Abstract
This article explores intertextuality, research questions, and arguments scientists use to articulate the legitimacy of geoengineering practices as “good science.” I employ critical discourse analysis to draw out patterns in articles from an invited special forum about the validity of geoengineering technology as a solution to climate change. Articulation theory guides my study of how scientists define what counts as “good science” by analyzing how geoengineering scientists legitimize their research as methodologically strong and beneficial to society. This project serves as a first step in clarifying how scientific debate influences broader circles and the potential social impacts of these debates.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 313-339 |
| Number of pages | 27 |
| Journal | Science Communication |
| Volume | 42 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 1 2020 |
Keywords
- articulation theory
- climate change
- discourse analysis
- geoengineering
- science communication