS? And what are the challenges for a climate justice approach in the Australian media?

The emerging research in this area indicates that the voices of Pacific Islanders are rarely heard in climate change reporting, and climate change impacts in the Pacific are usually framed in ways that center the interests and concerns of more powerful countries, such as Australia. Influenced by action research traditions and grounded in recent scholarship on media interventions, our research sought to maximize opportunities for people working at the front line of climate change impacts in the Pacific to speak on their own terms and to mobilize their own preferred climate justice media frames. The academic literature identifies four frames in climate justice reporting of SIDS: SIDS as “proof” of climate change, SIDS as “victims” of climate change, SIDS citizens as climate change “refugees,” and SIDS as travel destinations. Through a variety of qualitative research methods, PCP informants were able to respond to these media frames and propose alternatives, including frames of human rights, active change agents, and migration with dignity.

The selection of PCP is based in an emerging research agenda on media interventions and a commitment to action research. This approach is influenced by our own interest in climate justice; the research seeks to analyze and amplify the voices of people most impacted by climate change, who are rarely heard in mass media, or in academic scholarship. Research on media interventions investigates a very broad range of alternative media strategies whereby a variety of actors who are not media professionals seek to influence or intervene in media representations of their communities and/or issues of concern (Dreher, 2010; Howley, 2013). The focus

2 T. Dreher and M. Voyer

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

U ni

ve rs

ity o

f W

ol lo

ng on

g] a

t 2 1:

55 3

0 O

ct ob

er 2

01 4

on media interventions responds to Couldry’s call to “re-center” media studies around alternative media, broadly defined, in order to effectively grapple with the possibilities and limitations for media change (2001). Couldry theorizes the structured break between media producers and media consumers as a symbolic hierarchy in which symbolic power is concentrated in media institutions (Couldry, 2000, 2001). Following Bourdieu, symbolic power is understood as “the power of constructing reality,” of naming and defining the social world (Bourdieu, 1991). Alternative media are significant precisely because they challenge and make visible media power “as a systematic structure of symbolic inclusion and exclusion” (Couldry, 2001, pp. 2–3). Media intervention projects such as PCP are significant, therefore, not primarily for their direct impact on mainstream media—which may well be limited—but for their ability to demonstrate that alternative ways of naming and framing the world are possible, and for revealing the exclusions of media power.

The PCP is an amalgam of Christian, community and educational organizations in Australia and the Pacific established in 2006 in response to calls from people in low-lying Pacific Islands. PCP aims to raise awareness and lobby for climate action on behalf of several Pacific Island nations, including Kiribati and Tuvalu. They do so by listening to local voices and amplifying these voices to new audiences. They describe themselves as representing “countries whose voice is usually lost in the din of the world” (Pacific Calling Partnership, 2012). The PCP thus aims to encapsulate the role of alternative media as theorized by Couldry (2001) and the climate justice approach advocated by Mary Robinson (2010)—seeking to “amplify the voices of those people who have done least to cause climate change, but who are affected most severely by it.”

News Frames and Climate Change Impacts

The way news is constructed, organized, or presented, emphasizing some aspects while excluding or de-emphasizing others, is often described as “media framing” (Gitlin, 1980). “Frame analysis” was first developed by Goffman (1974) and assumes that frames establish “the fundamental categories in which thinking can take place. It establishes the limits of discussion and defines the range of problems that can be addressed” (Wuthnow, 1989, p. 13).

Like a window focusing attention on only one aspect of the landscape, frames call attention to some aspects of a news story while simultaneously directing attention away from other aspects. Framing can focus attention toward particular policies and interpretations and marginalize or exclude particular voices or solutions (e.g. Entman & Rojecki, 1993; Gitlin, 1980; Gamson, 1992). The framing of environmental issues in the media thus directs both thinking and action (Väliverronen, 2001, p. 41) and media framing “has a decisive role in defining risks and influencing what issues are to be put on the political agenda” (Jönsson, 2011, p. 121). Framing is particularly significant in the case of complex and uncertain risks such as environmental risks, including climate change, as these risks are largely invisible and beyond individual direct experience (Doyle, 2011; Jönsson, 2011, p. 123).

Climate Refugees or Migrants? 3

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

U ni

ve rs

ity o

f W

ol lo

ng on

g] a

t 2 1:

55 3

0 O

ct ob

er 2

01 4

Attention to news frames emphasizes not merely what a story is about, but rather how that story is told. The news-making process can be understood as a struggle between sources and journalists in order to have a particular “framing” of events adopted in news reporting (Palmer, 2000, pp. 14–15). NGOs such as PCP aiming to amplify marginalized voices often seek to recognize dominant media framing of their issues and communities and develop alternative frames to better represent their preferred interpretations and responses (Palmer, 2000; Wallack, Dorfman, Jernigan, & Themba-Nixon, 1993).

Framing climate change

Climate change has emerged over the last decade as a global crisis that is scientifically and politically contested and as such has attracted considerable international media attention. The mass media have been implicated in the on-going debates over the authenticity or reliability of climate change phenomena in what has been described as the “Scientific Uncertainty” frame (Schmidt, 2012, p. 9). Many news outlets in Australia, the UK and the USA have contributed to the uncertainty around climate science through what has become known as “balance as bias” whereby they provide relatively equal coverage to climate scientists who support and question the likelihood of human-induced climate change despite the fact that the scientific field is not equally divided along these lines (Boykoff, 2008; Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004, 2007). Lakoff suggests that the phrase “climate change” is itself the product of a political strategy of the Bush administration in the USA, designed to reframe “global warming” into a less threatening frame which obscures the role of human causation (2010, p. 71).

Schmidt (2012) finds that scientific uncertainty around climate change is largely confined to the powerful Anglophone countries, and the USA in particular, while news media in Germany and India, for example, largely accept the scientific consensus and focus on debates about appropriate responses (see also Painter, 2011). In Australia, “balance as bias” remains a prevalent trend (Bacon, 2011; Chubb & Bacon, 2010). In April 2012 the national public broadcaster, the ABC, was accused of “false balance” in the production of a reality TV documentary which provided equal airtime for a young advocate for climate change action and a well-known climate skeptic (Ashley, 2012). The politics of climate change also features prominently in reporting both domestically and internationally through UN conferences such as Copenhagen, Cancun, Durban, and more recently Doha, where countries seek to reach some form of consensus on future action on climate change (Schmidt, 2012, p. 10).

Finally, natural disasters or extreme weather events are often linked in some way to climate change in news media (Boykoff, 2008; Lester, 2010). Climate change is therefore largely seen in the USA, UK, and Australian media as an environmental or political issue. Relatively little coverage is given to the human aspects of climate change. Examination of tabloid papers in the UK found that only a very small percentage of articles used frames of “justice and risk,” which examined the uneven distribution of climate change risks within society. Journalists interviewed for the

4 T. Dreher and M. Voyer

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

U ni

ve rs

ity o

f W

ol lo

ng on

g] a

t 2 1:

55 3

0 O

ct ob

er 2

01 4

study cited the complexities of such stories when compared with the more straightforward reporting of statements or movements of politicians or links between natural disasters and climate change. Tight deadlines and limited column inches contributed to this preference for simpler content (Boykoff, 2008).

Doyle argues that “one of the difficulties in engaging people with climate change is due to its historical framing as an environmental issue, which has led to a separation of humans and culture from the environment” (2011, p. 3). In particular, Doyle examines the “investment in the visible as evidence of truth” as characteristic of both science and environmentalism, resulting in an over-reliance on iconic or spectacular images to communicate the unseen and invisible characteristics of climate change (Beck, 1992). In response, Doyle locates Mary Robinson’s climate justice challenge firmly in the arena of media framing:

If climate change is framed as an issue of social justice, then the human costs of climate change as a result of the unequal distribution of, and access, to, natural resources, are brought to the fore. Framing climate change as a humanitarian and social justice issue constitutes a moral imperative to act. (2011, p. 6)

While the importance of shifting media frames toward climate justice is therefore increasingly acknowledged, the process by which this can be achieved can be difficult. How do those most severely impacted by climate change gain a voice in the media and how do they ensure their voices are heard?

Climate Justice and the Media

Despite the media framing that predominately treats climate change as an environmental or political issue, there is an increasingly recognition that it is also a social justice and human rights issue (Doyle, 2011; Schmidt, 2012). Climate justice claims in media debates, however, have yet to be systematically analyzed (Schmidt, 2012, p. 13). Preliminary research finds that climate justice features more prominently in media coverage in India than in the USA, with very different interpretations of the significance of historically unequal responsibility (Schmidt, 2012, pp. 17–19).

Some of the communities at the front line of the climate justice debate include SIDS. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) characterizes SIDS as vulnerable to climate change due to a range of factors including their small size, limited natural resources, proneness to natural disasters, relative isolation, and poorly developed infrastructure. Climate change threatens the citizens of these states through groundwater contamination by saltwater intrusion, coastal erosion, habitat loss, and associated food security issues (Cameron, 2011; Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change, 1997). A climate justice framework highlights the fact that developed countries such as Australia or the USA tend to be high per capita polluters, with energy-intensive lifestyles and economies, where the impacts of climate change are still emerging. SIDS, in contrast, tend to be low emitters, with limited electricity, cars, or other sources of carbon pollution, and yet the impacts of climate change on SIDS

Climate Refugees or Migrants? 5

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

U ni

ve rs

ity o

f W

ol lo

ng on

g] a

t 2 1:

55 3

0 O

ct ob

er 2

01 4

are immediately evident and likely catastrophic. Despite this disparity, it is the developed nations that are the most powerful voices in debates over climate change action, while SIDS are marginalized in international negotiations (Ryan, 2010).

While coverage of climate justice issues is only slowly emerging in mainstream media in the USA, the UK, and Australia (Bacon 2011; Boykoff, 2008; Nerlich, Forsyth, & Clarke, 2012; Schmidt, 2012), there is some evidence that media interest in SIDS is growing. In recent years journalists, environmentalists, and documentary makers have converged on SIDS to gather footage of flooding, coastal erosion, and storm surges in an attempt to identify where global climate change theory intersects with local people (Cameron, 2011; Farbotko, 2010b).

This paper examines the way the Australian media frames climate justice in relation to the work of a small NGO, the climate justice advocacy group PCP. It begins by outlining dominant media frames relating to climate justice and their role in the reporting of the work of the PCP. It goes on to explore PCP responses to these frames and the alternative or preferred frames developed by PCP respondents as part of the action research process.

Research Approach and Methods

This study employed a mix of qualitative methods underpinned by action research principles. Action research is well established in the fields of public health and education (Mullett & Fletcher, 2011) and is increasingly adopted in media and communication studies (Buckingham & Sefton-Green, 1996; Tacchi, Foth & Hearn, 2003). Rather than a single methodology, action research is an approach which positions research as a contribution to social change and seeks to challenge inequalities as well as analyzing exclusions (Buckingham & Sefton-Green, 1996). Action research aims to democratize the research process by breaking down the hierarchy between research subjects and researchers, by giving voice to the expertise and input of participants in the research, prioritizing the co-creation of knowledge and by ensuring research outcomes which are useful to participating individuals and/ or organizations as well as to academic researchers (Buckingham & Sefton-Green, 1996; Machin-Mastromatteo, 2012; Mullett & Fletcher, 2011; Tacchi et al., 2003). As Herr and Anderson stress, action research “tempers expert knowledge with the expertise of locals [or participants] about their own problems or solutions” (2005, pp. 9–10). Action research therefore does not aim for objective distance from research participants, but rather seeks to maximize opportunities for collaboration and mutual learning, for community development and social change outcomes. The action research aim to facilitate change and improve practice (Machin-Mastromatteo, 2012, p. 572) was deemed essential in researching media and climate justice, where the challenge issued by former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, is to amplify the voices of those who have done least to contribute to climate change, but are the most severely affected.

The qualitative methods employed in this study included interviews and participant observation. A literature search of research articles relating to “climate

6 T. Dreher and M. Voyer

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

U ni

ve rs

ity o

f W

ol lo

ng on

g] a

t 2 1:

55 3

0 O

ct ob

er 2

01 4

change” and “climate justice,” “Small Island States” and “Pacific Islands,” and other related search terms was conducted. This search revealed a limited but emerging field of scholarly research into climate justice, much of which included discussion of the role of the media in communicating the issues around climate change for vulnerable communities such as SIDS. A review of this literature identified regular references to dominant media frames in discussions about any media coverage relating to climate justice. These frames have been summarized and explored in detail below. The validity of this categorization of frames was tested by conducting a Factiva/Google search, using the search terms “climate change” and “Pacific.” This search incorporated Australian news media between the dates of January 2010 and January 2012 and found readily available examples of each of the four frames the literature review identified. The Factiva search was then narrowed to specifically analyze the media surrounding the work of the PCP by refining the search terms to “Pacific Calling Partnership,” and other terms directly relevant to the work of the PCP (including the names of key activists and staff within the organization). Content analysis was used to identify the key media frames in these articles to determine whether they conformed to the dominant frames identified in the literature review.

A series of five semi-structured depth interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of staff and volunteers at PCP. Interviews were conducted at the PCP offices, lasting 1–1.5 hours per interview. The interviews were tape recorded, transcribed and analyzed thematically. Transcripts were returned to interviewees for clarification and further comments. The interviews discussed the role the media play in the organization’s efforts to “listen” and “amplify” Pacific voices. Interviewees included Phil Glendenning, the Director of the Edmund Rice Centre, the Catholic social justice advocacy group that established the PCP. They also included PCP Eco-Justice Coordinator Jill Finnane and three I-Kiribati staff and/or volunteers working with the PCP on climate justice issues: Maria Chi-Fang (PCP Outreach Officer), Kateia Kei Kei (PCP Outreach officer), and Kooba Kakiaman (PCP Volunteer).

In addition participant observation was conducted at a range of PCP events including screening of documentary films and workshop sessions, as well as monitoring the PCP email newsletter. A research diary was used to record notes and observations on public statements by PCP members, and the responses of audiences. The project also included action research activities, whereby University of Wollongong (UOW) researchers and the PCP collaborated on the organization of two media advocacy events. These included a public forum held at the UOW, jointly organized by the researchers and the PCP, which directly addressed the role of media in the work of PCP and how Pacific Islanders responded to the dominant media frames identified in media coverage of their stories. The second event was a Morning Tea with journalists organized in the lead-up to the UN Climate talks in Doha during December 2012. At each event, UOW researchers were involved as organizers, facilitators, and speakers alongside PCP staff. Through these processes the researchers were in regular contact with PCP over a 12-month period, with the opportunity to observe and discuss media strategies at close quarters.

Climate Refugees or Migrants? 7

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

U ni

ve rs

ity o

f W

ol lo

ng on

g] a

t 2 1:

55 3

0 O

ct ob

er 2

01 4

The action research principles adopted allowed findings to emerge that had not been predicted by the researchers at the outset, and ensured practical outcomes for the research partners, PCP. For example, planning for the public forum held at UOW clarified PCP responses to the dominant media frames analyzed below. In preparing for the workshop, the UOW researchers presented to PCP staff the four frames identified via literature review. This precipitated a discussion in which PCP workers responded to the dominant climate justice media frames and explained their concerns. Following this discussion, PCP Outreach Officer Kateia KeiKei developed a PowerPoint presentation for the public forum that clearly and succinctly outlined the responses and suggested alternative framings. This process produced valuable outcomes for the researchers, as issues raised

Related Tags