In the eye of the storm: Exploring how Montana and Ohio are framing the debate about the Clean Power Plan rule

Q3 Social Sciences Environmental Practice Pub Date : 2017-01-02 DOI:10.1080/14660466.2017.1275692
Sara R. Rinfret, Michelle C. Pautz
{"title":"In the eye of the storm: Exploring how Montana and Ohio are framing the debate about the Clean Power Plan rule","authors":"Sara R. Rinfret, Michelle C. Pautz","doi":"10.1080/14660466.2017.1275692","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Rulemaking is an integral component of environmental policy at both the federal and state level; however, the role states play in implementing federal rules is often overlooked. States frequently have to devise their own plans for implementation—subject of course to federal oversight—and this is the case with the new Clean Power Plan rule proposed in 2014 and finalized in 2015. This exploratory research examines the newspaper coverage of proposed Clean Power Plan rule in Montana and Ohio in an effort to surmise how these two states will proceed with implementation. To investigate these responses to the proposed rule, we utilize Nisbet’s (2010) framework for science-policy debates in the media to conduct a content analysis and identify the driving frames from the ten leading newspapers in each state. Our analysis concludes that although the leading frame in both states is economic development and competitiveness, Montana seeks a pathway forward, while Ohio wants a two-year freeze on renewable energy efforts. These findings suggest the rich potential for careful study of the importance of administrative processes at the state level and beyond.","PeriodicalId":45250,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14660466.2017.1275692","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Rulemaking is an integral component of environmental policy at both the federal and state level; however, the role states play in implementing federal rules is often overlooked. States frequently have to devise their own plans for implementation—subject of course to federal oversight—and this is the case with the new Clean Power Plan rule proposed in 2014 and finalized in 2015. This exploratory research examines the newspaper coverage of proposed Clean Power Plan rule in Montana and Ohio in an effort to surmise how these two states will proceed with implementation. To investigate these responses to the proposed rule, we utilize Nisbet’s (2010) framework for science-policy debates in the media to conduct a content analysis and identify the driving frames from the ten leading newspapers in each state. Our analysis concludes that although the leading frame in both states is economic development and competitiveness, Montana seeks a pathway forward, while Ohio wants a two-year freeze on renewable energy efforts. These findings suggest the rich potential for careful study of the importance of administrative processes at the state level and beyond.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在风暴中心:探索蒙大拿州和俄亥俄州如何构建关于清洁能源计划规则的辩论
规则制定是联邦和州一级环境政策的一个组成部分;然而,各州在执行联邦法规方面所扮演的角色往往被忽视。各州经常不得不制定自己的实施计划——当然要接受联邦政府的监督——2014年提出并于2015年定稿的新清洁能源计划规则就是这样。本探索性研究考察了报纸对蒙大拿和俄亥俄州拟议的清洁能源计划规则的报道,试图猜测这两个州将如何继续实施。为了调查这些对拟议规则的反应,我们利用Nisbet(2010)的媒体科学政策辩论框架进行内容分析,并从每个州的十家主要报纸中确定驱动框架。我们的分析结论是,尽管这两个州的首要目标都是经济发展和竞争力,但蒙大拿州寻求的是前进的道路,而俄亥俄州希望对可再生能源的努力冻结两年。这些发现表明,仔细研究州一级及其他级别的行政程序的重要性具有丰富的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Practice
Environmental Practice ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Environmental Practice provides a multidisciplinary forum for authoritative discussion and analysis of issues of wide interest to the international community of environmental professionals, with the intent of developing innovative solutions to environmental problems for public policy implementation, professional practice, or both. Peer-reviewed original research papers, environmental reviews, and commentaries, along with news articles, book reviews, and points of view, link findings in science and technology with issues of public policy, health, environmental quality, law, political economy, management, and the appropriate standards for expertise. Published for the National Association of Environmental Professionals
期刊最新文献
Anthropological approaches for cultural resource conservation design and planning Cultural resources and landscape conservation design and planning Moving beyond the ecosystem in ecosystem health report cards Food Loss and Food Waste, Causes and Solutions Last issue of Environmental Practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1