A pathway to climate neutrality? An argumentative discourse analysis on carbon offsetting in Swedish politics

Carbon offsetting has been one of the main international attempts to mitigate climate change. It is however a contested practice that has been heavily criticized in multiple ways. Seeing as Sweden offsets parts of its emissions to reach its national emission reduction targets, I am interested in studying the discourses on carbon offsetting and how the practice has been framed in Swedish politics. Taking a social-constructionist perspective, this essay uses Maarten Hajer’s argumentative discourse analysis and the analytical concepts storylines and discourse coalitions to investigate how carbon offsetting is perceived in Swedish politics, by whom and how these framings have changed over time in the last two decades. Covering more than 30 motions, 25 reports, 18 appropriation directions and other texts, I identify four key storylines on carbon offsetting and trace their development over time. Drawing on these storylines and coalitions I make out the two main discourses on offsetting – one positive and one more critical. The thesis shows that actors in Swedish politics make sense of the practice in two contentious ways, but that these different understandings have not changed over time, which further indicates that carbon offsetting will remain a contested issue in Swedish climate change governance