Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 69 No. 4 (2025): Symbolic Boundaries in Social Communication

Articles and essays

Green Hydrogen: Energy Justice Through the Lens of Press Discourse Analysis, 2016–2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35757/KiS.2025.69.4.4
Submitted: January 8, 2025
Published: December 12, 2025

Abstract

In the face of the global challenge of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the countries of the European Union are striving to achieve emission neutrality, among other strategies, by introducing hydrogen technologies in the energy diversification process and by implementing a just transition. This article is based on an analysis of press discourse on hydrogen in 2016–2022, using Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies (CADS) methods and qualitative content analysis based on framing analysis. The collected material comprised 1,896 articles (totaling approximately some 1.75 million words) from the highest-circulation press in its category on the Polish market. The analysis indicates the dominance of expert and specialist groups in shaping the hydrogen narrative. It reveals that the discourse has been taken over by representatives of big business, with only marginal participation by the academic community, local government, and the third sector—which may hinder the realization of the just transition. The authority of science is exploited to conceal the rhetorical tools applied in expert discourse. This implies the need to critically rethink communication strategies on innovative technologies and to engage diverse sections of society in dialogue on the energy transition, of which energy justice is a component in the process of change towards a post-carbon society.

References

  • Anthony Stark, Fred Gale, i Hannah Murphy-Gregory. 2023. „Just Transitions’ Meanings: A Systematic Review”. Society & Natural Resources 36 (10): 1277–97.
  • Baker, Paul. 2006. Using corpora in discourse analysis. London - New York: Continuum.
  • Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid Khosravinik, Tony Mcenery, i Ruth Wodak. 2008. „A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press”. Discourse & Society 19 (3): 273–306.
  • Bertilsson, Margareta. 1990. „The role of science and knowledge in a risk society: comments and reflections on Beck”. Quarterly. T. 4.
  • Bondi, Marina, Silvia Cacchiani, i Davide Mazzi, red. 2015. Discourse In and Through the Media: Recontextualizing and Reconceptualizing Expert Discourse. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Borgman, Christine. 2007. Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Calsamiglia, Helena, i Teun A Van Dijk. 2004. „Popularization Discourse and Knowledge about the Genome”. Discourse & Society 15 (4): 369–89.
  • Cha, J Mijin. 2020. „A just transition for whom? Politics, contestation, and social identity in the disruption of coal in the Powder River Basin”. Energy research and social science 69: 101657.
  • Emodi, N V, H Lovell, C Levitt, i E Franklin. 2021. „A systematic literature review of societal acceptance and stakeholders’ perception of hydrogen technologies”. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 46 (60): 30669–97.
  • Entman, Robert M. 1993. „Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm”. Journal of Communication. T. 43.
  • Franczak, Karol. 2017. „Analiza ramowania”, w: Analiza dyskursu publicznego. Przegląd metod i perspektyw badawczych, zredagowane przez Marek Czyżewski, Michał Otrocki, Tomasz Piekot i Jerzy Stachowiak. Warszawa: Sedno. Wydawnictwo Akademickie.
  • Fraser, N. 2013. „Recognition without ethics?”, w: The turn to ethics, 95–126. Routledge.
  • Fraser, N. 2020. „From redistribution to recognition?: Dilemmas of justice in a postsocialist age”, w: The new social theory reader, 188–96. Routledge.
  • Gabrielatos, Costas, i Paul Baker. 2008. „Fleeing, sneaking, flooding: A corpus analysis of discursive constructions of refugees and Asylum Seekers in the UK Press, 1996-2005”. Journal of English Linguistics 36 (1): 5–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424207311247.
  • Gillings, Mathew, Gerlinde Mautner, i Paul Baker. 2023. Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies. Cambridge University Press.
  • Heffron, R J, i D McCauley. 2017. „The concept of energy justice across the disciplines”. Energy Policy 105: 658–67.
  • Irmak Karakislak, Jan Hildebrand, i Petra Schweizer-Ries. 2023. „Exploring the interaction between social norms and perceived justice of wind energy projects: a qualitative analysis”. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 25 (2): 155–68.
  • Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubícek, Vojtech Kovár, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý, i Vít Suchomel. 2014. „The sketch engine: Ten years on”. Lexicography 1 (1): 7–36.
  • Lozano, L L, B Bharadwaj, A de Sales, A Kambo, i P Ashworth. 2022. „Societal acceptance of hydrogen for domestic and export applications in Australia”. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 47 (67): 28806–18.
  • Maczka, K., Lis-Plesińska, A., & Iwińska, K. 2023. Epistemic justice impossible? Expert perceptions of the participatory monitoring of geo-energy projects in Poland. Energy Research & Social Science, 102, 103154.
  • Matthes, J., i M. Kohring. 2008. „The Content Analysis of Media Frames: Toward Improving Reliability and Validity”. Journal of Communication 58: 258–79.
  • Müller, F, J Tunn, i T Kalt. 2022. „Hydrogen justice”. Environmental Research Letters 17 (11).
  • Puschman, Cornelius. 2015. „A Digital Mob in the Ivory Tower? Context Collapse in Scholarly Communication Online”, w: Discourse In and Through the Media: Recontextualizing and Reconceptualizing Expert Discourse, 22–45.
  • Rychlý, Pavel. 2008. „A Lexicographer-Friendly Association Score”, w: Proceedings of Recent Advances in Slavonic Natural Language Processing, RASLAN 2008, 6–9.
  • Sadat-Razavi, Pantea, Irmak Karakislak, i Jan Hildebrand. 2024. „German Media Discourses and Public Perceptions on Hydrogen Imports: An Energy Justice Perspective”. Energy Technology.
  • Scollon, Ron i Suzanne W. Scollon. 1995. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Scovell, M D. 2022. „Explaining hydrogen energy technology acceptance: A critical review”. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 47 (19): 10441–59.
  • Tarasek, Ewa. 2015. „Mechanizmy retoryczne w popularyzacji naukowej”, w: Retoryka w komunikacji specjalistycznej, zredagowane przez Maria Załęska. Warszawa.
  • Uffelen, Nynke van. 2022. „Revisiting recognition in energy justice”. Energy Research & Social Science 92.
  • Weingart, Peter, Marina Joubert, i Karien Connoway. 2021. „Public engagement with science—Origins, motives and impact in academic literature and science policy”. PLoS ONE 16.
  • Załęska, Maria. 2015a. „Retoryka a wiedza. Komunikacja niespecjalistyczna i specjalistyczna”, w: Retoryka w komunikacji specjalistycznej. Warszawa.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.