FRAMING, SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND CORPORATIONS: THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT IN DIALOGUE WITH OIL MAJORS

Master Thesis Joyce Mantel June 2010

Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University MSc International Management CEMS Department of Business Society Management Supervisor: Dr. Edward J. Carberry Co-Reader: Dr. Shahzad Ansari
-1-

ABSTRACT
Traditionally social movement organizations (SMOs) targeted the state in order to achieve change. More recently SMOs target corporations and seek to change organizational operations. This trend is reflected within the arena of in social movement research. There are several obvious examples known in how social movements affect corporations. Moreover, increasingly studies find evidence that SMOs are also able to influence corporations in less expected ways. One of the theoretical concepts of social movement theory that has proven to be particularly insightful in social movement scholar is framing. Since organizational characteristics of state and non-state target are very different it is likely to assume that framing and counterframing dynamics can enhance understanding about the influence of social movements on corporations. In order to address the above situation a qualitative research has been conducted to explore framing dynamics between social movements and corporations. By the means of the context of the environmental movement and its discourse with the oil industry about climate change data was gathered. Over the period 2004-2009 direct and paraphrased statements of Shell, BP, Greenpeace and FoE are observed in three major UK newspapers. Findings in this paper suggest the environmental movement successfully challenged the identity of the oil majors and enabled to a better alignment between the identity and actions of the corporations. Hence, the study extends known outcomes of social movement claims and suggests framing and counterframing emphasizes corporate practices the corporation rather not communicates and can influence public opinion. It forces corporations to be more open and truthful about it operations and explain investment decisions. Moreover findings suggest social movement pressure has consequences for the proactive attitude of corporations. In addition to being pressured to defend corporate decisions, proactive statements tend to align more with actual operations as well. Key words: Climate change, social movement organizations, environmental movement, framing theory, discursive fields and processes, corporate identity

-2-

TABLE OF CONTENT

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ 2 TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................................................ 3 1. 2. 2.1 2.2 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 5 LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................................. 8 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORY .............................................................. 8
Political Process model ..................................................................................................................................9 Core Framing tasks ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Discursive processes and fields .................................................................................................................... 14 Frame alignment processes ......................................................................................................................... 15 Frame resonance .......................................................................................................................................... 15 2.1.1 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4

FRAMING AND COUNTERFRAMING ..................................................................................... 11

2.3 2.4 2.5

CORPORATIONS AS TARGET ................................................................................................. 16 THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT ................................................................................... 17 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK ....................................................................................................... 22
Summary of literature review..................................................................................................................... 22 Research Gap ............................................................................................................................................... 22 Research Objective ....................................................................................................................................... 24

2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3

3. 3.1 3.2

METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 25 Qualitative research .............................................................................................................. 25

Research context ........................................................................................................................................... 25 Document analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 27 Data sample.................................................................................................................................................. 28 3.1.1 3.2.1 3.2.2

Data collection ....................................................................................................................... 27

3.3 4.

Data analysis .......................................................................................................................... 30 EMPIRICAL FINDINGS ............................................................................................................. 34

4.1 THE CORPORATIONS ............................................................................................................... 34

4.1.1 4.1.2 A comparison: Shell and BP ....................................................................................................................... 34 Development over time ................................................................................................................................ 36

4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................... 46

4.2.1 A comparison: Greenpeace and FOE ............................................................................................................. 46
-3-

4.2.2 Development of framing strategy.................................................................................................................... 48

4.3 When oil majors and EMOs meet ......................................................................................... 54 5. 5.1 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 58 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS .......................................................................... 58
The corporations .......................................................................................................................................... 58 Environmental movement organizations .................................................................................................. 60 Development over time ................................................................................................................................ 62 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3

5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

ACADEMIC CONTRIBUTION ................................................................................................... 63 PRACTICAL IMPLICATION ..................................................................................................... 66 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 67 FURTHER RESEARCH ............................................................................................................. 68

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................... 70 APPENDIX A: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................ 76 APPENDIX B: THE CODING FRAMEWORK ............................................................................ 77 APPENDIX C: COMPARING CORPORATIONS ......................................................................... 81 APPENDIX D: COMPARING EMOS ........................................................................................ 82

-4-

1.

INTRODUCTION

No one could fail to notice that climate change is having an increasing impact on society and receives more and more attention in the media. The growing body of scientific evidence almost indisputable demonstrates that global warming is a fact, illustrated by the following statement of IPCCs most recent report Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level (IPCC, 2007). Most worrying is the impact of global warming is or will be visible in every country with greatest impact in poorest regions (Stern, 2006). Climate change was particularly the centre of attention in December 2009 as result of UNFCCCs COP15 in Copenhagen. With the Kyoto Protocol expiring in 20102 that moment in time was perceived as a critical in order to achieve an international binding treaty for GHG emissions. Arguably one of the most important reasons that this event reached headlines of every major news source was because of environmental movement organizations (EMOs). A large scala of events were organized to gain attention for the growing concern on global warming. The environmental movement is one of the numerous social movements and defends the stance of the vulnerable in societies. The presence of social movements in our society dates at least back to Destutt de Tracy, 1797, were initial signals were observed on the scholarship of mobilizing beliefs and ideas (Snow, Soule, & Kriesi, 2004). Particularly in democratic societies, social movements have been an important way to articulate and force a collectivitys interests and claims. Significant developments and changes in our history are arguably at least partly contributable to the influence and workings of social movements. Today, social movements and their activities are daily visible in media contesting issues as terrorism, war, world poverty, environmental protection etc. World Values Survey Data reports that in 17 out of the 22 researched countries the percentage of respondents participating in demonstrations has increased considerably between 1980 and 1990. The increased activity is also reflected in the growing amount of scholarly research in the field of social movement theory. Snow et all (2004) show that in leading sociological journals the proportional contribution 4.13 percent in the 1970s to 9.45 percent in the 1990s (Snow, Soule, & Kriesi, 2004). Increasing awareness and acknowledgement

-5-

of the impact of social movements on the society motivates the need for a better understanding of social movements and its developments. Social movements traditionally held the state responsible to address social issues. However, the responsibility is shifting towards corporations that are more often held accountable for social issues possible resulting from its operations (Reid & Toffel, 2009). Social movement theory examines the conditions under which collective action by outsiders to dominant societal institutions emerges and facilitates access to those institutions, allowing outsiders to potentially affect social and political change (King, 2008b, p. 23). Though most theories are based on social movements with state-oriented strategies, insights are increasingly used to explain the interaction with corporate targets. For instance, a recent special of Administration Science Quarterly (2008) dedicated to social movements, organizations and markets demonstrates how social movement theories used to explain present-day issues at the intersection of organizational theory and social movement theory. The growing number of empirical research analyzing social movements with corporations as a target is particularly interesting for management scholars for several reasons. First, being a target of a social movement can entail boycotts, protests and letter-writing campaigns that can have significant consequences on the resource flow and reputation of corporations or can create unexpected opportunities. However, the ultimate goal of a social movement is influence the nature and level of corporate social change activities in order to finally achieve field-level change (den Hond & de Bakker, 2007). Next, social movement theory offers a promising framework to explain dynamics of organizations (King, 2008a; Briscoa and Safford, 2008). For instance, social movement theory has been used to explain organizational change, to explain the construction of new organizational forms and to explain the role of collective action in stakeholder influence (King, 2008b). Finally, Roa, Morrill, & Zald (2000) argue that the role of social movements for organizations is double-edged: they de-institutionalize existing beliefs, norms and values embodied in extant forms, and establish new forms that instantiate new beliefs, norms and values (p.240). Social movements have the ability to alter the cultural meaning of issues concerning society and organizations. Current scholars have provided valuable insights to the relation between social movements and non-state targets. Furthermore there are indications media has a significant influence on the outcome of social movements when imposing its claims on corporate targets (King, 2008a).
-6-

This suggests that the way of presenting issues in the media is of particular importance and is related to framing theory with the social movement scholar. Media enables to notify stakeholders and inform the public about its claim on the target. Obviously, the target is also able to frame its reality in media sources and can counterframe arguments of social movement organizations extend the discussion by introducing new frames (Benford & Snow, 2000). In addition, frames can be properties of organizations and can be treated as such (Snow, 2004). Though framing is a key pillar is social movement theory, little attention yet has been given to interaction with corporate targets. In order to examine framing and counterframing dynamics between social movement organizations and corporations an exploratory research is conducted between global and professional EMOs and MNEs that frequently appear in mass media. In particular the organizations Greenpeace and FoE vs. Shell and BP are observed in the discourse about climate change. By using newspaper data of three major UK newspapers between 2004 and 2009 all articles that discuss climate change and oil are capture d of these organizations. Only direct quotes or paraphrased quotations are used to ensure the frame of the organization is illustrated. The method gives a good perspective on the frames used by the organizations over time. Thesis outline The reminder of this paper is structured into four chapters. Chapter 2 provides a literature review about social movement theory and relevant research streams within the scholar, an historical overview of the environmental movement and motivates the research framework. The third chapter describes the methodology of this research. Next, the fourth chapter presents the findings and discussion of the study. The fifth and final chapter concludes the study and presents its academic contribution, limitations and suggestions for further research.

-7-

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Increasingly social movement theory is utilized to explain organizational phenomena. One of the reasons this occurs is because social movements increasingly emerge into professional and global entities, while corporations evolve from hierarchal and structured organization to more flat and network based organizations (Davis, Morrill, Rao, & Soule, 2008). Moreover, organizational theory has been utilized to explain organizational change and new organizational forms (Fligstein, 1996; Rao, 1998; Carroll & Swaminathan, 2000). In this research the framing concept of the social movement scholar is used to identify how an environmental movement organizations and corporations frame climate change in mass media. The purpose of this chapter is first to provide an overview of leading perspectives of social movement theory to ensure understanding about theoretical elements of social movement organizations that influence its operations. Next, in greater depth the academic contributions of the framing scholar will be discussed that is of particular relevance of this research. The third topic discusses the evolvement of the environmental movement and its relation to the oil industry. The final part includes a short summary and conclusion of about the literature review and motivates empirical research of subsequent chapters. 2.1 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORY

Until the 1970s leading views (Gurr, 1970; Smelser, 1963) of social movement theory that dominated assumed a close link between the frustrations and grievances between social movements and the growth and decline of the movement activity. McCarthy and Zald (1977) and Tilly (1978) were the first academics that offered a new perspective on social movement theory and moved away from the shared injustice as primary importance of in the development of social movements. The recourse mobilization perspective of McCarthy and Zald and the political process perspective of Tilly still dominate research of social movement scholars to enhance our understanding of social movement organizations processes and outcomes. The resource mobilization perspective explains emergence, success and failure by the ability of movements members to acquire resources and to mobilize people (McCarthy and Zald, 1977). It takes the shared grievances and frustrations for granted, which dictates a social movement achievement in the traditional view, and draws upon insights of organizational sociology. While

-8-

the resource mobilization perspective focuses on the internal context, the political process model acknowledges that success of social movements also depends on external factors. Both theories have laid the ground work for social movement theory, but the latter is especially interesting for this study. The reason is that the political process model takes the social movements resources and organizational structure into account, its capabilities to benefit from environmental opportunities and the interaction between those (McAdam et al., 1996). Therefore it focuses on framing, one of three pillars of the political process model, to explain organizational behavior and is the further review of the empirical evidence based upon the pillars of the political process model. 2.1.1 Political Process model

Tilly (1978) has introduced the political process perspective, and illustrated that success of collective action is dependent on the internal and the external context as well as its interaction. His view has led to the political process model based on three theoretical components: mobilizing structures, political opportunities and framing processes (McAdam, 1996). These have proven useful in explaining social movement outcomes (e.g. McCammon, 2001; Soule & Olzak, 2004). The following paragraphs discuss each of the three components separately. The first element that is part of the political process model is mobile structures. These are vehicles that mobilize individual resources and engage in collective action (McAdam, 1996). Social movement scholars agree that only discontent is not enough to create a social movement. Dissatisfaction does not necessarily result into the emergence of a prominent movement, but mobilizing structures are required to transform shared grievances into influence and action. Two types of mobilizing structures have been identified, namely formal organizations and interpersonal networks (King, 2008b). Formal organizations are classified as rather hierarchic and bureaucratic and have the characteristics of a traditional organization as for instance Greenpeace or WWF. These are expected to be most effective in generating resources. Interpersonal networks are often flat organizations that identified as grassroots organizations that enable the convergence of interests and identity (King, 2008b). The political process model defines political opportunity is the second element that facilitates the success of social movements. Political opportunities recognize that goals, strategies and

-9-

tactics chosen by social movement organizations do not evolve in vacuum but depend on external opportunities. The context in which the movement emerges is essential for development and impact (Meyer, 2004). A broadly used definition to define a political opportunity is consistentbut not necessarily formal or permanent dimensions of the political struggle that encourage people to engage in contentious politics (Tarrow, 1998, pp. 19-20). One of the important elements that determine the results of a movements claim is political openness (Meyer, 2004). Favorable changes in political openness can create room for movement mobilization and hence a positive movement outcome. McAdam (1982) demonstrated that the persuasive rise in the African American civil rights movement was the result of sufficient openness that enabled this mobilization. However, also unfavorable changes can stimulate action, since it can alert individuals to take action (Opp, 2000). Empirical research on political opportunity theory suggests a curvilinear relationship between frequencies of protest and political openness (Eisinger, 1973; Tilly, 1978). This implies that in open political systems less costly and more direct mechanisms of significance are available and protest is not the first tool to initiate change. Moreover, in closed political situations authorities are able to repress certain perspectives of its population. Another important element of the political opportunity that contributes to the outcome is the perception of the opportunity, thus how the movement frames the opportunity (Gamson & Meyer, Framing political opportunity, 1996). Already mentioned in previous paragraph is the element framing and is the third element of the political process model. Framing has been identified as the link between opportunity and mobilization. The roots of the concept framing within the sociological field are primarily drawn from Goffmans (1974) work schemata of interpretation that enable individuals to locate, perceive and label occurrences within their life space and the world at large (Benford & Snow, 2000, p. 614). Frames are metaphors, symbols, and cognitive cues that direct issues in a particular light and suggest possible ways to respond to these issues. It affects how actors perceive interests, identities, and possibilities for change. Mobilizing structures and political opportunities alone are often not sufficient to convince individuals and compliance of claims, but vital is often how awareness is created or framed to other stakeholders. Frames mediate between opportunity structures and action because they provide the means with which people can interpret the political opportunities before them, and thus, decide how to pursue their objectives (McAdam et al, 1996; Zald, 1996). Therefore, the role of framing is critical for social

- 10 -

movement organizations as well for the targeted organizations that have to decide upon the impact of social movement organizations and whether to counter frame is necessary. This section has explained the key framework of social movement theory, the three pillars of the political process model, to provide insights to empirical research of social movement outcomes. Though discussed respectively, in reality the three elements are intertwined and inseparable. Following section discusses conceptual and empirical research on framing and counterframing more closely, however it is important to realize a victorious movement outcome in requires a successful mixture of all three elements. 2.2 FRAMING AND COUNTERFRAMING

Literature on the framing scholar in social movement theory intensified in the 1980s and has focused merely on the conceptual rather than the empirical research (Snow, 2004; Snow, 2007). Frames of social movements, collective action frames, emerge from a social movements framing activities. These frames represent shared ideas, meanings and action oriented beliefs (Snow, 2007). Frames enable a movement to communicate the stance of the underrepresented and underprivileged parties. Next to collective action frames, the term master frame is often used. While collective action frames include ideology of a specific movement, master frames are utilized beyond and influence orientations and activities of other movements as well. Collective action frames that have been identified as master frames are rights frames (Valocchi, 1996; Williams & Williams, 1995), injustice frames (Gamson et. al, 1992), and environmental justice frames (Cable & Shriver, 1995; apek, 1993). Expected is the relevance of master frames will increase with current trend of cross-border to globalization as well as the increase of scale of the protests (Snow, 2004). A protest that illustrates this trend is the scale of the Battle of Seattle. During this protest over 30.000 people were demonstrating on the streets of Seattle (Smith, 2001). In order to mobilize such an amount of people the objective need to be appealing for a large public and therefore increases the importance of framing strategy. Benford and Snow (2000) evaluated the literature on framing and its processes in relation to social movement within the past two decades to provide an interconnected perspective of various strands. The perspective exists of frames that are developed, generated and elaborated via three core framing tasks and three overlapping discursive processes. The core framing tasks
- 11 -

has an action oriented function, and discursive processes represent the interactive element of collective action frames. They argue that every collective action frame is confronted to a certain extend to these core elements. In addition, literature identifies a set of four variable features that vary among collective action frames and are problem identification and direction/locus of attribution; flexibility and rigidity, inclusivity and exclusivity; interpretative scope and influence; and degree of resonance. Together the concepts provide a complete understanding of the framing concept. 2.2.1 Core Framing tasks

The three core framing tasks classified by Benford & Snow (2000) are diagnostic, prognostic and motivational framing. Though the tasks are discussed one by one, they are often used simultaneously. Gerhards & Rucht (1992) even recommend using core framing together by hypothesizing a marginal increase in the mobilization capacity of frames in case a core task executed adequately. The first core task, diagnostic framing, can be illustrated by the following definition: Diagnostic framing involves identification of a problem and the attribution of blame and causality (Snow & Benford, 1988, p. 200). Social problems exist only if these are interpreted as such by people that share the interpretation. Diagnostic framing means identifying the problem, a contentious process as other actors affected by the issue will try to impose their own interpretation of the problem (Della Porta & Diani, 2006). Diagnostic framing is also referred to by several researchers as injustice frames (e.g. Gamson et al, 1992). One of the studies that discusses and applies the concept injustice frame in the case study of environmental justice is apek (1993). The author studied the Carver Terrace neighborhood in Texas, where an extraordinary mobilization by its African-American residents resulted in a highly unusual federal decision in 1990 to buy out and relocate residents over the objections of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (apek, 1993, p. 5). The Carver Terrace case proved the final decision made by authorities was not determined by scientific evidence, but by a social movement repertoire based on effective symbolic framing of joint culpability of local governments and corporations. This study illustrates the critical role that particularly diagnostic framing can have in the outcome of social movement activity.

- 12 -

Next, the second core framing task is prognostic framing and involves the articulation of a proposed solution to the problem, or at least a plan of attack, and the strategies for carrying out the plan (Benford & Snow, 2000, p. 616). Even though social movement organizations may have identified similar problem or diagnostic frame, they can propose different solutions to the problem and therefore employ various prognostic frames. apek (2003) hypothesizes that the closer the frames come to giving solutions for the defined problems and ways to reach these solutions, the higher the mobilization capacity of the frames. Simultaneously, she recognizes that prognostic framing is less important to social movements than diagnostic framing. Hence, in addition to only identifying the problem also articulating solutions for is essential for develop claims and so improve mobilization. The prognostic element demonstrates social movements are not only reactive to its environment, but also proposes alternatives (Della Porta & Diani, 2006). Thus, prognostic frames can be perceived as the element that actually makes change happen. Thirdly, motivational framing has been identified as a core framing task that is defined by a call to arms for engaging in ameliorative or corrective action (Snow & Benford, 1988, p. 199). Motivational framing give the motivation or incentive to overcome possible barriers as an uncertain outcome and possible costs associated with collective action (Della Porta & Diani, 2006). Limited empirical and theoretical discussion can be found on motivational framing (Benford & Snow, 2000; Schrock, Holden, & Reid, 2004; Shemtov, 1999). One exception is the work of Einwohner (2002). She researches the relation between the role of efficacy and framing techniques in the context of the animal right movement in the US. The context is perceived particularly useful tp demonstrate motivational framing, since the movement has had to deal with several obstacles before accomplishing achievements. The study found evidence that motivational framing helped to identify and emphasized positive outcomes of the accomplishments of the movements and therefore enhancing the sense its effectiveness. Since the accomplisments of the enviromental movement have not always rewarding either due to several reasons, the results suggest motivational framing can play a significant role in expectations for succes for current and prospective activists.

- 13 -

2.2.2

Discursive processes and fields

Frames of social movements are not static, reified entities but are continuously being constituted, contested, reproduced, transformed and/or replaced during the course of social movement activity (Benford & Snow, 2000). Hence, framing is a dynamic, ongoing process that is affected by a number of elements of the socio-cultural context in which they are embedded, for instance illustrated by Esacove (2004). In a study on framing/counterframing of partialbirth abortion Esacove observes how movement and countermovement actors try to give partial-birth abortion meaning by motivate and direct action to support their goals. The case illustrates the usage of one single frame by activists and opponents shaped by interaction of framing activities and transformed through collective action. The study confirms that frames and counterframes are an iterative process constructed in response to something else. Discursive processes, capture the talk and conversations the speech acts and written communications of movement members that occur primarily in context of, or in relation to, movement activities (Benford & Snow, 2000, p. 623). These take place in during conversations, meetings, and written communications among social movement members. Academics agree there is little examination on discursive processes, while framing occurs primarily through language and its dynamic and active character has been continuously proven. Discursive processes are affected by the broader context in which it is embedded or discursive terrain(s) in which meaning contests occur (Steinberg, 1999, p. 748) and called discursive fields. Discursive fields evolve during the course of debate about contested issues and events, and encompass cultural materials. Relationships and participants in a discursive field can be easily altered and result of events and actions inside or outside the field (Snow,2004). Morever, existance of discursive fields suggest social movements are functioning in an multi- organizational field. Furthermore activists are not able to construct and impose on their intended targets any versions of reality they would like; rather there are a variety of challenges confronting all those who engage in movement framing activities (Benford & Snow, 2000, p. 625). Benford and Snow have identified three contested processes: counterframing by movement opponents, bystanders, and the media, frame disputes within movements, and the dialectic between frames and events. Counterframing mainly takes place within the prognostic task of framing as discussed in previous paragraph.

- 14 -

2.2.3

Frame alignment processes

Frame alignment processes or strategic processes include frames that are developed and deployed to achieve a specific purpose to recruit new members, to mobilize adherents, to acquire resources, etc. (Benford & Snow, 2000, p. 624). Four basic alignment processes have been identified by Snow et al (1986). To start with frame bridging, that refers to the linking of two or more ideologically congruent but structurally unconnected frames regarding a particular issue or problem. Second, frame amplification, involves the idealization, embellishment, clarification or invigoration of existing values or beliefs. The following process, frame extension, entails depicting a SMOs interest and frame(s) as extending beyond its primary interests to include issues and concerns that are presumed to be of importance to potential adherents. To end, frame transformation, refers to changing old understandings and meanings and/or generating new ones. Snow (2004) suggests that frame transformation can be more complex and multifaceted than discussed in some of the literature. He identifies two types of framing transformation: one that tend to be event-initiated and one that tend to be agentinitiated or based and that results in a more dramatic or radical transformation in the way in which the object of orientation is seen or regarded. Moreover, the change occurs on an individual or group level, or is more generalized and pervasive. The similarities and differences in the character of each of these transformative processes is not well understood and thus invites further empirical investigation. Nor there is a clear and consensu al answer to questions concerning the generation of frames that evolve. 2.2.4 Frame resonance

Furthermore, degree of resonance, addresses the concern of effectiveness and thereby the question why some framings seem to be more successful than others. Variation in degree of resonance is shaped by credibility and salience. Frames should be credible, both in their content and in their sources (Porta and Diani, 2003, p. 81). Consistency, being able to proof the message and the articulation of an actor with an established public image enhance the credibility. Various battles within the environmental movement illustrate the influence of credibility on the outcome of claims. In addition, the degree of resonance is affected by its salience to targets of mobilization. To achieve the status of a salient stakeholder, the SMO should touch upon central beliefs and values as well as with personal, everyday experiences of

- 15 -

the targets of mobilizations. And finally, to what extent are the framings culturally resonant, e.g. Scandinavian citizens perceive the environment inherently different than Indian citizens. 2.3 CORPORATIONS AS T ARGET

Traditionally social movement organizations were state-oriented, however increasingly target corporations. Additionally, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become increasingly important for corporations over the past two decades and corporations engage more and more in these activities. Strong financial performance and healthy economic conditions increase the probability that corporations behave more socially responsible (Campbell, 2007). While most logical reason not to involve in CSR activities are the lack of economic incentives (Martin, 2003). Pressure of stakeholders like consumers, investors, NGOs, and social movement organizations increases the likelihood corporations act in a more social and environmental responsible manner (Martin, 2003; Campbell 2007). Of these entities, social movement organizations are able to monitor and when necessary, pressure corporations to behave more socially and environmentally desirable (Davis, Morrill, Rao, & Soule, 2008). The significance of social movement organizations when targeting corporations can be illustrated by several campaigns. One of the contested issues in the 1990s was the sweatshop labor a working environment considered as unacceptably physical and dangerous in Third World countries for outsourced operations to benefit from cheap labor. The anti-Nike campaign of social movement organizations to inform citizen, consumers, and investors and generated global concerns about Nikes practices and had substantial consequences (Carty, 2002). Next to reputational damage the corporation had to lay off 1600 workers and the stock price dropped almost 50% (Egan, 1998) (Nike, 1998). Another issue that can be described as an historical victory of the environmental movement is to stop the deep-sea disposal of North Sea oil storage and tanker Brent Spar. The British government had already announced its support for deep sea disposal in the North Atlantic. Greenpeace organized a global media campaign against the approval and occupied Brent Spar for over three weeks. The German government issued a formal objection with respect to the dumping plan. Two months later Shell decided to withdrew the plan to sink Brent Spar after considerable reputation damage (Livesey, 2001). These two cases demonstrate the impact a social movement campaign can have on a corporation. The

- 16 -

pressure can weaken organizational resources and urge the corporations to revise earlier decisions. Social movements can also have less expected influence on corporations. A study conducted by King and Soule (2007) provide empirical evidence that social movement protests can influence a firms stock price. Protests affect the stock price when it is able to inform investors about sufficient discontent among key stakeholder groups with considerable media coverage (King & Soule, Social Movements as Extra-institutional Entrepreneurs: The Effect of Protests on Stock Price Returns, 2007). Thus, social movement organizations can have significant impact on corporations, but wich factors determine a positive outcome of these campaigns? King (2008a) has conducted research in which situations corporations are more willing to comply with boycotters demands. He found that corporation targets are more likely to concede when the action obtains significant media attention and the chances increased more when the corporate target previously experienced a decline in reputation. It is well known that mass media can be an important tool to influence the public opinion (Lipsky, 1965). The results of King suggest framing also has a considerable role when social movements target corporations. Essential differences between the state and corporations can affect framing and counterframing dynamics of social movements (Carberry, Ansari, & Mantel, 2010). Carberry et all identified some factors that could explain why framing dynamics vary between the state and corporations First, SMOs are have no access to corporate decision makers, thus there are no democratic tools to object against decisions. Openness to political opportunities has been identified as a critical factor in social movement outcomes (Kriesi, Koopmans, Duyvendak, & Giugini, 1995). Hence, framing strategies of social movements may differ in order to obtain influence from outside on corporations. Second, corporations are often profit-seeking and while state act in interest of its citizen. Hence, this increases incentives of corporations to strategically influence claims of SMOs.

2.4

THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT

Scientists have found empirical evidence of human interference with climate in the 1960s and 1970s resulting in international consciousness from governments, society and corporations about a decade after. Environmentalists advocate a sustainable management of resources and

- 17 -

responsibility for the environment by changing public policy, individual and corporate behavior. Climate change is one of the primary concerns of the environmental movement represented by organizations that vary from large global organizations to local grassroots that began campaigning in the late 1980s (Betsill, 2000). The following paragraphs highlight the main issues of the dialogue between environment non-governmental organizations EMOs by describing the key players and confrontations. Fossil fuel producers, particularly oil multinationals, have a principal role in the discussion. The combustion of oil-based fuels accounts for more than half of GHG emissions in industrialized countries. At the same time, oil multinationals are in the possession of a large amount of resources that can play an essential role in reducing GHG emissions and in implementing international policies (Kolk & Levy, 2001). Therefore, oil multinationals are often the target of ENGO campaigns and have an active role in the discussion of climate change mitigation. For instance, they are active in COP meetings via industry NGOs and communicate a public position about the climate change issue. In the 1980s international concerns resulted in the first international meeting on climate change, the World Climate Conference (WCC) in 1979 (UNFCCC, 2007). The second WCC was held in 1990 was complemented by the first IPCC report and received significantly more commotion than the first WCC. Consequently, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was established, of which the Kyoto Protocol is part. The UNFCCC entered into force in 1994 and had 192 countries as member in 20091. The Conference of Parties (COP) is the highest decision making authority of the Convention and meets annually at a two-week meeting. One of its largest achievements was the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol by 174 countries during the COP3 in Kyoto in 1997. The Kyoto Protocol is the first international treaty with binding targets to reduce GHG emissions for developed countries that entered into force in 2005 and will expire in 20122. The role of the IPCC is to provide the scientific content of climate change, and its reports are used by the UNFCCC as policy relevant materials. The objective of the IPCC is to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic consequences, as is stated on its website3, established in 1988 by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The

1 2 3

http://unfccc.int http://www.un.org http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.htm

- 18 -

IPCC is a scientific intergovernmental body that allows all scientists from member states of the UNEP and WMO to contribute on a voluntary basis; the organization does not conduct any research itself. After the establishment of the IPCC in 1988, with the task to scientifically evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity, it inevitable climate change was accepted as a serious problem and would eventually result in regulation of GHG emissions. One of the main corporate responses to oppose immediate action of the establishment of the IPCC in 1988 was the evolvement of the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) in 1989, representing USs major producers and users of fossil fuels. The GCC is an organization of trade associations to coordinate business participation in the international policy debate on the issue of global climate change and global warming primarily representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels. The GCC was created in 1989 shortly after IPCCs first meeting and therefore likely a response to the formation of the IPCC initiative of the United Nations4. By NGOs and climate opponents the GCC has been perceived as one of the most outspoken and confrontational industry groups in the United States battling reductions in greenhouse gas emissions5. Two key actions of the GCC has been to challenge to science of climate change by pointing to the lack of consensus among scientists and highlighting the uncertainties (Edwards & Schneider, 2001) as well as addressing the high costs of reducing emissions. They saw themselves as a leading voice for business and industry and attend all international climate negotiations, monitor the activities of the IPCC and contribute to the IPCCs scientific reports. At least one-third up to two-thirds of the emissions can be hold accountable to corporate activities. The fundamental interests of corporations are maximizing profits often achieved via development and growth, traditionally at cost of the environment. At first most corporations opposed and/or denied the issue of climate change, however one can observe a significant shift in attitude toward climate change since the initiation of the GCC. Today leading fossil fuel producers and fossil fuel producers as British Petroleum, Royal Dutch/Shell, Ford, Toyota and Wall-Mart support binding GHG regulation (Pulver, 2007a). Even ExxonMobil, the most outspoken company denying climate change, had publicly acknowledged the seriousness of the issue. Unfortunately, public support does not necessarily mean the firm operates accordingly. For instance, evidence has been found that ExxonMobil still opposes global warming and actively tries to convince society that
4 5

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_Climate_Coalition http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_Climate_Coalition

- 19 -

human-kind is not the cause of global warming (Adam, 2009). Evidence shows the company still funded lobby groups that question climate change in 2008. During the mid-1990s more scientific and public consensus regarding climate change and its consequences resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. The GCC responded by a large advertising campaign in the US against any agreement aimed at reducing GHG emissions internationally. However, the increasing consensus also forced some prominent GCC members to reconsider the consequences of its reputation by being part of one of worlds leading antienvironmental groups. After the public admission of BPs CEO that climate change has to be taken seriously by the society, it withdrew from the GCC in 1997. A shift in GCCs strategy from scientific uncertainties to the high cost of mitigation and lack of developing country commitments did not prevent further abundance of members and eventually led to the deactivation of the organization. Recently evidence has found that the GCC would have suppressed internal evidence about the cause of climate change resulting from increased GHG emissions of human activity (Revkin, 2009). During a lawsuit, an internal document showed that GCCs own experts were advising that the role of GHG in global warming is undisputable according to science. Several corporations from the oil industry changed its standpoint towards the climate change issue from denial to supportive. In 1997 the entire industry opposed climate change regulation, until BP announced it would move away from the industry opinion and would support international GHG regulation and supported its public opinion by resigning from the GCC. Shell followed quickly BP, while it took more than a decade for ExxonMobil to publicly confirm that climate change is really happening. The announcement of BP caused a split in the industry, as it divided the industry by a part acknowledging and partly denying climate change. The reason of the oil industry split regarding its stance to international climate change regulation is arguably based on how this will influence shareholder value at a certain term. As the awareness of global warming is growing, up until a significant number of countries were willing to sign a binding treaty and implement regulations the corporations stakeholders will have an opinion as well. The regulations and stakeholder perspective will most likely have consequences for the corporation and the whole oil industry. A more thorough analysis on the

- 20 -

cause of the oil industry split concludes it is not the result of operational characteristics as the fossil fuel mix in a companys reserve and production portfolios, different global distributions of assets and reserves or the differences in the extent to which different companies were targets of NGO campaigns as these arose after the split in the industry (Pulver, 2007a). It is rather the strategy regarding climate change regulation is rather based on socially generated assessments as the state of climate science, the likelihood of climate change regulation and the level of public interest in climate change. However, it could also have been the corporation tried to influence the information on which it should base it assessment on. For instance, the motivation to influence the government and regulation could have been a reason for ExxonMobil to have its own researchers rather than basing decisions on its own research and bend the outcomes to its preferred direction. Besides strategy, large incidents resulting from oil exploration operations have had direct impact on the environment, have caused severe concerns in society and therefore received public criticism that resulted in reputational damage. The oil spill that generated most media attention was the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound in Alaska in 1989. This spill is considered to be one of the most devastating human caused disasters at sea costing Exxon 3,5 billion dollars (Skjrseth & Skodvin, 2001). The attention around the Exxon Valdez oil spill increased the awareness of the consequences of oil exploration, therefore oil companies were forced to increase levels of maintenance. Consequently, the number of accidental oil spills has sharply declined in the new millennium as figure 2 illustrates, while more and more oil has been exploited (Burgherr, 2007). Following the oil spill US oil companies started to report on their environmental behavior (Kolk & Levy, 2001). Another major incident Shell has been exposed to public criticism around 1995 following serious accusations of violation of human rights in Nigeria starting as well as about the planned deep-sea disposal of the North Sea oil storage and tanker Brent Spar. Brent Spar is an excellent example of the possible impact of an EMO. The British government had already announced its support for deep sea disposal in the North Atlantic. Greenpeace organized a global media campaign against the approval and occupied Brent Spar for over three weeks. The German government issued a formal objection with respect to the dumping plan. Two months later Shell decided to withdrew the plan to sink Brent Spar after considerable reputation damage.

- 21 -

Currently international campaigns are activated against the tar sands in Canada and against unethical operations in Nigeria6. 2.5 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK

The literature review has provided a better understanding of social movement literature, the role of framing and it the impact for corporations and the development of the environmental movement. This section presents the research framework of this study starting with a summary of the literature review. Second, the research gap is discussed derived from the literature review. Next, the research objective of this study is introduced and finally the contribution to existing literature is presented. 2.5.1 Summary of literature review

The objective of the literature review was to provide a better understanding of social movement theory and relevance for organizational research. Leading concepts of the social movement scholar have been introduced by the means of the political process model that exists of mobilization structures, political opportunities and framing processes (McAdam, McCarthy, & Zald, 1996). Framing processes are perceived as the link between political opportunities and mobilizing structures. Empirical evidence arose after acknowledgement in the mid-1980s that the social movement organizations actively engage in the production and maintenance of meaning for constituents, antagonists, and bystanders or observers (Snow & Benford, 1988). Since then framing is regarded as a central dynamic in order to understand the character and course of social movements (Benford & Snow, 2000). Two sets of framing processes have been distinguished by Benford & Snow, core framing tasks with an action oriented function, and discursive processes that represent the interactive element of collective action frames. Furthermore the literature review illustrates the of role social movements in case of a corporate target. It demonstrates the significance in situations like Shell with Brent Spar and Nike with its labor practices. Finally, the environmental movement and its interaction with the oil industry is described to enhance understand of 2.5.2 Research Gap

www.greenpeace.org

- 22 -

Within social movement literature has ample research has been conducted to the three pillars mobilizing structures, political opportunities and framing processes of the scholar both to enhance theoretical understanding and find empirical evidence. Though social movement theory is traditionally utilized to explain interaction between social movements and the state, only recently social movement analysis has expanded to investigate relations with none-state targets (Davis, Morrill, Rao, & Soule, 2008; Snow, 2004) increasingly used in situations in which corporations are the target. The literature review highlights that framing is mostly studied when considered as a static concept (e.g. Gerhards & Rucht, 1992). Empirical attention to the dynamic character of framing has been mostly been theoretically and required further research (Benford & Snow, 2007; Snow 2004; Snow 2007). Snow (2007) has identified some of the understudied phenomena among framing and social movements. He acknowledges the connection between framing and social movement organizations has resulted in substantial theoretical and empirical research, but recognizes the necessity for empirical evidence to understand discursive processes through which frames evolve, develop, and change. This study analysis is among the first of its kind to research framing and counterframing of the environmental movement in relation to major oil corporations by the means of newspaper data. As result of numerous examples of SMOs targeting corporations and the growing role of corporate social responsibility and climate change in our society it is a contemporary topic. Furthermore, this study taps perfectly into the current wave of research on SMOs in which non-state actors are the target (Davis, Morrill, Rao, & Soule, 2008). The dynamic character partly evolves by counterframing activities of the target. None the literature has considered framing and counterframing with corporations as target, while it is probable to expect that corporations react different to social movements than governments. Additionally, the literature suggests media plays a significant role in the reaction of corporations to claims of SMOs and increase the likelihood of response by corporations (King, 2008a; King & Soule, 2007). These findings can be expected, since corporations have extensive organizational resources and mostly the objective to generate profit. However, it is more difficult to predict the development of those frames and the corresponding tools deployed by organizations in mass media. Hence, it is not clear how corporations respond to social

- 23 -

movement claims. In addition, it is likely the corporate response is substantial particularly when mass media is involved. Consequently, do SMOs react to corporate efforts to frame social movement concerns and if yes, how? 2.5.3 Research Objective

The purpose of this study is to obtain insights in the corporate reaction to social movement claims by exploring framing dynamics between SMOs and its corporate target(s). With frames treated as properties of organizations (Snow, 2004, p. 405) it aims to identify interesting and/or unexpected framing dynamics More specifically, this study analyses a discourse within the environmental movement that generates considerable media attention. It analyses visible EMO organizations and oil majors in the period between 2004 and 2009.

- 24 -

3. METHODOLOGY
In the preceding chapter the academic literature has been discussed that resulted in the current research objective and resulting in the following study. The objective of this exploratory research is to provide understanding about the interaction of social movement organizations and corporations in mass media. By using framing theory it examines these dynamics. This chapter describes the methods used in order to conduct the study. First the research context and data gathering are presented, followed by the data collection and analysis. 3.1 Qualitative research

This is an exploratory study, a qualitative research approach, in order to meet the research objective. Qualitative studies analysis qualitative data such as words sentences and narratives and aims to understand the meaning, definition or metaphor characterizing something (Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2005). This type of research can for instance refer to behavior, emotions, organizational functioning, social movements and interactions (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Moreover, qualitative studies addresses mainly the how questions rather than the how many (Pratt, 2009). Exploratory studies are particularly suitable to investigate little understood phenomena or the area may be new or vague that exploration is most suitable to become acquainted with the research context (Marshall & Rossman, 1995). Hence, exploratory research is most relevant for this study since it deals with qualitative data of a novel area of research. 3.1.1 Research context

In order to depict the framing and counterframing of climate change between oil corporations and environmental movement organizations EMOs we zoom in on the discourse that takes place in major news publications. EMOs target the state as well as corporations with the goal to stringent environmental regulation and diminish environmental consequences of corporate operations. The oil industry is perceived as a critical player in discourse of the climate change for several reasons. On the one side, the production as well as usage of fossil fuels is one of the principal sources of GHG emissions that contribute to climate change. On the other side, the major players in the industry have technological, financial and organizational resources to reduce GHG emissions if willing to utilize these accordingly. Arguably, these corporations can

- 25 -

be held responsible for climate change and its resources partially to reduce its own emissions and the consequences its emissions have for the environment. Scientists have come to the consensus that climate change is occurring as a result from the increase of GHG in the atmosphere caused by human activity. Some corporations acknowledge the correlation between climate change and human activity while others deny this correlation. At least until 2008 diverging stances were found between oil majors from the United States and Europe that resulted in large differences in the response to climate change (Kolk & Levy, 2001). Therefore this paper only examines European oil corporations in order to avoid becoming tangled in debates that take place within the oil industry. More precisely, the framing activities of British Petroleum (BP) and Royal Dutch Shell (Shell) have been observed. Both are major global operating companies that have European roots and are obliged to pursue the European regulatory framework. BP originates from the UK and Shell is partially British and Dutch as result of a merger in 1907. The two organizations have been voluntarily as well as reluctantly involved in the climate change discussion since the early 1990s. For instance, BP was the first oil company that supported binding GHG regulation shortly after supported by Shell, invested in alternative energy sources and became the target of various climate change campaigns of EMOs. Many EMOs in Europe target the oil industry due to the major impact of the oil industry on the environment; however two social movement organizations, Greenpeace and FoE, attract international attention by their illustrious actions since the early 1990s (e.g. Gueterbock, 2004). Greenpeace and FoE are both global and prominent EMOs involved in large campaigns as Brent Spar and Prudhoe Bay. Currently they are active with campaigns against oil companies as the tar sands in Canada and unethical practices in Nigeria. Their campaigns have received en still receive publicity from prominent media sources that result in relevant public data used for this research. Next, these major news and business publications request commentary from for instance Greenpeace and FOE on environmental related actions and decisions of well-known organizations. Thirdly, these organizations produce general documents about the climate change and the role of the oil industry that are publicly available. Finally, Greenpeace and FoE both have the status of official NGOs that are allowed to attend the annual UN Climate Conventions as e.g. the COP15 in Copenhagen in December 2009.

- 26 -

3.2 3.2.1

Data collection Document analysis

While aware of other methods to conduct qualitative research e.g. in-depth interviews, focus groups, desk research etc. (Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2005) textual analysis is perceived as most suitable for empirical research to the framing theory of the social movement scholar and to help explain the observations. In order to conduct research to framing activities of organizations, textual analysis of mass media is used in the context of a case study of two social movement organizations and two major corporations. The objective of this exploratory research is to conduct a frame analysis to observe interaction between social movement organizations and corporations and how these try to counter its meanings. Hence, framing activities of the social movement organizations, the target organizations and its interaction have to be taken into account. Goffman has identified that close analysis of naturally occurring speech as the best way to study framing analysis that is well summarized by (Johnston, 2002).
Verification of framing activities or of a frames content is based on evidence embodied in what people say and do. To be convincing, the frame analysis must not journey too far from the original texts on which it is based, and must maintain a continual evidential dialogue with them.

By using direct statements or paraphrased quotations of spokespersons of organizations, it was possible to use original statements of organizations and retrieve these from various organizations. With other methods one would be able to retrieve more extensive frames, by for example examining organizations specific documents, statements from mass media were perceived as particularly suitable by its reach to the larger public. First, the choice for newspaper data has to been explained. When an organization chooses to make a statement in a newspaper that can be qualified as a mass media source, or to react on a certain issue it chooses to reach the larger public. Thus the issue is important enough to for the social movement organization to gain participants or to become a step closer to the desired change within the organization. For the corporation the issue is important enough to possibly influence its overall reputation or maybe even influence behavior of its customers or consumers. The messages in the mass media have the ability to reach all stakeholders, and therefore cannot be ignored. Furthermore, Gamson (2004), highlights that mass media is the major site of

- 27 -

contests of over meaning, because all of the players in the policy process assume its persuasive influences, even though they may not have this. Finally, a statement that appears in the media both signals and spreads the change (Gamson W. A., 2004, p. 243). This is a positive outcome for the organization that tries to make the change, but also is alarming for the opposing organization that does not agree with the new meaning suggested and published in the mass media arena. Consequently these messages cannot be ignored, and are contested. The type of mass media used, direct or paraphrased statements retrieved from newspapers, contributes to the reliability and validity of the research. The length of newspaper articles is generally not very long, and therefore the space attributed to direct or paraphrased statements is often not a lot. Moreover, the statements that are in the articles are intended to be understood for the large public. Therefore it is not difficult for the author to grasp the meaning of the statements and increases the reliability of the sample. Additionally, since all information is written in newspapers and the context is particularly important, it helps that any non-verbal communication as tone of voice, interruptions, emotions etc cannot be observed and therefore do not influence the results of the empirical research. 3.2.2 Data sample

The data sample exists of citations of BP, Shell, Greenpeace and FOE from selected prominent UK newspapers. For similar reasons as the oil industry also the regulatory, political and geographical differences can bias the perspective of media sources. Therefore, the data sample focuses only on UK news and business publications. In order to employ a feasible and manageable data set that includes the required depth articles from newspapers The Independent, The Guardian and The Financial Times are used that are all major UK newspapers. Given the three publications have the same heritage as the examined oil corporations it is expected these sources pay at least equal or more attention to BP and Shell than compared to for instance an originally major German publication. In addition, we are restricted to the language skills of the authors for analysis of the data. Therefore it is not possible to incorporate major newspapers with European languages other than English or Dutch.

- 28 -

Access to the data was enabled via the database Factiva, were all media articles of previous decades can be retrieved from news sources, publications and web news. Categorization of articles is possible by industry, language, region, alphabetical and type. The sources can be further classified by Down Jones Newswires, Major News and Business Publications, Press Release Wires and Reuters Newswires. Besides sources, Factiva allows to search by industry, subject, company, region, language and free text simultaneously. In this case articles have been retrieved from all major European and UK news and business publications. For the oil corporations the data include all items that incorporate BP or Shell in combination with climate change or global warming. The situation for the EMOs is more complex, since not all items that relate to climate change are necessarily connected to the oil industry. Therefore the word oil was added. In order to avoid articles related to recent palm oil campaigns, the articles that included the word palm were eliminated from the data set (Table 1). Next, all articles that contain the above requirements were selected from all major European and UK news and business publications. Subsequently items from The Independent, The Financial Times and The Guardian were retrieved manually to ensure a complete data set from all European and UK editions of the three newspapers.
Organization Shell, BP Greenpeace, FOE Table 1: Search terms in Factiva Search terms (climate change or global warming) (climate change or global warming) and (Greenpeace/FOE and oil not palm)

After finding the articles that include the position of the organizations regarding climate change, statements of the organizations have been deducted. These statements are only direct quotations, citations and paraphrased expressions. A difficulty when using media citations with the objective to unravel framing tactics of organizations is that publications also communicate its own perspective within an item. By using only direct statements the possible bias of the authors perspective should be at least partially reduced. During the analysis one citation or expression is managed as one element. Therefore in some cases more than one data point retrieved from one news article. This research is based on citations of Shell, BP, Greenpeace and FOE during the period 2004 2009. This particular period was selected, because this was when the Kyoto Protocol came into force and the targets of GHG reduction binding. The assumption was supported by preliminary

- 29 -

analysis that quantified the number of articles in major European and UK news and business publications related to the discourse of climate change and the oil industry (see Figure 1). The media appearances of the four organizations were counted independently over the entire period of debate, from 1988 to 2009, to identify how often these organizations appeared over time in the media in relation to climate change. In addition a distinction has been made across sources, namely press releases, major news and business publications, major European and UK news and business publications and major US news and business publications. The analysis shows a spike of the number of European media articles that include climate change in relation to Shell, BP, Greenpeace and FoE in 1997 and then from 2004 onwards a steady increase of European media attention on climate change about the examined organizations in Europe. The trend of the other public sources is similar, with exception of major US news and business publications. As expected, the spike in 1997 coincides with the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol that came into effect in February 2005, which could explain the start of the ongoing discourse in major European media sources. The outcome supports the argumentation to study framing activities of the oil corporations and EMOs between 2004 and 2009.

250 Number of Articles 200 150 Shell 100 50 0 BP Greenpeace FoE

Year

Figure 1: Articles on Climate Change - European & UK Media (1988-2009)

3.3

Data analysis

The unprocessed data, the direct quotations and paraphrased statements of representatives of the respective organizations, have been gathered in an Excel document in which the data was coded and analyzed. The same data set is used for similar research objectives for the conference paper of Carberry et al (2010). The coding scheme of this paper is used during this analysis, but

- 30 -

with the objective to take the analysis to the next level, look at more sophisticated aspects and incorporate the complexity of the dialogue into the analysis. During the analysis issues are introduced, and resemble the subject of the direct or paraphrased quotations. These might have been introduced by social movement organizations, the corporations or both. Table 2 gives an overview of the identified issues in the data sample.

Shell High profits Reputation Tar sands Unethical operations Energy scenarios CCS Divestment renewables Energy mix Alternative energy COP15

BP Reputation Tar sands Unethical operations Divestment renewables Energy mix Alternative energy

Greenpeace Reputation Tar sands Unethical operations Alternative energy CCS Politics GHG Emissions

FOE Reputation Tar sands Unethical operations Alternative energy CCS Politics GHG Emissions

Table 2: Overview of identified issues

The employment of these issues contributes to study in four ways. First and foremost function is its contribution to context and meaning. With only the use of frames used by the organizations it is difficult to grasp the correct meaning, important during the analysis or to quantify patterns in the data sample. Next, with the identification of the issues, one can track the frames used across issues and thus observe whether there is correlation among issues. The third contribution is that the issues address the various topics are contested between the social movement organizations and oil corporations or it can be that the issue is not contested by the opposing group. In that case the issue is not found important enough to try to alter or the target been tried to alter the meaning of the frames used around the issue but this has not reached the mass media. Fourth and last use of the identified issues is to track its importance over time. By identifying issues it enabled the researcher to observe when certain topics were introduced and when these disappeared of the radar or whether these for on the surface on a continuous base during the period of the data sample.

- 31 -

In addition to subjects, the framing strategies employed by the organizations have been identified.
Shell Identity frame Business frame Demand frame Government responsibility frame Carbon market frame Being concerned frame Investment frame Not guilty frame Miscellaneous BP Identity frame Business frame Demand frame Government responsibility frame Carbon market frame Investment frame Not guilty frame Miscellaneous Greenpeace Skeptical frame Greenwashing frame Social justice frame Environmental destruction frame Bad investment frame Government responsibility frame Miscellaneous FOE Skeptical frame Greenwashing frame Social justice frame Environmental destruction frame Bad investment frame Government responsibility frame Miscellaneous

Table 3: Overview of identified framing strategies

The foundation of the identification of the framing strategies was conducted by (Carberry, Ansari, & Mantel, 2010). The objective of this study was to provide further understanding of the conditions under which social movements influence corporations. The study, that utilizes the identical data set as in present paper, identifies nine frames of which five represented the frames of the oil corporations and four the social movement organizations. The respective frames are identity, business, demand, government responsibility and carbon market frame. For the social movement organizations these are the environmental destruction, social justice, greenwashing, and bad investment frame. With assistance of the nine frames the study aims to investigate the role of the social movement organizations beyond the verbal capitulation of movement demands. The data shows that in the period of 2004-2009, the oil corporations were initially perceived as green companies. However, towards the end of the research period, the image of the oil corporations shifted, namely the corporations acknowledged that oil exploitation is its core business and investing in tar sands is giving in to the demands of the economy and is a good business opportunity. Carberry et al (2010) suggest that the rhetoric and framing activities of social movement organizations can lead to further significant organizational outcomes, even though they are less visible as the recognized outcomes. After assessment of the analysis some further interesting matters were found and included. For example more insights about investment

- 32 -

With these results, additional analyses have been conducted in order to find additional trends in the data sample. First the data has been coded in an initial and second round. The purpose was to become acquainted with the data set as well as to examine the development over time. Next, for the social movement organizations the statements have been divided in target, subject and frame. Since the literature highlights the difference in targets, and we looking at how social movement organizations target corporations, this differentiation is particularly important. Helpful is to identify subjects as well, to track how these change over time and what type of frames are used for the varying issues. Most important for the objective of this paper is the corresponding frame, for which the framework of Carberry et al (2010) is used and developed further by incorporating the frames some additional frames that seemed important. Furthermore, the data of all organizations has been categorized in whether it initiates the statement in the media or whether it is a reaction to something that occurred and therefore called action or reaction to observe framing and counterframing of the respective organizations. Therefore it is important to make a distinction between reactive and proactive frames in order to identify the frames the social movements and corporations utilize to alter or impose specific frames. In case of a reaction on a certain subject, the meaning of the opposing organization is contested or the organization is reacting on action. A statement is named an active statement when the organization announces the topics itself. Thus, for instance when BP announces to invest in alternative energy or the announcement of a new report of FoE.

- 33 -

4.

EMPIRICAL FINDINGS

To analyze the empirical findings of the textual analysis, the findings are discussed per organization in a descriptive as well as in a quantitative manner. The reason to analyze the findings in both descriptively to capture possible contextual factors that are difficult to observe in quantitative analysis, as is perceived as one of the main pitfalls of empirical evidence of the framing scholar. Quantitative analysis is conducted in order to identify interesting patterns in the data sample. The fourth chapter is structured in two sections. The first section includes the corporations, where the results of Shell and BP are discussed followed by a comparison of the two corporations. In the second part one can find an equal structure for the environmental organizations. 4.1 The corporations

Shell and BP are both European oil majors with similar operations, size and view of on climate change. After coding of the data a total of 119 statements out of 33 articles have been found for Shell and 63 statements out of 27 articles for BP, summarized in the table below. Thus, even though there are more statements of Shell in the newspapers of the data sample, these are divided over an equal amount of articles. Both corporations roughly discussed similar issues in the newspaper data. In addition to the issues Shell and BP both discuss, Shell introduces new issues. This is in line with overall findings of the statements of the corporations that suggest Shell pursues a more proactive strategy than BP and tries to shape the discourse more than BP.

Shell Articles Statements Reactive Proactive 33 119 32 87 100,0% 26,9% 73,1%

BP 27 63 39 24 100,0% 61,9% 38,1%

Table 4: Overview number of statements of corporations

4.1.1 A comparison: Shell and BP

- 34 -

In this section the framing strategy of climate change of the two oil majors are compared to identify differences and similarities. Though Shell has around twice as many statements as BP, the number of reactive statements is more or less equal (seeTable 4). First the issues are compared to the frequency of the issues they utilized in the observed media sources and then the usage of its framing strategy is compared. During the comparison a difference is made between the reactive and proactive strategies of the corporations.

Number of statements

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2004 2005 2006 Year 2007 2008 2009

Reaction Shell Action Shell Total Shell Reaction BP Action BP Total BP

Figure 2: Shell and BP - Statements 2004-2009

It was possible to identify similar topics that the oil majors discuss in the media, which is reasonable as the corporations have many similarities (Kolk & Pinske, 200x) looking at size, products and perception of the climate change issue and thus face similar external pressures and opportunities. Therefore it is straightforward to compare the number of statements by issue. Shell is more often visible in proactive framing activities, but they have equal visibility regarding its reactive statements. When pursuing its proactive framing strategy it introduces new issues to achieve its objective. Figure 2 shows the issues and its corresponding number of statements. The dark colored statements are reactive and the light colored statements are reactive. Observing the reactive statements it appears that the both corporations address the issues with similar number of statements. For divestment of renewables and unethical operations the number of reactive statements is exactly the same. The tar sands and reputation issue invoke reactive statements, but the frequency of Shell and BP differs. Alternative energy encourages only BP and critique on high profits only provokes BP to react.

- 35 -

Hence it can mean that Shell and BP have similar perception of the importance of these issues concerning climate change mitigation. Furthermore, both find it important enough to react on the specific issue, raised by other stakeholders, to alter or confirm public opinion. The reactive framing strategies depict similar results; it seems both corporations utilize similar reactive framing strategies to achieve its objective. Comparable frequencies can be found for the business frame and demand frame and small differences in the identity frame, government responsibility and not guilty frame slightly more used by BP. Shell makes use of some frames that are more difficult to identify, and therefore named miscellaneous. Thus, it seems Shell and BP use the comparable framing strategies to react on issues in the three major UK newspapers.

4.1.2 Development over time Chapter 3 has demonstrated a significant increase in media attention to climate change by the analyzed organizations in this study starting in 2004. Before then little media attention was devoted to climate change by Shell and BP by the major European newspapers, with exception of a modest peak in 1997. In addition, 2005 was the moment the Kyoto Protocol became legally binding. Evidence suggests changes over time between 2004 and 2009 by frames of both Shell and BP. BP and Shell: A green identity In 2004 and 2005 both corporations were predominantly visible in the newspaper data by proactive statements, which indicates Shell and BP communicated its stance to climate change and corporate image to the public supported by the following statements.
"No one can be comfortable at the prospect of continuing to pump out the amounts of carbon dioxide that we are at present," he says. "People are going to go on allowing this atmospheric carbon dioxide to build up, with consequences that we really can't predict, but are probably not good." (The Guardian, June 17 2004) Ron Oxburgh, Chairman Shell

He believes the solution is something called sequestration, in which carbon dioxide from cars and power stations is captured and stored. "Sequestration is difficult," he says. "But if we don't have sequestration I see very little hope for the world." (The Guardian, June 17 2004) Ron Oxburgh, Chairman Shell

- 36 -

"I'm convinced that [climate change] will have a huge impact on our industry. You still feel that a lot of people see it . . . as a cost. Whereas I'm of the school that thinks 'my goodness, if we find better solutions to CO2 than our competitors . . . that gives me a better seat at the table." (Financial Times, July 6 2005) Jeroen van der Veer, CEO Shell

These statements illustrate that Shell had serious concerns about climate change, proposed a solution, and identify climate change as a business opportunity. Shell frames that climate change will have a significant impact on the industry, frames to be concerned and act upon the seriousness of global warming. BP has similar reaction the situation of the corporation:
'As a long-term business we should begin to look beyond that [hydrocarbons], beyond petroleum " to the energy needs of the world over the next half century. And that is what we are doing, starting today.' (The Independent, November 29 2005) Lord Brown, CEO BP Our aim is to become the leading player in alternative energy in the power sector on a global basis and to grow the business five or ten-fold over the next 10 years.' The company expects the installed generation capacity of renewable and alternative power to triple by 2020. (The Independent, November 29 2005) Lord Brown, CEO BP

BP also recognizes the need to look further than petroleum or beyond petroleum and commits to considerable investments in alternative energy. However, in the same period both corporations also frame the continuing dependency on fossil fuels in the nearby future and thereby framing the importance of its core business, illustrated by the following statements.
"Whether you like it or not, we live in a capitalist society. If we at Shell ceased to find and extract and market fossil fuel products while there was demand for them, we would fail as a company. Shell would disappear as any kind of economic force," (The Independent, January 26 2005) Ron Oxburgh, Chairman Shell 'Of course, what we are announcing today is not an instant, magical transformation of the energy market. It is a very realistic, practical step in a new direction. For the foreseeable future, for decades to come, the world will need hydrocarbons, and we will continue to invest in order to produce and sell oil and gas in the cleanest, most efficient way possible,' (The Independent, November 29 2005) Lord Brown, CEO BP

Even though representing themselves as green and sustainable companies, both companies are also acknowledging its engagement in oil and gas.

- 37 -

During these two years the corporations have not reacted to important events or environmental movement campaigns, supported by the fact that almost all of the statements are proactive. For instance, both Shell and BP do not make any claims about the Kyoto Protocol that became binding in 2005, that was by far the most important event in the climate change arena. Thus, it seems Shell and BP did not want to become publicly involved in the discourse around Kyoto. Moreover, both corporations have not reacted to campaigns of the environmental movement, while at least one global campaign was active against Shells operations in Nigeria. In 2006 the number of proactive statements declared by the corporations, particularly Shell, increased substantially. The newspaper data shows the statements were predominantly about the future energy mix, which suggests that Shell intended to frame its perspective about this issue to the public by both highlighting the growing demand of energy, its sustainable image and its investments in alternative energy as illustrated below. Hence Shell defends its business, but certainly also frames its environmental friendly behavior.
'There's a growing demand for energy in almost all forward-looking scenarios,' he says. 'And within that, there's most likely to be a larger call on fossil fuels than today. So total demand grows; the share of large carbon grows, including renewables and potentially nuclear, but at the end of all that the absolute amount of fossil fuels to meet this energy demand also rises.' (Guardian Unlimited, June 2006) Graeme Sweeney, Chief Executive Shell Renewables Shells investment in the giant offshore wind project known as the London Array could provide a major breakthrough in the UK low-carbon energy mix. 'A positive decision would be a clear signal that a substantial contribution could be made by renewable energy if we could all drive this through to a successful conclusion.' (Guardian Unlimited, June 2006) Graeme Sweeney, Chief Executive Shell Renewables

BP did the same in this period fewer by fewer statements. The corporation emphasized its sustainable image by introducing a program for motorists to offset its CO2 emissions by donating money to the development of renewable energy sources, published in The Independent on June 23 2006. Moreover, it was the first time in the data sample one of the corporations reacted to an event, in this situation several incidents as result of malfunctioning equipment as the following statement illustrates. The reactions to the incidents do not refer to EMOs, but the BP found it necessary to provide a reaction. Therefore, it is highly the EMOs informed the public about the incidents several oil spills and its environmental consequences.

- 38 -

BP blamed it on internal corrosion creating a 65mm hole. A BP spokesman said in London yesterday: "We are fully cooperating with the investigation and we are carrying out our own investigation into what caused the corrosion. We believe that our actions were at all times proper." (The Guardian, June 6 2006) Spokesman BP

To summarize, the former years of the period of analysis identify a proactive strategy of both oil corporations to highlight its sustainable identity. Shell and BP express its concerns about climate change, recognize it as a business opportunity and decide to invest in alternative energy. Both corporations inform the public about its investments in alternative energy and so enhance its green identity frame. Contrary to the green identity, Shell and BP also proactively state the importance of fossil fuels and for its business. No evidence is found these statements are given as result of pressure from the environmental movement. More probable, rather than EMOs or events a reaction was provoked by the media itself. Reactive statements of BP in 2006 to oil spills as result of eroded pipelines are given to provide the public with the companys perspective. Whether the public has been informed by attention created by EMOs or by solely media sources is unclear, but it is highly unlikely BP raises these deficits voluntarily. Green identity? Investments in tar sands and divestments of alternative energy From 2007 onwards the number of reactive statements of both oil corporations increases. Instead of framing its investments in alternative energy and future energy perspectives, Shell and BP counterframed issues as divestments of renewables, high profits and the tar sands. Moreover, compared to 2006 Shell and BP decreased the number of proactive statements considerably in 2007. Shell (that proactively discussed issues as the energy future or CCS in years previous to 2007) now introduces statements about the tar sands and downplays the role of renewable energy as illustrated in the following statements.
Van der Veer argues that the public has been misled that wind and wave can provide more energy than is realistic and says the world must accept it is going to be dependent on carbon-based fuels, but must find ways of dealing with greenhouse emissions. Carbon sequestration in old offshore oil fields perfectly fits this model, is his argument. (The Guardian, August 31 2007) Meanwhile, with "easy oil" running out, it is necessary to concentrate on "unconventional" fossil fuels such as tar sands and gas-to-liquids while still proceeding with potential new sources such as biofuels, thin-film solar technology and hydrogen. (The Guardian, August 31 2007) Jeroen van der Veer, CEO Shell

- 39 -

The first statement demonstrates the trivialization of renewable energy as an introduction to protect the petroleum industry by the world must accept it is going to be dependent on carbonbased fuels. Next, van der Veer frames investments in the tar sands as inevitable in response to the global energy demand and its dependence on fossil fuels. In comparison to Shells statements in 2004 and 2005, when it expressed serious concerns about climate change and Van der Veer framed to perceive climate change as having a large impact on the industry and identify it as a great business opportunity. In 2007 BP only declared two statements in one article on own initiative and this had a similar tone. BP published a report that proves oil reserves for the next 40 years. Consequently after analyzing the proactive statements in 2007 both companies frame climate change and its impact on the industry differently compared to the former years of the period in this study. However, the corporations still try to emphasize its investments in alternative energy in the newspapers, illustrated by the following statement that refers to investments in biofuels by growing marine algae.
"Algae have great potential as a sustainable feedstock for production of diesel-type fuels with a very small C02 footprint" (The Guardian, December 12 2007) Greame Sweeney, Chief Executive Renewables

But what can be observed in the large number of reactive statements of both companies? This is the first year Shell and BP frequently react to events and issues in newspapers, that is also depicted in figure x. Both companies show similar results regarding the issues and its framing strategy, only Shell reacted on a larger scala of issues but uses the same framing strategies that have been identified as the business, identity and government responsibility frame. In the beginning of 2007 Shell was challenged by EMOs because of its high profits and the relatively small amount the corporation invests in renewable energy. Shells CEO reacts to these accusations (see statement below) by admitting its investments in renewable energy are relatively small and it is therefore pointless to say the exact numbers. Moreover, no business opportunities are present to invest in more viable projects.
Shell insisted it would be "pointless" to say how much of Shell's $23bn of capital expenditure was going into renewable energy schemes. Mr van der Veer indicated that the investment in renewables was small, saying it would be "throwing money away" to invest in alternative energy projects that were uncommercial and people could not afford to buy. "We have to put more into research and get a value proposition," he said. (The Guardian, February 2 2007) Jeroen van de Veer, CEO Shell

- 40 -

To explain its decisions Shell and BP utilize the business frame in the newspapers in reaction to contested operations divestments of renewables or investments in the tar sands. Simultaneously the corporations continue to highlight its green identity and reassuring these are only business decisions. These double frames are illustrated by the following statements.
Mr Van der Veer said the company was committed to further investment in the tar sands projects of Alberta, Canada, which would play a major part in the future of the group. He said there was no contradiction between commitments to carbon-intensive schemes such as this and Shell's corporate social responsibility in the face of climate change. (The Guardian, July 27 2007) Jeroen van der Veer, CEO Shell We are spending $8bn (pounds 4bn) over ten years and are pressing ahead with 450 megawatts of wind production capacity in the US. "The tar sands deal in Canada does not represent a change in direction, it was just a very good opportunity which represents a broadening of the portfolio." (The Guardian, December 11 2007) Spokesman, BP

Thus, the data shows both Shell and BP made decisions that do not reflect its environmentally and socially responsible behavior. Both organizations find the need to explain these decisions in public arena, beyond its own website. The oil corporations fight back Both corporations returned to proactive framing approach returned with a peak in 2008 of both Shell and BP and decreased slightly in 2009. In the earlier years of the sample period Shell and BP framed to be concerned about climate change, and expected it to be a large impact on the business. The data demonstrates this stance was moderated in 2007 together with the number of proactive statements. But, after 2007 the number of proactive statements increases again. Hence, the question rises what the corporations try to communicate to the public about climate change and its position. The proactive statements of Shell predominantly used to discuss the energy scenarios, with 15 out of 25 statements. Shell introduces two energy scenarios that illustrate its perspective on the energy future. The two scenarios are also actively framed in e.g. own media cannels, advertising campaign and during recruitment events and emphasizes a clear preference for the Blueprints scenario (see statement below)
The first scenario, "Scramble", envisages a mad dash by nations to secure resources. With policymakers viewing energy as "a zero-sum game," use of domestic coal and biofuels accelerates. () The alternative scenario,

- 41 -

"Blueprints", envisages a world of political co operation between governments on efficiency standards and taxes, a convergence of policies on emissions trading and local initiatives to improve environmental performance of buildings. (Financial Times, January 25 2008) Jeroen van de Veer, CEO Shell

The framing strategies corresponding to the energy scenarios are the government responsibility frame and the demand frame. Hence, Shell puts pressure on the government to take responsibility by taking a step into the future. The following statement frames the consequences of little attention of governments.
It is a world, said the Shell chief, where "policymakers pay little attention to energy consumption - until supplies run short." (Financial Times, January 25 2008) Jeroen van de Veer, CEO Shell

In addition, the demand frame is clearly depicted by the next statement:

"Shell estimates that after 2015 supplies of easy-to-access oil and gas will no longer keep up with demand." (Financial Times, January 25 2008) Jeroen van de Veer, CEO Shell

BP utilizes similar frames, visible via a comment of the new CEO Hayward in the Financial Times of June 11th 2008. He identifies three myth in the oil industry of which two regards climate change. The first myth relevant in this study is that Hayward claims fossil fuels reserves are not the problem but politics, hence invoking the government responsibility claim.
Myth number two is that the world is running out of hydrocarbons. Not so. The world has ample resources, with more than 40 years of proven oil reserves, 60 years of natural gas and 130 years of coal. The problems in bringing on new production are not so much below ground as above it, and not geological but political. (Financial Times, June 11 2008) Tony Hayward, CEO BP

Subsequently Hawyard emphasizes the societys dependency on fossil fuels and is certain humankind will continue to demand these, while at the same time eliminating renewable energy as a solution for the next decades. Note that also Van der Veer (CEO Shell) utilized the same tactic already in 2007 by calling renewables pointless.
Myth number three is that we can switch quickly to a low-carbon economy. While biofuels, wind and solar energy are growing rapidly, they comprise a tiny share - less than 2 per cent - of global energy production. Humankind remains dependent on fossil fuels and coal is the fastest-growing of all the main fuel types. Carbon emissions continue to rise. We clearly all need to work harder if we are to tackle the threat of climate change. (Financial Times, June 11 2008)

- 42 -

Tony Hayward, CEO BP

Finally, Hayward depicts its perspective of the energy future in which he sees investments as a solution. It is almost a call for the government to enable BP and the market to operate more liberally.
So how are we to secure the energy needs of the world in the 21st century? The evidence is that where markets are allowed to operate, they do work. That is what the data in the review show. And that is the real source of hope for the future. Consumers in Europe and north America are already responding to high prices by moderating demand. They are also beginning to embrace energy efficiency. Where investment is allowed to take place, energy production responds positively. Last year, US oil and natural gas production increased - in the case of oil, for the first time since 1991. (Financial Times, June 11 2008) Tony Hayward, CEO BP

The proactive statements above demonstrate the usage of demand as well as government responsibility frames that were predominantly used during 2008. Surprisingly, the corporations are not attempting to frame its green identity in the newspapers. The statements even suggest both corporations try to frame as alternative energy being idealized by society and is not possible in reality. Towards Copenhagen In 2009 Shell continued with its proactive framing strategy and BP became slightly more conservative. December 2009 was the COP15 in Copenhagen, perceived as the moment to accomplish an agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol that expires in 2012. It is likely Shell and BP try to frame its perspective in mass media as a way to influence stakeholders involved in the process. Analyzing the reactive statements of the two oil majors, little change has been observed. When reacting to issues as divestment of renewables the identity frame in combination with the identity frame is continue to be used. For instance, when EMOs claim that tar sand investments have substantial consequences for the environment, Shell utilizes its the green identity frame illustrated by the following statement.
Shell denies the charges. The company insists its tar sands production is only 15% more carbon intensive on a well-to-wheels basis and says it has always played a constructive role in climate-change issues. We are an advocate of cap-and-trade schemes and are doing what we can to increase our efficiency and reduce our relative carbon output." (The Guardian, May 25 2009) Spokesman, Shell

- 43 -

And when is challenged because of its reduced renewable investments, similar patterns are detected. Both the business frame and the identity frame are used.
Hayward said it was "not true" that the oil firm had turned its back on the alternative energy industry. He said the company would invest between $500m and $1bn this year and was on track to exceed the $8bn (pounds 5bn) of investment it pledged over 10 years in 2005. (The Guardian, July 29 2009) Tony Hayward, CEO BP "We established the alternative energy business in 2005 with the purpose to explore options, which we did," he said. "It was now right to look at the array of options before us, and to step back and say 'What can make commercial returns? What could be material to BP? And, frankly, what would have some synergies with the existing business?' It is a perfectly reasonable way of proceeding." (The Guardian, July 29 2009) Tony Hayward, CEO BP

The amount of proactive statements of BP is diminishable and therefore tells us little. However, Shell does have a considerable number of statements that are worthwhile discussing. The 22 proactive statements address 14 times alternative energy and 6 times directly the COP15. The statements about alternative energy invoke an investment frame, government responsibility frame, and a carbon market frame or a combination of those. The investment frame, below, illustrates the invested resources in alternative energy. Shell actively frames these investments in the final months of 2009, but do not include any renewable energy. It includes only alternative methods or energy as biofuels and CCS.
Having spent several hundred million dollars over three decades on a gasification process to improve the efficiency of coal, CCS was an obvious choice. "We had to be good at separating gases and liquids because that is what we do in a refinery," Mr Smith says. Biofuels is also a natural fit, and the company is convinced there is a big future. "Energy flows out of a petrol pump two-and-a-half times faster than out of a 13 amp plug, so there are challenges for electric cars," (The Independent, November 12th 2009) James Smith, UK Chairman Shell

In addition the government responsibility frame is used:

Voser said Britain and the rest of Europe was losing its leading position on developing CCS technology. "Europe had a leading position for some time but has slowed down on funding [being made available for projects]. Maybe they are losing their CCS leadership - we have conveyed that message to Brussels and the UK." (The Guardian, November 25 2009) Peter Voser, CEO Shell

Furthermore, Shell proposes a carbon market frame, an international price for carbon, with government intervention.

- 44 -

Voser said that such government intervention would only be needed for a few years. Beyond that, the market should still be capable of setting the carbon price. "Over the long term the market should be capable of working out the CO2 price," he said, in one of his first interviews since taking the top job at Shell in the summer. "But I can see a scenario where in the first few years you have to intervene to get the market going. I should not be opposed to that." He did not say where any minimum price should be set, describing the U-turn as a "refinement" "not a big change". (The Guardian, November 25 2009) Peter Voser, CEO Shell

In addition to alternative energy, Shell declares statements about the COP15 in Copenhagen in the newspaper data, first mentioned in November 2009 a month before the COP15. Main objective of these statements is to frame a carbon market as a solution for climate change that should be initially established and regulated by governments. Shell finds COP15 a good moment to introduce the carbon market.
"The sooner we can get the cost of carbon into the system we can frame good policies, hammer out international agreements, and scale up new technology. The key thing for business is a level competitive playing field; if everything is done in a rush there can be no guarantee." James Smith, UK Chairman Shell

Besides the carbon market, Voser states CCS should also be accepted as a method to mitigate climate change as the next statement suggests.
Voser said he hoped that CCS would be accepted as a "mitigation technology" that developing countries would receive financial support to develop. "That is on the top of my wish list," he said. (The Guardian, November 25 2009) Peter Voser, CEO Shell

Observing the data, Shell has been actively trying to shape the debate before Copenhagen and frame its perspective in the newspaper data. In the statements directly referring to the COP15 Shell proposed the carbon market frame in combination with CCS and calls up the governments to act. Also without referring directly to Copenhagen, many statements about alternative energy that propose very similar solutions to climate change mitigation. Hence, one method for Shell to influence stakeholders related to the COP15 has been through mass media sources as used for this study.

- 45 -

4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT ORGANIZATIONS Similar analysis as in previous section for the oil majors has been also conducted for two visible organizations of the environmental movement, namely Greenpeace and FOE. These two international EMOs both target oil majors as one of the methods to enhance climate mitigation. The table below gives an overview of the number of articles and statements of both Greenpeace and FOE and differentiates between proactive and reactive statements. There are only small frequency differences between the number of statements and articles that appear in the three major newspapers. However, FOE seems to have a more proactive strategy compared to Greenpeace, since 66 or 71% are proactive statements compared to 58 or 51,3% of Greenpeace.
Greenpeace Articles Statements
Reactive Proactive

FOE 100,0% 48,7% 51,3% 55 93 27 66 100,0% 29,0% 71,0%

59 116 55 58

Table 5: Overview number of statements EMOs

4.2.1 A comparison: Greenpeace and FOE Over the period 2004-2009 Greenpeace and FOE declared a similar amount of statements, as was illustrated in Table 5. However, Figure 3 shows the statements were distributed differently over time. FOE had a clear peak in visibility in the three observed newspapers in 2005, the year were the Kyoto Protocol went into force, while Greenpeace appears most often in these mass media sources during 2008 and 2009 with a clear upwards trend during the period. Thus the organizations do not have similar patterns regarding mass media exposure.
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2004 2005 2006 Year 2007 2008 2009 Reaction GP Action GP Total GP Reaction FOE Action FOE Total FOE

Figure 3: Greenpeace & FoE - Statements 2004-2009

Number of statements

- 46 -

Issues Within this section Greenpeace and FoE are compared in which issue the organizations address in the media. Appendix C illustrates all statements per issue per organization. Even though the sample only includes articles that are related to climate change and oil, still there is a large variation in topics within these requirements. Greenpeace focuses merely on GHG emissions and tar sands, while FoEs focal issues are politics, GHG emissions and high profits. Thus, both organizations discuss GHG emissions in the observed newspapers and to a lesser extent unethical operations. However, for the majority of the statements Greenpeace and FoE choose different issue to pursue climate mitigations objectives.

Framing strategies Also the framing strategies of Greenpeace and FoE have been compared to find differences and similarities. In contrast to the differences found about the issues the organizations decide to bring up in the major mass media sources; its corresponding framing strategies are strikingly similar. The same graph is constructed, and one can see that though the organization have preferred frames that the other utilizes less, both use the greenwashing, environmental destruction and skeptical frame often. Greenpeace has clearly a stronger preference for the skeptical frame and in addition uses the bad investment frame more often than FoE. FoE mostly uses three most often frames and has a stronger preference for the government responsibility frame than Greenpeace. This is logical, since FoE addresses politics more often as well.
Greenpeace vs. FoE: Framing strategies
40 Number of statements 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Skeptical Greenw Env. Destr. S. Justice B. invest Gov. resp Mis Total GP Total FOE

- 47 -

In addition, FoE is pursuing a more proactive framing strategy in comparison to Greenpeace. The organization more often addresses oil majors behavior in the newspaper data.

4.2.2 Development of framing strategy Previous section has showed that over the five years of analysis in this study Greenpeace gradually increased the number of statements in until 2009, while FoE had its peak in 2005 the year when the Kyoto Protocol became binding. The following section discusses the statements of Greenpeace and FoE in from the newspaper data over time. Particular attention is given to possible changes in framing strategies over time. In 2004 mainly FoE was visible in the media with proactive statements, while Greenpeace with some reactive statements. For Greenpeace no particular issue or framing strategy can be identified in 2004. A reasonable conclusion, since only reactive statements are given. Depending on the situation or even Greenpeace gives a reaction, an example is the skeptical comment on the oil industry acknowledging climate change. The skeptical frame is a typical example of a strategy used by both EMOs.
"This is an important state ment to make but it does have to come with a commitment to follow through, and that means making the case to his peers in the oil industry who are still sceptical of climate change." Robin Oakley, climate campaigner Greenpeace

- 48 -

FoE was proactive in the first year of the newspaper data, and mainly addressed political situations and called the government to take responsibility to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, illustrated by the following statement. This statement exemplifies the government responsibility frame that is often used, but also other frames as the environmental destruction frame and the social justice frame were utilized in 2004 by FoE.
The government must do three things. First, it should introduce incentives or regulations to force manufacturers to make cars much more efficient. This would be a win for the environment and for consumers. Second, it should encourage the use of biofuels, produced from renewable crops, to provide substitutes to conventional petrol and diesel. There should be a renewable transport fuel obligation to achieve this. Tony Juniper, Director FoE

Also during 2005 politics was the most discussed issue, with 12 active statements. After 2005 the FoE paid little attention to governmental subjects. Though not explicitly mentioned, most logical reason for FoE to concentrate on political issues is the fact the Kyoto Protocol went into force in 2005. The statements emphasize responsibilities of the government by signing this binding treaty to reduce CO2 emissions .
'It's now time for the government to recognise it has a popular mandate and stand up to those who are blocking moves to water down climate change policies. Policy should not be shaped by vested interests - car manufacturers, airlines and oil companies.' (The Guardian, June 27 2005) Tony Juniper, Director FoE

However, when addressing the US government FoE utilizes a different strategy since they did not sign the Kyoto Protocol. An example below demonstrates that FoE is more skeptical to the US stance. FoE does not refer to government responsibility, since the US government made clear to be not willing to invest in climate change mitigation.
"The US has walked away from a global effort to tackle the problem of climate change. The rest of the world is right to push ahead and leave the obstructive President Bush behind. We can only hope the next administration cares more about the future of the planet than its mates in the oil industry." (The Guardian, December 10 2005) Tony Juniper, Director FoE

Hence, FoE used mass media to remind the public about the governments responsibilities regarding climate change mitigation. Data suggests FoE varies its framing strategy depending on the governments perspective on climate change. In the Guardian Juniper reminds the governments in general about its responsibilities. In case it is certain no responsibility is taken, e.g. the US, the environmental consequences and momentum for better prospective are framed.

- 49 -

During 2005 FoE also actively and reactively was in dialogue with the oil majors Shell and BP. In the newspaper 7 proactive and 7 reactive statements have been found that directly address these corporations. When FoE reacts to issues as alternative energy investments of Shell and BP, a skeptical frame is used:
'This is a step in the right direction. But considering the scale of the company, this is still a modest initiative. BP's core business is still the production of fuel from oil, which is one of the main sources of climate change.' (The Independent, November 25th 2005) Tony Juniper, Director FoE

And when the EMO reacts to its high profits, FoE invokes an environmental destruction frame:
It was ironic that the Shell figures were being reported just as scientists met in Exeter to discuss global warming. Huge profits like this are only possible because Shell and other oil companies are able to burden the rest of society with the pollution and climate change that is the inevitable consequence of their business operations." (The Guardian, February 4 2005) Tony Juniper, Director FoE

Hence, findings suggest FoE uses consistent frames when reacting to issues. Framing strategies vary among issues, but are consistent within issues. For the proactive statements three different framing strategies have been identified. When FoE addresses non-ethical operations as e.g. gas flaring in Nigeria, it invokes an environmental destruction frame.
2.5bn cubic feet a day of gas is flared instead of harnessing it for energy, losing Nigeria $2.5bn (pounds 1.5bn) in potential revenues annually and producing about 70m tonnes of CO 2 a year. Deadly substances have been emitted by flares for more than 40 years and the Nigerian government has promised to ensure it ends in 2008. (The Guardian, June 21 2005) Unknown, FoE

And in situations when FoE chooses to tackle the general climate policy of Shell and BP, FoE uses a greenwashing frame and a skeptical frame, demonstrated respectively below:
"I would question whether the extent to which BP has reduced its emissions represents their actual ability to do it. BP makes a big song and dance about what they are doing but they could do a lot more." (The Guardian, April 12 2005) Hannah Griffiths, Campaigner FoE "BP also says it has increased its oil and gas extraction for the 12th consecutive year, how on earth is that compatible with its commitment to reducing climate change?" (The Guardian, April 12 2005) Hannah Griffiths, Campaigner FoE

- 50 -

In the years subsequent to 2005 the total amount of statements continued to be between 35 and 42 statements. While the number of statements of Greenpeace gradually increased, it gradually decreased for FoE. During 2006 both EMOs addressed the general climate policy issues in society. Greenpeace did not actively targeted Shell or BP in the newspaper data in contrast to FoE. FoE particularly targeted both corporations by informing others about the high profits of the oil majors and employed various frames to stress the controversy around these elevated earnings. The next statement illustrates incorporates the greenwashing and skeptical frame. In all statements in which FoE addresses high profits of Shell and BP it intends to create awareness about the price society is paying to achieve these earnings or what the corporations could have done with those funds.
"If the proportion of BP's and Shell's investments in renewables came even close to the proportion of their advertising budget they spend bragging about them, the world would be a very different place and we would be well on the way to addressing dangerous climate change. But the reality is that both of these companies are making massive green claims while carrying on with unsustainable business as usual." (The Guardian, July 27 2006) Craig Bennett, Head Corporate Accountability FoE

The reactive statements from the newspaper data found given by Greenpeace and FoE were predominantly targeting Shell and BP, only 1 statement had a different target. Issues contested were the reputation of the oil majors, its initiatives to enhance climate change mitigation and environmental consequences of malfunctioning equipment. To communicate the message, FoE and Greenpeace use the environmental destruction, greenwashing and skeptical frame. For instance, the next statement challenges the offsetting program for motorists of BP. Greenpeace is skeptical about the initiative and says it will not moderate climate change when motorists continue to use their vehicles.
So-called offsetting is better than doing nothing but only just. It's like smoking 20 cigarettes then going for a run to feel less guilty. As long as British vehicles are pumping tens of millions of tonnes of CO into the atmosphere every year, no amount of investment in clean energy projects built thousands of miles away will reduce the effect that our emissions are having on the climate." (Financial Time, August 27 2006) Robin Oakley, Greenpeace

This example illustrates how Greenpeace and BP try to counterframe initiatives of the oil majors.

- 51 -

From 2007 onwards particularly Greenpeace shifts its attention to the oil corporations tar sands investments in Alberta, Canada. In 2007 most large oil majors decided to invest heavily in the tar sands. The tar sands are unconventional oil resources that are convert tar into oil are take place mainly in Canada. According to environmental movement this type of oil exploration requires more GHG emissions to obtain the oil in compared to conventional drilling techniques. One of Greenpeaces reactions frames the disastrous consequences of tar sands exploration and how it conflicts with BPs sustainable identity, illustrated by the following statement:
BP will be extracting oil from tar sands in northern Alberta. "It takes about 29kg of CO2 to produce a barrel of oil conventionally," "That figure can be as much as 125kg for tar sands oil ... For BP to be involved in this trade not only flies in the face of their [green] rhetoric but, in the era of climate change, it should not be developed at all." Campaigner Greenpeace

While Greenpeace initially reacted on large investments of for instance BP and Shell, in the same year both FoE and Greenpeace started proactively address the tar sands, demonstrated by the following statements.
Meanwhile, BP has been accused by Greenpeace Canada of lining itself up to help commit "the biggest environmental crime in history". This follows its decision to swap assets with Husky Oil, giving it an entrance ticket to the Alberta tar sands. (The Guardian, December 11 2007) Greenpeace Canada Shell was spending more on exploiting fossil fuels - as in its carbon-intensive tar sands operations in Canada while failing to put out its illegal flares in Nigeria, he argued. "Shell needs to move away from PR being a term for public relations and use it for pollution reduction," he said. (The Guardian, June 17 2007) Tony Juniper, Director FoE

As the above statements illustrate, the tar sands are strongly opposed by the EMOs that both target Shell and BP for its investments in these unconventional oil resources. In 2008 the battle against the tar sands in the newspaper data is fought by Greenpeace that is actively visible with its campaign against tar sands investments. The data demonstrates Greenpeace changed its framing strategy opposing the tar sands. Greenpeace and Platform published a report that demonstrated investments in tar sands are risky investments and warned investors.
Greenpeace has always known that tar sands were a risk to the climate but now it's becoming clear that they're a risk to the bottom line as well. (The Guardian, September 17 2008)

- 52 -

John Sauven, Executive Director Greenpeace

Hence, Greenpeace wants oil majors to stop tar sand exploration. In this situation compromises are no option, since unconventional fossil fuels harms the environment more than unconventional resources. It seems Greenpeace realized the decision is mainly taken from a business perspective. By convincing investors of Shell and BP that it is highly unlikely their investments will become profitable, Greenpeace targets the oil majors indirectly. In addition, Greenpeace reacted 7 times on statements on CCS that is proposed by oil majors and considered by governments as a solution to climate change. Greenpeace opposes the solution by arguing it could make the situation worse, by the next statement:
"The urgency of reducing emissions of CO2 has never been greater. But just as with an emergency in a heavy passenger jet, the crew should never rush in to hasty actions that will ultimately make a very bad situation a lot worse. Ocean disposal of CO2 is one such option. The position of Greenpeace and of other groups opposed to this option was based on research into the effects of ocean disposal of CO2." (The Guardian, June 18 2008) Bill Hare, Greenpeace

Greenpeace even states CCS cannot be implemented on a short term and is used by oil corporations to let its business look more sustainable, hence suggesting greenwashing.
"Carbon capture and storage is decades away. The oil sands are one of the greatest environmental crimes of the last decade and pose a very great threat to any chance we have of tackling climate change. Companies are only interested in the bottom line. That can converge with doing the right thing on many occasions, but in some cases it has been deeply unhelpful, and it can be characterised by greenwash." (The Guardian, July 16 2008) Ben Stewart, Greenpeace

FoE continued to target Shell and BP by emphasizing its high profits and introduces the introduction of a windfall tax to invest part of the earnings in renewable resources, as depicted in the statement below.
Oil companies are making vast profits at the expense of the planet. Ministers should introduce a windfall tax and invest the money in tackling climate change, including a comprehensive energy-efficiency programme to end fuel poverty and cut emissions from peoples' homes. Tim Jenkins, Economics Coordinator FoE

In the final year of the newspaper data sample, the EMOs are well aware of the international momentum in Copenhagen during the COP15 in December 2009. However, both Greenpeace and FoE do not relate fossil fuels to the COP15 with exception of 1 statement of FoE. The majority of the statements of both EMOs directly targeted Shell or BP by addressing unethical operations, tar sands and its general climate change policy.
- 53 -

General actions against the tar sands in Alberta. Report 4.3 When oil majors and EMOs meet The former section discussed findings on how Greenpeace and FoE targets the oil industry and in particular Shell and BP. Besides changes over time it is likely oil majors respond to pressure of the environmental movement when media attention is given to its claims. With media exposure these claims reach a large group of stakeholders, and it is therefore probable Shell and BP try to counterframe such claims. Consequently the response of oil majors Shell and BP to claims of EMOs Greenpeace and FoE has been studied, particularly direct and indirect responses. Direct response is identified when oil majors directly refer to the environmental movement and vice versa. Indirect response identifies signals that indicate interaction. The data sample used in this study showed an increasing role climate change and oil companies over time, and therefore including public opinion into the discourse of climate change mitigation. First signal of interaction between the environmental movement and the oil majors is when BP finds it necessary to defend its environmental policy in December 2005. In an article called BP fails to reduce greenhouses gasses (The Guardian, December 12 2005) Lord Brown CEO BP reacts on the claims that states BP is not able to meet is targets regarding CO2 emissions, hence it is important enough for BP what the public thinks and states: "We are not struggling, we are absolutely on track". Even though the media facilitates such an article, the fact that BP reacts to the claims signals interaction between BP and the environmental movement. In the start of 2006 also Shell responds publicly to propositions of the environmental movement. As result of the high profits FoE proposes a windfall tax in order to utilize these profits to reduce GHG emissions.
But Van der Veer rejected the idea of a special tax. He also denied claims that it had profiteered by overcharging UK motorists or domestic gas consumers. "That is incorrect. It is a very competitive market with small margins," he said. (The Independent, February 3 2006) Jeroen van der Veer, CEO Shell

- 54 -

Shell shares its vision with the public about the tax and finds it not a good idea, according to Van der Veer the margins are small and the market is highly competitive. So the perspective of Shell is different than the environmental movement. Obviously additional tax charges have a negative impact on the corporation, thus by stating its opinion in the newspaper it informs and maybe even influences decision makers. Van der Veer refers to FoE on February 2nd 2007 in The Guardian which is the first time Shell explicitly refers to the environmental movement in the data set. FoE took out a full-page newspaper advertisement of Shell and demanded the oil major to use its profits to clean up its mess. Van der Veer directly responded in The Guardian by saying:
The environmental group's claims were ill informed and insulted his staff. I do not like Shell people being portrayed as people not doing a good job" (The Guardian, February 2 nd 2007) Jeroen van der Veer, CEO Shell

Subsequently in July 2007 Shell responds to the environmental movement in when they try to halt drilling operations in Alaska via court by claiming the polar beers and whales would be at serious risk as result of the operations. Shell states:
"We will comply with the court order and continue to welcome discussions with the North Slope communities. Alaska is a long-term investment for Shell" (The Guardian, July 23 2007)
Curtis Smith, Spokesman Shell

Mr van der Veer said he was "frustrated" by the last-minute challenge to the drilling programme and that he was confident it would be defeated. "We think we have good arguments and we are well prepared . . . we expect that drilling can begin this summer (The Guardian, July 27 2007) Jeroen van der Veer, CEO Shell

These statements express clear disagreement with the environmental movement, and Shell does not seem to appreciate that its operations were brought to a standstill. Pressure from environmental groups regarding tar sand investments in Alberta began in 2007 and became stronger afterwards. Shell reacted in the media on this campaign in August 2008 and warned environmentalists and ethical investors that failure of unconventional fossil fuel would enhance coal usage and thus be even worse for climate change.
The world needed every kind of energy source it could find at a time of soaring demand. He said groups that had threatened to organise a ban on alternative fossil fuels should be careful because without unconventionals "the balancing fuel will be coal". (The Guardian, August 1 2008) Jeroen van der Veer, CEO Shell

- 55 -

Moreover, environmental groups claim that oil extraction from tar sands costs triple the amount of energy compared to conventional oil exploration. Shell reacted to this statement by claiming the well-to-wheels carbon footprint was only 15% higher than conventional oil (The Guardian, August 1 2008). Similar issue arose in 2009, when Shell was ranked by Greenpeace and FoE as the most polluting company because of its high carbon intensive operations as for instance the tar sands in Alberta and gas flaring in Nigeria. The following response has been given in response to the claim of Greenpeace and FoE:
The company insists its tar sands production is only 15% more carbon intensive on a well-to-wheels basis and says it has always played a constructive role in climate-change issues. "We are an advocate of cap-and-trade schemes and are doing what we can to increase our efficiency and reduce our relative carbon output." (The Guardian, May 25 2009) Spokesman, Shell

In this statement Shell downplays the claims of the environmental movement organization by expressing tar sand extraction is less carbon extensive than they claim. At the same time Shell frames its green identity and emphasizes CCS as a preferred solution to combat climate change. Finally, both Shell and BP were approached by Greenpeace and Platform to withdraw its membership from the API and stop political lobbying in the White House. Both corporations reacted to the claim of the EMOs that are depicted below.
Shell said last night that it had told the API that it would not participate in the rallies but indicated it would not be leaving the organisation. "Our focus is on seeking common ground with stakeholders that can aid Congress in enacting a fair and effective cap and trade program. We will continue to express our position within API and other business and trade associations of which we are members," (The Guardian, August 20 2009) Spokesman, Shell BP said last night it was "highly unlikely" it would pull out of the API, which was just one of hundreds of trade bodies to which it was affiliated. But it stressed that it was not involved directly in any of the planned public rallies. "Our views on climate change legislation are fairly well known. We support action to counter emissions although we favour market mechanisms, like trading schemes." (The Guardian, August 20 2009) Spokesman, BP

Shell and BP respond to the claims and are clear in not willing to leave the API. Reason for the EMOs to demand this type of claim could be related to reassignment of the GCC in 1997. At that moment, withdrawing from the GCC symbolized a change at the core of the oil majors.

- 56 -

Similar act would have been an achievement of the environmental movement shortly before the start of the COP15.

- 57 -

5.

CONCLUSIONS

After exploratory analysis the goal is to highlight interesting findings and compare these with these with theoretical concepts and empirical findings with the objective to confirm, reject or emerge theories. Particular attention will be attributed to framing between social movement organizations and corporations. In the context of EMOs and oil majors its frame development, generation and elaboration have been observed. The fifth and final chapter of this paper summarizes and concludes this study by the means of six sections. The first part presents an in-depth discussion about the empirical findings. Secondly, the academic contribution will be outlined followed by practical implications. The fourth section includes the limitations of the study. Next, further research opportunities are proposed and finally the conclusion of the study is presented. 5.1 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

5.1.1 The corporations Here a summary and discussion of the findings of Shell and BP will be given. Both are visible similar amount of newspaper articles, and react with an equal number of statements on climate change related issue. However, data suggest that Shell provides more active statements than BP with 87 versus 24 proactive statements. 5.1.1.1 Royal Dutch Shell After analyzing Shells statements quantitatively several observations can be made. First, the data indicate that the number of statements about climate change increases steadily until 2008 and declines slightly in 2009. Hence, the public opinion of climate change has become more important. Next, as mentioned a clear proactive strategy can be observed with 87 statements or 73,1% of the total. A third observation is that Shell provides a majority of proactive statements. This suggests though it is necessary to contest certain issues to manage public opinion, it prefers to strategically frame issues. Fourthly, Shell does not seem to use particular frames more for often than others. However, in general looking at their overall framing strategy to address or contest issues some interesting observations has been made. Framing strategy mostly used by the organization are the identity frame and the government responsibility

- 58 -

frame. The identity frame was used reactively as well as proactively during the whole period. Thus, Shell used its identity frame to react on issues as e.g. the tar sands to frame that the corporation is not as bad as framed by the environment movement but also utilizes it proactively to emphasize its green identity within issues as CCS. The government responsibility frame was mainly used as a proactive framing strategy, hence clearly aiming to transfer responsibility regarding climate change to governmental organizations. Other often used frames particularly proactively are the demand frame, carbon market frame and investment frame. Thus, the data indicates that Shell intends to frame climate change more strategically rather than reacts on events or pressure of environmental movement pressure. Furthermore, data suggests has Shell changed its framing strategy over time. In earlier years of the sample the organization build upon its green identity and stated its motivation to actively combat climate change mitigation. However in the latter years of the sample, 2008-2009, the organization decreased the usage of its identity frame and actively commenced to use the business and government responsibility frame. Hence, besides a strategic approach to frame climate change the organization also changed its framing. 5.1.1.2 British Petroleum BPs data result in several interesting observations. First, BP rather reacts than acts on increasing attention to climate change with 61,9% of reactive statements and suggests reactive approach to climate change. Secondly, there is only one issue exclusively and one issue is partly initiated by BP that is energy mix and alternative energy. Not surprising, because within these issues the corporation can easily frame its stance about climate change according preference. All other issues tar sands, reputation, unethical operations and divestment renewables are merely reactive and arguable mainly invoked by EMOs. The third observation is that BP utilizes primarily the business frame, identity frame and demand frame to discuss climate change in mass media. Hence, it claims to be green while simultaneously highlights its business intentions and societys dependence on fossil fuels via the demand frame. More interesting is time over which the usage of frames develops. The data suggests BP started to use different frames around halfway through the sample. Reacting on issues perceived as climate change enhancing activities (e.g. tar sands investments and divestments of renewables) with the business frame did not occur until 2007. Moreover, claims to be a green and sustainable by the

- 59 -

identity frame decreased, the government responsibility frame was introduced and the demand frame was utilized most often in 2008. All these observations suggest a change in framing strategy throughout the sample period. 5.1.1.3 A comparison A comparison between the data of Shell and BP resulted in some interesting differences and similarities. First, it was possible to analyze the data of both corporations via the same coding structure. It suggests similarities of perspective of what is important regarding climate change. Where both organizations change seem to follow each other with its attitude to climate change mitigation exemplified by both publicly supporting climate change regulation in 1997 withdrawing from the GGC, this pattern seem to continue during 2004-2009. The data indicates that both Shell and BP change from a more green and sustainable framing strategy to a business and demand framing strategy in 2006, and when EMOs pressured to resign from the API both rejected this request openly in the media. Hence, it suggests Shell and BP have a similar holistic approach to climate change. Nevertheless, findings have also resulted in differences of framing strategy between the corporations. First, Shell clearly pursues a more Shell proactive strategy than BP and thus tries to shape and influence the debate around climate change more actively. Within these efforts Shell even introduce s its own energy scenarios gives, brings up CCS as a solution to climate change, actively talks about the Copenhagen agreement and addresses the government more often than BP. Thus, besides the similarities it seems Shell has more strategic intentions behind its climate change declarations in the mass media than BP.

5.1.2 Environmental movement organizations Also for Greenpeace and FoE considerable amount of direct or paraphrased statements have been found. A similar number of statements in a comparable number of articles are found in the data sample. Subsequently a summary of the findings of Greenpeace and FoE can be found. 5.1.2.1 Greenpeace

- 60 -

Of the in total 113 statement about climate change in the UK newspapers, 53 are directly addressed to the oil majors BP and Shell. For Greenpeace an almost equal number of reactive and proactive statements have been found, that suggest no particular preference can be found here. In contrast to the oil majors, results indicated a more clear and consistent framing strategy for Greenpeace. According to the data Greenpeace does seem to favor to discuss certain issues, namely GHG emissions and tar sands investment of oil majors. These account for 56% of Greenpeaces total number of with limited number of frames. For its reactive framing strategy, predominantly the skeptical frame has been used. These are reactions to green initiatives to that Greenpeace encourages but can only accept green promises as true after implementation that is particularly true for CCS and GHG emissions. Less frequent the environmental destruction frame and greenwashing frame was used reactively in case of initiative rather harming the climate. Greenpeaces proactive strategy is leaded by the environmental destruction or bad investment frame. Thus, while Greenpeace contests green initiatives being skeptical and seeking results its proactive strategies contain stronger arguments by emphasizing destructive environmental and investment consequences. Hence, Greenpeace seems to have more consistent framing strategy and utilized a different framing strategy for reactive that for proactive statements. 5.1.2.2 Friends of the Earth The data of FoE showed a peak in quantity of statements in 2005, the initiation of the Kyoto Protocol and thereafter declined gradually. The organization has a proactive strategy in the observed newspapers, because 71% of the statements are initiated by FoE. Its preferred issues to discuss in these mass media sources are politics, GHG emissions and high profits. As with Greenpeace, differentiation of frames between the proactive and reactive statements is clearly observable. Overall, FoEs proactive statements most often employ the environmental destruction, greenwashing and governmental responsibility frame. The latter frame is merely used within politics is an issue, addressed upon initiative of FoE and enhance government responsibility about climate change mitigation with the government responsibility frame. During the discussion of the GHG emissions FoE predominantly uses the greenwashing, environmental destruction and skeptical frame to make its point. Summarizing its reactive

- 61 -

framing strategy, the organization utilizes a variety of frames of which mostly the environmental destruction, skeptical and greenwashing frame. The environmental destruction frame is mostly used to counterframe high profits of oil corporations and the greenwashing frame to counterframe the environmental responsible identity oil corporations. 5.1.2.3 A comparison Comparing both EMOs it first appears that over the sample period only a small difference in its appearance in the newspaper exists. This suggests both organizations find climate change and oil more or less equally relevant for communication in mass media. However, analyzing both organizations over time Greenpeaces number of statement increase gradually since 2004, while FoE peaks already in 2005. Arguably this could be because of the Kyoto Protocol, but 2009 was the year of Copenhagen that was also perceived as a critical moment in time regarding binding climate change mitigation regulation. Moreover, FoE addresses politics more often than Greenpeace suggesting it should be more sensitive to political opportunities as the COP15. 5.1.3 Development over time The data shows that both Shell and BP were, quite ironically, perceived as green and sustainable oil companies at the start of the sample around 2004. The corporations expressed its concerns about climate change and invested in renewable energy next to its fossil fuel investments. However, both never gave the intention to move away of its core business. Year 2005 was the year of Kyoto Protocol came into force, implying a large part of the world were restricted to binding targets to decrease its GHG emissions. The oil majors did not seem to react on that in the newspaper data. Greenpeace also paid little attention to this event, findings suggest that only FoE reacted to the start of the Kyoto Protocol. Findings demonstrate a peak of number of statement and particularly within the politics issue. Besides the gradual increase in statements of all corporations with exception of FoE, a shift within the sample is visible in 2007. This is the moment investments of Shell and BP in the tar sands in Alberta became publicly known. In 2007 the EMOs reacted strongly to this development. From 2008 onwards both EMOs started to act against the developments in Alberta, hence Greenpeace launched a global campaign and actively expresses its stance in the newspaper data. Moreover, in 2008 Greenpeace published a report in which in introduced the

- 62 -

bad investment frame. Greenpeace targeted investors of the oil majors to inform them about the riskiness of their investments partly as a result of the rigorous environmental consequences of this method of oil extraction. The oil majors had to explain these investment decisions to its stakeholders and used contradictory arguments. Mainly Shell and BP explained tar sand investments as business decisions but meanwhile still relied on its green and sustainable identity. During the same period Shell and BP divested several alternative energy projects, framed in the media by the environmental movement. Also on these decisions Shell and BP felt the need to react, visible in newspaper data. Divestments of renewables together with tar sand investments are contradictory decisions regarding its green identity, emphasized by the environmental movement. Continuing the green identity frames is was not in line with current strategy and did not contribute to the integrity of the organizational identity. Hence, both Shell and BP started to different frames in the newspaper data in the latter years of the sample. Corporations used the business and demand frame more often and even downplayed the role of renewables as a possible solution for climate change mitigation. Findings suggest pressure of EMOs in mass media played a role in the change of corporate appearance in the newspaper data.

5.2

ACADEMIC CONTRIBUTION

This study is the first that has explored framing dynamics between SMO and corporations in mass media over time. The increasing role of SMO in our society that more often target corporation creates a necessity understand these dynamics. It has chosen to research these dynamics in the context of the environmental movement with visible EMOs and major oil corporations that have converging interests in fossil fuel development and operations. The combination of exploring social movement dynamics within the environmental movement makes this research particularly relevant in present situation of rising awareness about the consequences of climate change. This study has found some interesting dynamics. 5.2.1 Social movements and corporations First and most importation is the contribution to the understanding of social movement outcomes. Findings suggest that pressure of SMOs also result in less obvious outcomes and can

- 63 -

influence a corporations public stance towards SMOs claims. The environmental movement pressure oil majors to reduce fossil fuel operations shift focus to renewable or alternative energy. Oil majors are well aware that global warming has been proven almost irrefutable by scientists and public awareness of climate change is rising. The rising public awareness also means rising awareness of stakeholders of the corporations. Since 1997 (the moment Shell and BP openly supported climate change regulation) Shell and BP build upon a sustainable identity by e.g. investing in renewables and informing stakeholders via own media channels, advertising and mass media statements. From 2007 onwards the oil corporations started to divest renewables and invest in unconventional fossil fuel resources. These decisions of did not remain unnoticed by the environmental movement since they were destructive rather than constructive for the environment. Even though the pressure of EMOs did not result in a change in decisions of the oil majors, the newspaper data suggest that because of environmental movement claims the oil majors were pressured to defend its stance to its stakeholders. Rather than framing the severe consequences of climate change and take responsibility by its proactive attitude the oil corporations became were forced to explain its environmental unfriendly decisions. Additionally, in proactive statements both Shell and BP find it more important to motivate business objectives and shift responsibility to the government. Since EMOs often do not have direct access to corporations, media attention has appeared to be imperative for the outcome of SMOs claims as it includes other stakeholder that are able to pressure corporations (King, 2008a). Environmental movement organizations are increasingly able to enforce public opinions on corporate practices, for instance Brent Spar was a situation where Shell choose to concede with the claims of Greenpeace, even though government regulation did not demand this. This study shows the importance of media attention for social movement organizations. It forces corporations to react, alter or create frames to influence public opinion that include many important stakeholders. However, the growing attention for climate change in mass media also provokes strategic reactions by corporation that further try to influence sources both by the investigated EMOs and oil majors. It is relevant for EMOs to be aware that large oil majors not only react within mass media to defend or explain its position in practices questioned by EMOs, increasingly they try to shape the debate itself. Findings demonstrate that especially Shell introduces its own topics, provides solutions and even turn to the government. Thus, besides advertising campaigns also mass media is utilized to

- 64 -

communicate its opinion about climate change and corresponding sustainable identity. Additionally, in order to react adequately to these actions it is useful to be aware of the framing strategy it pursues. 5.2.2 Framing and counterframing The first academic contribution regards the dynamic character of frames and discursive fields. Several conceptual and empirical studies on framing suggest frames are dynamic and are generated, developed and elaborated over time (Benford & Snow, 2000; Esacove 2004; McCaffrey & Keys, 2000). Findings in this study confirm frames are not static entities, but indeed develop over time. For Greenpeace and FoE the message is consistent, but frames vary over time. For instance, during the latter years of the sample Greenpeace uses the environmental destruction frame more heavily and introduces the bad investment frame to influence investors of oil majors as well. Moreover, the more profound change in frames of the oil major suggests a change in framing strategy as discussed in previous paragraph. Findings also find evidence about the varying playing field of discursive fields in which relationships and participants can be easily altered and therefore confirm current scholars (Snow, 2004). The corporations initially promote its investments in alternative energy, enhance climate change awareness and react to mostly unforeseen unethical events. Over time Shell and BP react to issues as the tar sands and divestments of materials and promote fossil fuel dependency. Logically this has consequences for its relation with the environmental movement that was initially encouraging though skeptical about green initiatives of the oil majors and became more opposing with the usage of environmental destruction and greenwashing frames. The role of the government varies as well over time. Initially especially FoE emphasized the role of the government, however gradually the oil companies addressed need for government intervention. Next, the change in framing activities found in this study raise questions about frame transformation. According to Snow (2004) frame transformation is more complex and variegated than initially suggested. Changes of framing and counterframing can occur around events as well as more dramatic modifications can be accomplished (Benford & Snow, 2000) of which the latter has been studied less. Findings of this study suggest dramatic changes occur by the means of several events particularly by the countermovement. In 1997 several events contributed to the change of oil companies to support of binding climate change regulation.

- 65 -

Brent Spar, practices in Nigeria, increasing scientific evidence, and growing intergovernmental support made Shell and BP realize it was not possible to ignore climate change and corresponding consequences. The profound change of frames regarding climate change did not happen instantly. A weaker global economy increase pressure on shareholder value and good investment opportunities in a politically stable area could deliver such. In addition, decisions made at the COP15 would affect the oil industry and therefore particularly Shell tried to shape this debate. Pressure of the environmental movement enhances public awareness of core business activities that resulted in change of frames. No dramatic changes in the stance of the EMOs were observed, however decisions of oil majors did provoke stronger opposing frames used by Greenpeace and FoE. Hence, these findings suggest frame modification does not particularly have to be a response to an event or a dramatic change, but what often starts with a reaction to one or multiple events can lead to a more dramatic and long-term change. 5.3 PRACTICAL IMPLICATION

This study results in several practical implications for SMOs and corporations. However, results are based on one discourse within the environmental movement and therefore limited generalizable implications can be derived. Findings imply that mass media plays a critical role in the outcome of the environmental movement. Framing issues in mass media in order to inform corporate stakeholders (e.g. customers, consumers and shareholders) about operations of the firm is very important. Particularly with contemporary issues that affect the corporations can force corporations to explain itself towards its stakeholders. Moreover, also oil corporations also try to shape the discourse itself via emphasizing issues that enhance its image or influence regulatory decisions. SMOs awareness of the power of public opinion and the affect it has on the outcome of its claim is imperative. Hence, SMOs should put substantial efforts in framing tactics of its claims and campaigns. This study suggests consistency is importance when determining its frames, the consistent pressure of EMOs in the dialogue with oil majors demonstrated oil majors were forced to explain its decisions and eventually changed its framing strategy. The critical role of framing is also applicable to the corporations, or at least the oil industry observed regarding EMOs made it difficult for the oil majors sustain its green identity that

- 66 -

framed the oil majors one of main causes for the problem in this case worlds largest contributor to climate change. Obviously oil majors did not want to be perceived as large polluters by its stakeholders invested to obtain a sustainable identity achieved by investing in operating efficiency and alternative energy. However, the public was not left unnoticed when alternative investments were divested and tar sands investments were given priority. Findings suggest honesty was appreciated above continuing its green rhetoric. Thus, integrity and sincerity is regarded as more important than pursing a green identity that in reality is not all that green. 5.4 LIMITATIONS

The limitations that apply to this study are addressed subsequently. First constraint relates to general characteristics of the study. As result of the exploratory nature of this research, not the strengths of relationships are tested, but this study is designed to rather investigate whether there is an affect between the concepts. Furthermore, the data is subject to qualitative research and therefore limits the generalizability and applicability of the study in several ways: the study is based on a European perspective, the study examines framing process of NGOs and oil corporations within the environmental movement, and the study is based on a single discourse within the environmental movement. Next, the study uses newspaper data that implies it is subject to several corresponding limitations. Earl et al (2004) find that newspaper data is subject to the selection bias and the description bias. The selection bias entails the selection of report news that the news agency has to make. The description bias concerns the vereicity of reported events and distinguishes between hard news (facts) and soft news (opinions and impressions of commentators). Soft news is subject to multiple sources of bias and therefore decreases its reliability. The selection bias is also apparent in this setting. To a lower extend present study faces a description bias, since only direct statements or paraprased quotations of the analyzed organizations are used. However, the role of journalist is still significant as he or she chooses the quotes and decides on length and context. A further limitation that is related to the data analysis is the high degree of subjectivity. Analyzing frames refers to attach meaning to expressions of organizations or individuals. The

- 67 -

data set was analyzed by the means of codes chosen by the researcher. Al these actions are subject to personal bias. 5.5 FURTHER RESEARCH

This objective of this study is to conduct explore dynamics of SMO and corporations in the context of the environmental movement and thereby enhance understanding about interesting developments, actions, events etc. As result of the exploratory nature of this research it raises more questions than it provides with answers. First of all, this study is based on UK newspaper data to determine framing strategies of organizations. Newspaper data gives a good indication of the main framing strategies used by both the EMOs and oil majors and are therefore suitable for exploratory research. Even though the data suggests the environmental movement play an essential role in the framing strategy of the oil majors, more evidence is required to support the claim. Future research could analyze own media of the investigated organizations to obtain further insights into the discussed issues and corresponding framing strategies of the EMOs and oil majors. Since Greenpeace and FoE as well as Shell and BP are all global and highly visible organizations in the public arena they inform its stakeholders by annual reports, speeches, websites etc. Such evidence provide better understanding of framing strategies, decreases the subjectivity corresponding to the meaning of frames, and hence contributes considerably to the reliability of the findings. Additionally, it will be interesting to analyze the advertising campaigns of Shell and BP over time. It can provide further evidence of changes in frames and the objective of the campaigns. Newspaper data is this study finds EMOs claiming that oil majors are greenwashing, and not actually implement the green rhetoric. Further exploration could provide interesting insights to the message of the advertisement strategies and modification of frames. A second suggestion for further research is to investigate more closely the theoretical concepts within the framing and counterframing. Snow (2004) and Benford & Snow (2000) both intended to demonstrate and conceptualize the complexity of frame transformation. This research confirms the complexity and proposes to dedicate further research to empirical research of existing concepts. Findings of this study suggest transformation of frames due to events lead to

- 68 -

more drastic changes that affect a larger range of communication. However, it is not clear which situations More conclusive evidence of frame transformation, e.g. the techniques used, the most Furthermore, some interesting and useful suggestions were provided during the presentation of the preliminary results of Carberry et al (2010) at the Fifth Organization Studies Workshop in Margaux in May 2010. Two suggestions are found especially interesting for further research this perspective. First, the suggestion was made to connect frames to the different event occurring over the time period. Future research to more event based framing strategies would gain insights to how organizations act and react to various events. It would be interesting to explore how both SMOs and its corporate targets frames and counterframe particular events. Second suggestion proposed to pay more attention to the introduction of the bad investment frame of Greenpeace that was introduced in 2008. An interesting idea, since Greenpeace refers specifically to investors and hence most probably Greenpeace tries to influence this particular group of stakeholders via the media.

- 69 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adam, D. (2009, July 1). ExxonMobil continuing to fund climate skeptic groups, records show. The Guardian. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment. Annual Review Sociology , 26, 611-639. Betsill, M. (2000). Greens in the Greenhouse: Environmental NGOs, Norms, and the Politcs of Global Climate Change. Unpublished PhD diss . Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2005). Business Research Methods. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education. Briscoe, F., & Safford, S. (2008). The Nixon-in-China effect: Activism, imitation, and the institutionalization of contentious practices. Administrative Science Quarterly , 3, 460-491. Burgherr, P. (2007). In-depth analysis of accidental oil spills from tankers in the context of global spill trends from all sources. Journal of Hazardous Materials , 140, 245-256. Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review , 32 (3), 946-967. apek, S. M. (1993). The "Environmental Justice" Frame: A Conceptual Discussion and an Application. Social Problems , 40, 5-24. Carberry, E. J., Ansari, S., & Mantel, J. H. (2010). Keeping organizations honest: Framing, counterframing and the role of social movements in contesting organizaitonal idenity. The Fifth Organization Studies Workshop: Social Movements,Civil Societies and Corporations, (pp. 1-40). Margaux. Carroll, C. R., & Swaminathan, A. (2000). Why the microbrewery movement? Organizational dynamics of resource partioning. American Journal of Sociology , 106, 715-762. Carty, V. (2002). Technology and Counter-hegemonic Movements: the case of Nike corporation. Social Movement Studies , 1 (2), 129-146. Constain, A. N. (1992). Inviting Women's Rebellion: A Politcal Process Interpretation of the Women's Movement. Batimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Davis, G. F., Morrill, C., Rao, H., & Soule, S. A. (2008). Introduction: Social Movements in Organizations and Markets. Administrative Science Quarterly , 53 (3), 389-394. Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2006). Social movements: an introduction. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. den Hond, F., & de Bakker, F. (2007). Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Academy of Management Review , 32 (3), 901-924.

- 70 -

Earl, J., Martin, A., McCarthy, J. D., & Soule, S. A. (2004). The Use of Newspaper Data in the Study of Collective Action. Annual Review of Sociology , 30, 65-80. Edwards, P., & Schneider, S. (2001). Self-Governance and peer-review in science-for-policy: the case of the IPCC Second Assessment Report. In C. A. Miller, & P. N. Edwards, Changing the Atmosphere. Expert Knowledge and Environmental Governance (pp. 219-246). Cambrigde, MA: MIT Press. Egan, T. (1998, September 13). The Swoon of the Swoosh. New York Times Magazine , pp. 6670. Einwohner, R. L. (2002). Motivational framing and efficacy maintenance: Animal Rights Activists' Use Of Four Fortyfying Strategies. The Sociological Quarterly , 43 (4), 509-526. Eisinger, P. (1973). The conditions of protest behavior in American cities. Americian Political Scientific Review , 81, 11-28. Esacove, A. W. (2004). Dialogic Framing: The Framing/Counterframing of "Partial-Birth" Abortion. Sociological Inquiry , 74 (1), 70-101. Fligstein, N. (1996). Markets as olitics: A politcal-cultural approach to market institutions. American Sociological Review , 61, 656-673. Gamson, W. A. (2004). Bystanders, Public Opinion, and the Media. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi, The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (pp. 242-261). Blackwell Publishing. Gamson, W. A., & Meyer, D. S. (1996). Framing political opportunity. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & Z. M. N, Comparative perspecitves on social movements (pp. 275-290). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gamson, W. A., H, C. D., & Sasson, T. (1992). Media images and the social construction. Annual Review of Sociology , 18, 373-393. Gerhards, J., & Rucht, D. (1992). Mesomobilization: organizing and framing in two protest campaigns in West Germany. American Journol of Sociology , 98, 555-595. Greenpeace. (2009a, November 30). Annual Report 2008. Retrieved January 2010, 2010, from http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/internationalannualreport-2008.pdf Greenpeace. (2009b, January 6). Red Carpet Four out of jail - but face trial for climate action, need support. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/outof-jail-060110 Gueterbock, R. (2004). Greenpeace campaign case study - StopEsso. Journal of Consumer Behaviour , 3 (3), 265-271.

- 71 -

Gurr, T. R. (1970). Why Men Rebel . Princeton: Princeton University Press. IPCC. (2007). Fourth Assessment Report. Geneva: IPCC. Johnston, H. (2002). Verification and Proof in Discourse Analysis. In B. Klandermans, & S. Staggenborg, Methods of Social Movements Research (pp. 62-91). Minnapolis: University of Minnesota Press. King, B. G. (2008a). A Political Mediation Model of Corporate Response to Social Movement Activism. Administrative Science Quarterly , 53 (3), 395-421. King, B. G. (2008b). A Social Movement Perspective of Stakeholder Collective and Influence. Business & Society , 47 (1), 21-49. King, B. G., & Soule, S. A. (2007). Social Movements as Extra-institutional Entrepreneurs: The Effect of Protests on Stock Price Returns. Administrative Science Quarterly , 52, 413-442. Koenig, T. (2006). Compounding mixed-methods problems in frame analysis through comparative research. Qualitative Research , 6 (1), 61-76. Kolk, A., & Levy, D. (2001). Winds of Change: Corporate Strategy, Climate Change and Oil Multinationals. European Management Journal , 19 (5), 501-509. Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Giugini, M. G. (1995). The Politics of New Social Movements in Western Europe. A Comparative Analysis. London: University College of London Press. Lipsky, M. (1965). Protest and City Politics. Chicago: Rand McNally&Co. Livesey, S. M. (2001). Eco-Identity as Discursive Struggle: Royal Dutch Shell, Brent Spar and Nigeria. Journal of Business Communication , 38 (1), 58-91. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1995). Designing Qualitative Research. SAGE. Martin, R. L. (2003). The virtue matrix: Calculating the return on corporate responsibility. Harvard Business Review on corporate responsibility , 83-104. McAdam, D. (1996). Conceptual origens, current problems, future direction. In D. McAdam, M. J. D, & Z. M. N, Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 23-40). New York: Cambridge University Press. McAdam, D. (1982). Politicall Process and the Development of Black Insurgency. Chicago: University Chicago Press. McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1996). Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. New York: Cambridge University Press.

- 72 -

McCaffrey, D. & Keys, J., 2000. Competitive framing processes in the abortion debate: Polarization-vilification, frame Saving, and frame debunking. The Sociological Quarterly, 41(1), 41-61. McCammon, H. J. (2001). Stirring up suffrage sentiment: The formation of the state woman suffrage organizations. Social Forces , 80 (2), 449-480. McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory. The American Journal of Sociology , 82 (6), 1212-1241. Meyer, D. S. (2004). Protest and Political Opportunities. Annual Review Sociology , 30, 125-145. Meyer, D. S., & Minkhoff, D. C. (2004). Conceptualizing Political Opportunity. Social Forces , 82 (4), 1457-1492. Nike. (1998). Annual Report. Opp, K. D. (2000). Adverse living conditions, grievances, and political protest after communism: the example of East Germany. Forces , 79 (1), 29-65. Pratt, M. G. (2009). For the lack of a boilerplate: tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal , 52 (5), 856-862. Pulver, S. (2007a). Making sense of corporate enviromentalism. Organization and Environment , 20 (1), 44-84. Pulver, S. (2002). Organising Business: Industry NGOs in the Climate Debates. GMI , 39, 5567. Pulver, S. (2007). Three Pathways to Political Liability:The effects of oil industry dynamics on climate change advocacy NGOs. International Studies Association Annual Convention, (pp. 1-31). Chicago. Quarterly, A. S. (2008). Special Issue on Social Movements and Organizations. 389-574. Rao, H. (1998). Caveat emptor. The construction of nonprofit watchdog organizations. American Journal of Sociology , 103, 912-961. Reid, R. E., & Toffel, M. W. (2009). Responding to public and private politics: corporate disclosure of climate change strategies. Strategic Management Journal , 30, 1157-1178. Revkin, A. C. (2009, April 24). Industries ignored scientists on climate. New York Times . Schrock, D., Holden, D., & Reid, L. (2004). Creating Emotional Resonance: Interpersonal Emotion Work and Motivational Framing in a Transgender Community. Social Problems , 50 (1), 61-81.

- 73 -

Shemtov, R. (1999). Taking Ownership of Environmental Problems: How Local NIMBY Groups Expand. Mobilization , 4, 91-106. Skjrseth, J. B., & Skodvin, T. (2001). Climate Change and the Oil Industry: Common Problems, Different Strategies. Global Environmental Politics , 1 (4), 43-64. Smelser, N. (1963). Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press. Smith, J. (2001). Globalizing Resistance: The Battle of Seattle and the Future of Social Movements. Mobilization: An International Journal , 6 (1), 1-19. Snow, D. A. (2007). Framing and social movements. In G. Ritzer, The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology (pp. 1780-1783). Blackwell Publishing. Snow, D. A. (2004). Framing processes, ideology, and discursive fields. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi, The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (pp. 380-412). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, Frame Resonance and Participant Mobilization. In B. Klandermans, H. Kriesi, & S. Tarrow, International Social Movement Research 1 (pp. 197218). Greenwich: Conn.: JAI. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research , 1, 197-218. Snow, D. A., Soule, S. A., & Kriesi, H. (2004). Mapping the Terrain. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi, The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (pp. 3-16). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Soule, S. A., & Olzak, S. (2004). When Do Movements Matter? The Politcs of Contingency and the Equal Rights Amendment. American Sociological Review , 69, 473-497. Steinberg, M. W. (1999). The Talk and Back Talk of Collective Action: A Dialogic Analysis of Reportoires of Discourse among Ninetheenth-Century English Cotton Spinners. American Journal of Sociology , 105, 736-780. Stern, N. (2006). The economics of climate change: The Stern review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. California: SAGE Publications. Tarrow, S. (1998). Power in Movement. Oxford: Clarendon. Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. UNFCCC. (2007). Uniting on Climate: A Guide to the Climate Change Convention and Kyoto Protocol. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

- 74 -

Valocchi, S. (1996). The emergence of the integrationist ideology in the civil rights movement. Social Problems , 43, 116-130. Williams, G. I., & Williams, R. H. (1995). 'All we want is equality': rethorical framing in the fathers' rights movement. In J. Best, Images of Issues (pp. 191-212). New York: de Gruyter.

- 75 -

APPENDIX A: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviation API BP CCS COP15 CSR EMO FoE GCC GHG IPCC NGO PPM SMO UK UNFCCC WWF Meaning American Petroleum Institute British Petroleum Carbon Capture and Storage 15th Conference of Parties Corporate Social Responsibility Environmental Movement Organization Friends of the Earth Global Climate Coalition Greenhouse gas Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Non-governmental Organizations Parts Per Million Social Movement Organization United Kingdom United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change World Wildlife Fund

- 76 -

APPENDIX B: THE CODING FRAMEWORK

Corporation 1: Shell
Government responsibility frame

Copenhagen agreement

Divestment renewables

Being concerned frame

Carbon market frame

Unethical operations

Alternative energy

Energy scenarios

Investment frame

Not guilty frame

Business frame

STATEMENTS

2004 r a 2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A

8 0

2004 r

1 0

1 0 0 2 2 0

3 0 0

3 5 1 0

8 8 2

3 3 1 2 4 1 3 8 5 3 10 4 6 8 4 4 33 15 18

a 2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A

1 0

5 0 1 5 1 1 4 1 2 0

2 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 0

5 1 1 4 3 3 4 2 2 0 2 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 0 2 1 1 5 4 1 9 5 4 2 1 1 7 3 4 8 8 0 15 0 15 2 2 3 14 0 14 12 12 0 24 0 24 0 15 15 0 4 4 3 1 1 8 8 4 4 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 0 12 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 12

1 3 0

6 20 1

1 1

20 1

3 3 0

19 21 13

6 6 6 5 4 1 2 2 7 3 4 5 1 4 15 10 5 25 9 16 2 2

6 3

1 2 1

2 1 0

2 2 0

1 2 2

19 21 13 8

3 1 1 11 1 1 6

8 36 11 25 27 5

3 8 3 5 1 1

1 10 10 5

1 3 3 5 2 2 2

2 1 1 5 2 1 0 1 1 2 2

36 11 25 27 5 22

11 19 0 19

6 7 0 7

22 120 32 88

5 19 4 15 23 2 21

5 11 0 11

2 6 0 6

5 11 0 11

1 4 3 1 5 4 1

120 32 88

- 77 -

STATEMENTS 8 0 8 8 2 6

Demand frame

Miscellaneous

Identity frame

High profits

Energy mix

ARTICLES

Reputation

Tar sands

CCS

Corporation 2: British Petroleum

Government responsibility frame

Divestment renewables

Carbon market frame

Unethical operations

Alternative energy

Investment frame

Not guilty frame

Business frame

STATEMENTS

2004 r a 2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A 21 6 15 8 8 0 3 3 0 6 6 0 5 5 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 4 4 5 0 0 0 2 2 2 8 8 3 3 13 0 13 12 12 0 4 4 3 3 2 5 5 10 5 7 7 1 1 0 0 0 10 0 1 1 0 0 0 11 1 10 13 8 5 9 7 2 16 8 8 14 11 3 63 35 28 6 2 4 6 4 2 4 3 1 6 3 3 5 4 1 27 16 11

2004 r a 2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A 4 2 2 4 3 1 7 5 2 17 10 7 15 11 4 3 3 2 2 5 1 4 2 1 1 12 3 9 7 4 3 1 1 0 4 0 4 6 6 0 1 0 1 4 1 3 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 1 3 4 3 1 2 2 3 0 3 2 1 1 0 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 4 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 11 1 10 13 8 5 9 7 2 16 8 8 14 11 3 63 35 28

- 78 -

STATEMENTS

Demand frame

Energy supply

Miscellaneous

Identity frame

ARTICLES

Reputation

Tar sands

Environmental Movement Organization 1: Greenpeace

Environmental destruction frame

Government responsibility frame

Economic destruction frame

Bad investment frame

Greenwashing frame

Unethical operations

Social justice frame

Alternative energy

GHG emissions

Skeptical frame

STATEMENTS

2004 r a 2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A

2 2

5 5

7 7 0

5 5

2004 r a

3 3

0 0

1 1

3 3

1 1

4 1

10 2

7 2 5 10 6 4 10 8 2 15 9 6 12 4 8 59 34 25

2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A

2 2

10 2

2 0 2 2 0 2 2 0

3 4 1 3

3 9 3 6 3 3

8 17 8 9 20 16 4

2 5 4 1 6 6 0 10 10 4 2 2 7 1 6 10 4 6 36 29 7 17 7 10 1 1 3 3

2 2 1 1 7 5 2 2 2 0 8

1 0 0 2 0

3 5

17 8

2 1 1 0 1 1 0

5 1 1

1 1

9 7 2

5 5

20 16 4

2 0 4 2 2 5 1 1 0 17 7 10 7 3 4 12 6 6 39 20 19 4 4 2 2

7 7

9 1

30 16 14 30 8 22 114 57 57

2 2

1 1

30 16 14

4 0 1

8 6

8 0 5 1 2 3 3

30 8 22

1 11 11 0 7 2 5

6 24 8 16

5 14 7 7

8 21 8 13 3 2 1

5 13 0 13

1 6 3 3

2 2 0 2 16 8 8

114 57 57

- 79 -

STATEMENTS 7 7 0 8 9

Miscellaneous

ARTICLES

Reputation

Tar sands

Politics

CCS

Environmental Movement Organization 2: Friends of the Earth

Environmental destruction frame

Government responsibility frame

Economic destruction frame

Copenhagen agreement

Bad investment frame

Greenwashing frame

Unethical operations

Social justice frame

Alternative energy

GHG emissions

Skeptical frame

STATEMENTS

2004 r a 2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A

1 1

12 1

5 1 4 14 6 8 12 5 7 9 5 4 9 7 2 6 1 5 55 25 30

2004 r a 2005 r a 2006 r a 2007 r a 2008 r a 2009 r a TOTAL R A

1 1

Miscellaneous 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 6 2 4

High profits

ARTICLES

Reputation

Tar sands

Politics

CCS

12 1

1 5 4 1 6 1 5 0 1 1 0 3 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 0 2 2 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 4

9 13 1 12 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0

1 4

11 28 9

1 5 3 2 4 1 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 9 2 7 2 2 2

2 9 3 6 10 3 7 0

2 2

1 1 1

3 8 1 7

1 0

11 28 9 19

4 5

19 18 5

2 0 0

18 5

5 6

13 14 5

1 0 1 1 1 1 0

13 14 5 9

6 4 1 3 0 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

9 12 8 4 9 1 8 93 29 64

1 1

3 3

12 8

2 0 0 5 2 1 1 1 5 14 7 7 16 6 10 27 7 20 2 9 3 6 1 4 1 3 16 3 13 1 0 1 0

1 14 8 6 3 2 1

1 6 4 2 3 0 3

4 9 2 7 8 7 1 29 4 25

1 2 0 2

1 19 2 17

93 29 64

- 80 -

STATEMENTS 4 9 1 8

APPENDIX C: COMPARING CORPORATIONS

Shell vs. BP: Issues

30 Number of Statments 25 20 15 10 5 0 Total BP Total Shell

Shell vs. BP: Framing Strategies

30 25 Number of statements 20 15 10 5 0

Total BP Total Shell

- 81 -

APPENDIX D: COMPARING EMOS

Greenpeace vs. FoE: Issues
45 40 Number of statements 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Total GP Total FOE

Greenpeace vs. FoE: Framing strategies

40 Number of statements 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Skeptical Greenw Env. Destr. S. Justice B. invest Gov. resp Mis Total GP Total FOE

- 82 -