| dc.description.abstract | The purpose of this master thesis is to map out the discourses in the public debate surrounding sea lice. The data consist of news articles from 14 regional and national Norwegian newspapers, in which certain articles have been selected, and included in a qualitative discourse analysis to illustrate the competing discourses. The theoretical framework consists of contributions from Foucault and Laclau & Mouffe, and aims to map out discursive fields and the discourses competing for hegemony in each field. Five actor groupings have been identified in the discourses surrounding sea lice. The groupings have been categorized as; administrative- and governmental, research institutions, environmental- and wild salmon, aquaculture and political. Also, the discourse analysis has resulted in the constitution of four discursive fields; treatment, research/science, management and sustainability. Within each discursive field several competing discourses has been identified and mapped out. The sea lice treatment field consists of two discourses (safety vs poison) competing for hegemony. While the science field consists of three discourses (dissolution vs diversity vs established). In the discursive field related to management, two discourses (compliance vs stronger restrictions) struggles to dominate the field. In the last discursive field, sustainability, three discourses (cost vs balance vs irreversible) competes for hegemony. Findings in this study, illustrate antagonistic struggles related to the concept of sustainability, and which dimension (economic, environmental, social) should be emphasised by authorities, and lay the foundation for either growth or protection. Other findings show that regulation and management also constitute a field of conflict. Several stakeholder’s express concern regarding the level of sanctions from authorities, and the aquaculture industry’s compliance to the established management regime, where trust holds an important role. Three ideologies (growth, ecological modernization, environmentalism) acts as nodal points, and thereby structures and differentiates the discourses in each field, often resulting in conflicts between the different discourses. As a result, several antagonistic struggles have been identified. The most prominent and antagonistic positions are between aquaculture stakeholders and environmental- and wild salmon stakeholders. | nb_NO |
