Framing the Green New Deal for Local Governance

Rebecca J. Romsdahl

For optimists, the proposed Green New Deal (GND) is a glimmer of hope as society confronts grim scientific reports about the climate crisis and its cascading impacts. Developers and supporters of the GND seek to unite the long separate factions of environmental protection and socio-economic issues in order to address this broad, complex, slow-moving disaster. For local elected officials and public administrators, the proposed plan provides a variety of policy opportunities, but to be successful these will require practical framing to gain support from within city governments and from community members.

Even though the GND includes many goals that are important to local governance, like energy transitions and job training programs, the plan overall has been framed by influential Republicans as a ‘socialist plot;’ this negative framing has already infiltrated public discussion enough that local leaders (both elected officials and public administrators) have recently told me they now feel that ‘green’ is no longer a usable policy frame. This is especially true for small – medium size cities in politically conservative states. Without national legislation, policy actions to address the climate crisis have been unpopular in these conservative communities. However, despite persistent negative narratives, cities in these states have begun to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adapt to impacts. Local leaders have generated success by reframing climate change into other issues, like energy savings and flood management. By doing so, they avoid the political conflict and are able to implement policies that promote public benefits.

Framing is a normal and significant part of our daily communication; it brings our focus to some aspects of an issue and allows us to ignore other aspects. Framing is both personal, in regard to how individuals understand the world, and shared because our collective understanding shapes public decision-making about policies. Issue framing is an important step in the policy process; it helps establish how a problem is defined, which causes are identified, what information is needed, types of solutions proposed, and how decisions will be made. This means there is inherently a great deal of political power associated with how an issue is framed and who has influence in the process. For a controversial issue, such as addressing the climate crisis, the framing steps are a political battle, which is now playing out since the GND was introduced.

Local Leadership and Community Support

Framing matters, not only to politicians, but also to citizens. People want their government to work for the public good, and they want to be more involved in policy planning, especially for environmental issues. At the local governance level, this means policy frames must resonate with the values and concerns of community stakeholders.

My research finds that the right frames are key for climate policy support in small ‐ medium size cities in the largely rural, conservative Great Plains states. When asked how they frame climate change, elected government officials and public administrators indicate alternative frames, including: energy efficiency, clean water and clean air, cost savings, and sustainability. For example:

“We frame the initiative as: energy savings (=$ savings), as smart growth/good planning, and as common sense natural resource management. Climate change is only explicitly referenced in our Climate Protection Plan adopted in 2009. Most initiatives fall under the “sustainability” umbrella term.”

“Climate change is framed as one of several benefits of conservation measures. Other benefits of conservation, recycling, walking, etc. include it’s “good for the earth” (regardless of climate change), healthful, economical, etc.”

My study shows that local leaders can successfully frame one policy as relevant to the climate crisis, but community atmosphere overtakes government attitudes and becomes the driving factor in cities where two or more policies are specifically framed as climate change.

This reinforces the need for local leaders to take that first brave step in promoting climate policy. Local elected officials and public administrators across the country stepped up to this challenge in the early 2000’s by joining ICLEI’s Climate Protection Program, but after conducting a GHG inventory and implementing a few energy efficiency programs, many of these actions tapered off and disappeared. To avoid a similar fate, supporters of the GND need to encourage public administrators to recognize their role in actively building community support around that first policy; so it can serve as a foundation for additional climate related policy opportunities associated with the GND. This is where community discussions about framing climate change can contribute.

Framing Can Help Build Public Support

Without community support, in the current political atmosphere environmental protection issues must be reframed. For example, personal discussions with local leaders in my city reveal that a ‘resilience’ frame is gaining support for practical environmental policy. Reframing the climate crisis is not a new idea, but it will be an ongoing exercise until this topic becomes a normalized part of regular conversations. For the GND to become a reality, its supporters need to reframe the narrative, likely away from the socialist brand, toward its important practical goals that communities and their local governments will support.

A recent survey of registered American voters shows that a large majority (69%) already support the policy ideas in the proposed GND. Community discussions about framing can help reinforce and build on this broad national support. Public administrators can play a key role in: organizing community discussions; ensuring that diverse voices are heard; and that expressed values and concerns are incorporated into the decision-making process. Many communities across the US have organized discussions with the help of the National Issues Forums Institute (NIFI).

NIFI has a recent guidebook that introduces facilitators and participants to multiple options for deliberating about climate change frames; this helps provide an unbiased/non-political set of frames, which includes trade-offs among alternative ideas. This strategy can be described as ‘framing to deliberate’ and was also tried in the Alberta Climate Dialogue in Canada, which was a regional-scale project organized by a collaboration between university researchers, local government administrators, and civil society organizations. Local leaders have begun to address the climate crisis, but much more needs to be done, and soon. Community discussions can help identify the climate related issues people care about and provide a means for the public and government to co-develop locally relevant frames that build support for the important policy opportunities proposed in the GND.

Rebecca J. Romsdahl is an Associate Professor of Earth System Science & Policy at University of North Dakota.