Motivations and claims of the Climate and Environmental movement in Oslo

(1)

Motivations and claims of the Climate and Environmental movement in Oslo

What motivates activists in the climate and environmental movement to protest in demonstrations in Oslo and what

claims are the activists promoting?

Anna Christine Stykket, Kandidatnummer 300

Master Sosiologi 60 studiepoeng

Institutt for Sosiologi og Samfunnsgeografi Samfunnsvitenskaplig fakultet

01.06.2021

(2)

understandable. I would like to thank my tutor and guide through this thesis Lars Mjøset for his hard work and inspiration to finish this master´s thesis. I would also like to thank the research group of the Norwegian branch of Protest Survey, Lars Mjøset, Department of Sociology and Human Geography, University of Oslo, Norway, Kjell E. Kjellman, Dept of Sociology and Human Geography, University of Oslo, Norway, Rune Ellefsen, Dept of Criminology and Sociology of Law, University of Oslo, Norway, Sebastian Svenberg,

Department of Sociology, Ørebro University, Sweden and Daniel Arnesen, Institute for Social Research, Oslo, Norway. I feel very lucky to have been able to take part in this research project. Sonja Savolinen in Finland wrote her master’s thesis last year and her thesis has been very inspirational, so thank you Sonja for sharing your knowledge. A big thank you to all my interview subjects, without you there would be no thiesis, it has been a pleasure to talk to you and I am grateful for your time and effort.

Abstract

Norway is in the process of implementing measures to fulfill our promises in the Paris Agreement. The Green shift will be subject to continuous debate in years to come by the different interest-groups in our society. Youth political organizations and the climate and environmental movement are two very active participants in this discourse. This thesis is largely based on survey data from a demonstration in Oslo on the 27^th of September 2019 and interviews by phone and e-mail in 2021. The interview subjects are politicians in youth political organizations and representatives from organizations in the climate and

environmental movement. The surveys showed that activists are concerned by a feeling of urgency when it comes to climate change, they also feel that politicians need to do more, that it is important to support the next generations and that it is important to stand up to support the cause. Activists want social change in Norway, to speed up measures that implement the Green shift, and they want politicians to reduce CO2 emissions and to terminate further exploration for oil. There is a fluid identity within this group of activists and they identify more with the Green Party than the party they voted for in the last election. Greta Thunberg has been an influential profile in the movement and the Norwegian Green political party has an unfulfilled potential to influence Green policy.

(5)

1. Introduction

In august 2018 Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg sat down to protest in front of the Swedish parliament «Riksdagen» to protest. Greta wanted Swedish politicians to make better decisions for Sweden to reach the goals of the Paris agreement. This was the beginning of School Strike for Climate «Skolstrejk for klimatet» and many more protests were later rallied, first in

Europe, then across the world. Word of were to meet and when, were spread through social media such as twitter, Facebook and Instagram. In the following months and years youth demonstrated to make politicians take better measures to meet the Paris Agreement, until Covid 19 put most countries in lockdown in 2020 and 2021.

1.1 The journey towards a master thesis

In august 2019 my tutor Lars Mjøset and the department of sociology at the university of Oslo was contacted by an organization originating in Sweden called Protest-survey. Protest-survey is a collaborative research project «Caught in the act of protest: Contextualizing contestation»

(protestsurvey.2021). The principal aim is to create an international inter-university network of research teams interested in collective action and protest surveying. By doing so this project wants to describe and create knowledge about protest demonstrations in several different countries. They research the difference between countries, recruitment, mobilization and motives. The information gathered is then standardized to find a common theoretical framework. The data is made available to all the individual teams for comparison and analysis for new insights. The network also organizes workshops and publishes results from research to: “help societal actors understand and deal with the changing dynamics of protest”

(protestsurvey.2021).

The survey response results did not meet the requirements of a representative sample needed for a quantitative study. The protest surveys in other countries and previous surveys where all analysed quantitatively in Qualtrics. We then started to plan for a new survey, the next

demonstration was planned in November, but it got cancelled due to snow and the next after that would be in March 2020. Unfortunately Covid 19 put an end to any attempt at organizing large gatherings. Thus, I had to shift the focus of the theme of this thesis. It now includes a qualitative analysis of two of the open-ended questions in the survey and four e-mail and phone interviews of prominent actors in the climate and environmental organizations and youth political representatives.

(6)

The overall research question (a specification follows in Ch 2) is:

What motivates activists in the climate and environmental movement to protest in demonstrations in Oslo and what claims are the activists promoting?

The year 2020 saw a paradigm shift in peoples´ perception of crisis, state and governmental representatives and individuals. Covid 19 became public knowledge, everybody had some kind of understanding of the virus and what it meant for society and to them personally, whether they were ill or not. The virus represented a fast-moving crisis (Engen et al. 2017. p 276), it will kill us much faster than climate change, which is a slow-moving crisis, it will kill us some time in the future, nobody knows exactly when. To solve the crisis climate change represents to our society, Norway needs to take part in the Green Shift. Nrk.no published an article on the 28th of June 2020:"Half of the population wants as strong actions to fight climate change as the Covid crisis" (Krekling &Fjeld, 2020). That survey was a population survey done by the poll firm Opinion on request from Norwegian Broadcasting Company (hereby NRK). Just over 1000 respondents makes this a representative sample. The survey thus indicates that the Norwegian population is willing to comply to strict actions and regulations from the government to make the necessary changes in society to fight climate change.

Aftenposten printed a chronicle written by the president of the on the Norwegian Trade Union NHO (Næringslivets Hovedorganisasjon) on the 7th of January 2021: "The year of the

Corona was a good start to the climate year " (Almlid & Moss. 2021). This article was based on a survey done by the NHO and the respondents where businesses connected to the

organisation, the conclusion to this survey was that half of the businesses asked had already invested money in measures to fight climate change. These two surveys give an indication of willingness to change in more than one segment of society. Both surveys mentioned here indicated a demand for more political involvement and clear guidelines. 2021 is an election year and in January the Norwegian government released a climate plan, St. meld 13

(Klimaplan for 2021-2030), the policies and measures planned for battling climate change from 2021 to 2030.

(7)

1.2 The Green Shift

The origins of the thoughts about a green societal change in Norway dates back to 1987 and the Brundtland commission report: “Our Common future”. This report introduced sustainable development to Norwegian policy (Leichenko and O’Brien. 2019, p 187). The definition of the Green Shift (Det Grønne Skiftet) was defined by the energy and climate editor Anders Bjartnes in his book about the Green Shift from 2015:

“The green shift is a continuous, ongoing, irreversible and unstoppable process, which means reduced climate emissions and improved resource productivity in all sectors of society and at the same time offers new opportunities for value creation.”

(Bjartnes. 2015:Ytterstad & Veimo, 2020).

The definition is open for interpretation and can house a diverse collection of meanings and values, but it does leave an impression of being an unstoppable force of nature. This gives room for criticism and journalists Veimo and Ytterstad has evaluated five discourses about the Green Shift, where they say:

“… the power of the green shift is divergent and is neither clear nor strong enough to signal a halving of emissions over the next ten years. The societal changes needed to reach the 1.5-degree goal are so great that we do not think we can do without explicit normative discussion and a strong popular actor” (Ytterstad & Veimo, 2020).

The discussion about who is going to fund the process is a long one, some say that the one of the main drivers is the free market that will adjust itself to be climate friendly, others say it will be controlled by societal norms (Ytterstad & Veimo, 2020). Social movements will play a significant contentious societal role in this ongoing discussion when trying to plan and

implement new measures.

1.3 Paris Agreement

Norway signed the Paris Agreement alongside 195 other countries attending the COP 21 in Paris, on the 12th of December 2015. The agreement was instigated by the UN. The

agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change and the contract period was initiated on the 4th of November 2016. The goal is to limit global warming to below a 2

(8)

degrees Celsius rise, preferably 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. The aim is to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gasses and make the world climate neutral before 2050. For the first time, a binding agreement brings all nations into coordinated efforts to combat climate change and adapt to its ongoing effects.

This agreement gave the committed member-states flexibility in their commitments and a possibility to choose their own definitions of their reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.

The element of voluntary commitment and self-control was meant to inspire a positive dynamic, creating a bidding war in which countries would bid to contribute the most. France and China have signed an additional climate deal in Beijing in 2019, declaring that the Paris accord is irreversible.

1.4 Climate plan (St. Meld. 13) for 2021-2030

On the 8th of January 2021, the Norwegian government released their new plan on how to fight climate change: St. Meld. 13. Klimaplan for 2021-2030. The plan presents the response the Norwegian government give to sustainability goal 13: Climate action in the Paris

agreement. Climate action is specified: “Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts”. One of the main goals of this plan is an increased reduction of climate gas

emissions from 50 to 55% by 2030. In comparison, the European Union (the EU) has promised to change their goal from 40 to 55% and Great Britain has been even more ambitious with an increase to a 68% lowering of emissions (St. Meld. 13, 2021. p 2). The Norwegian plan entails more climate friendly transportation, both people and goods transport.

-An increase in public transport to avoid cars in the larger cities.

-Bus and ferry transport fuelled by electricity and hydrogen are means to alleviate some of the emissions.

-Norway has already started to replace fossil fuelled cars with electric cars, and the government are planning to replace all fuel to either electric or biofuel to reach the zero emissions goal for the transport sector (St. Meld. 13, 2021. p. 7).

The Norwegian parliament considered the report from the government on the Climate Plan for 2021-2030 on the 23^rd of March 2021. The plan was then accepted and the parliamentary members asked the government to move ahead with the development of a comprehensive

(9)

infrastructure for zero- and low-emission vehicles. The government was also asked to arrange support schemes for the establishment of necessary infrastructure and freight transport, and to extend the agreement on the NOx fund until 2021. Representatives from the opposition (Labor Party, FrP, Sp, Sv and MDG), asked the government to adjust the tax on waste incineration to both stimulate a smaller volume of waste and to handle the waste locally in Norway. The government was asked to launch its guide for licensing for offshore wind as soon as possible. A majority also voted to not include a taxation of Norwegian meat

production as part of the climate policy (Stortinget, 2021). This climate plan shows how the Norwegian society is going to take action and combat climate change and its impacts. The surveys by NRK and NHO both concluded that respondents favoured increased involvement by political actors and policy makers in order to combat climate change. The protest survey that was completed by the Norwegian research group in 2019 in Oslo also show that

protestors amongst other things want more political involvement, more regulation and legislation.

Taking action to combat climate change implies a core paradigm in sociology, the structure/

action problem. If climate change is going to be slowed down, society needs action at all levels, the individual, at the local level, at the nation state level and finally globally. Social structures must be in place to guide and define measures that inspire collective and individual actors to adapt to the Green Shift. Society must understand problems and possible solutions at the different levels in order to plan solutions to the climate crisis. Actions and changes in action patterns are required at the individual level and at the societal level. Links between different social organizations / groups and technological systems should not be overlooked as these can affect the likelihood of finding the right measures to solve the climate crisis. The reality / truth interpreted by social scientists and actors in society contains both unobservable physical processes an social processes that we can understand and actually influence.

Elster (1979) discusses the connection between biological and social science explanations.

Studying climate problems social science must relate to the explanations provided by the natural sciences (physics, chemistry, meteorology and biology) as to why the problem of global warming has developed. In order to counteract the development of a manmade climate crisis, movements and an politicians must address how the problems can be solved.

(10)

2 Method and design

This chapter provides a roadmap of my research design, data and methods.

2.1 Grounded Theory

This study employs qualitative methods, relying on grounded theory design and analysis. The data collected over the last two years. The data and findings have guided the choice of theory.

According to Johannesen, Tufte and Christoffersen (2016) grounded theory allows open and explorative research questions, without any preconceived hypotheses. Grounded theory was launched by Glaser and Strauss in the mid-1960s as an alternative to the use of abstract, high level theory in sociology. They alternatively suggested that theory should emerge through the analysis of data. Research projects could rely on earlier theory, but this theory should itself be grounded, having emerged from earlier studies asking the same or similar research questions I have chosen this theme and these research questions:

What motivates activists in the climate and environmental movement to protest in demonstrations in Oslo and what claims are the activists promoting?

As specifications of this overall research question, I will ask the following four questions:

- How does risk perception influence organizations to make these claims?

- How does the activists want government to change policy?

- How are activists influenced by Greta Thunberg?

- How have the activists influenced the political youth organizations of KRFU and Green Youth (Grønn Ungdom)?

The two main sources of empirical data are the open-ended survey questions and interviews.

The relationship between activist and politicians will be researched. The starting point is the initial survey-data, were I selected two open-ended question and six questions with a multiple answer option.

(11)

1 Explain why you chose to take part in the protest on September 27^th, 2019?

2 What should be done to solve this problem?

And the multiple answer option questions:

3 Which political party did you vote for in the last election?

4 Which political party do you most identify with?

5 Are you a member of an environmental organization?

6 Are you a member of a political party or its youth organization?

7 Did Greta Thunberg make you more interested in climate change?

8 Did Greta Thunberg affect your decision to join the Climate Strike on September 27^th, 2019?

These survey questions give an insight into the demonstrators’ motivation to protest in the event on September 27^th, 2019, as well as their political influences and identity,

organizational connection and knowledge about Greta Thunberg (The Greta effect). The survey included mostly multiple choice questions and was designed for quantitative research.

What I will be looking at is just a very small portion of the total survey material.

Grounded theory is based on the experience of doing fieldwork. Therefore I have focused particularly on the open ended questions, and I have interpreted these in the light of my experiences in the field. I have not conducted a full fieldwork, but I was hanging around at several climate demonstrations in the fall of 2019, taking notes, asking around and following the various activities of the demonstrators. I have interpreted the interview statements in the light of my experiences in the field (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2018), trying to practice what is in grounded theory called “theoretical sensitivity” (Johannesen, Tufte and Christoffersen. 2016.

p 183). I have used thematic analysis close to data to develop my main categories (Johannessen, Rafoss and Rasmussen, 2019).

(12)

2.2 Observation

I did non-participant observation (Hellevik 2002) to prepare for the survey collection of data.

I went to the Oslo city centre on Friday the 20th of September to find out how many people where present and how the protest developed. The demonstration was announced on social media belonging to FFF and I found the announcement on Facebook. The demonstration on the 20^th of September 2019 was planned by activists to be very similar to the demonstration on the survey collection day (27^th September 2019), I stayed there for four hours from 10 to 14. The observation-based data collection gave insight into the participants in climate protests and their actions. I made notes and took photos (Hellevik 2002). The purpose of such

observation was to get a feeling of the nonverbal and verbal communication at this type of demonstration in Oslo. I also wanted to identify who we could expect to be present on the actual day of the survey, both interest groups within the movement and other social actors, for example the police and journalists. I talked to a journalist from NRK who estimated a turnout of about 300 protesters and I also asked the police in charge who estimated an attendance of about 200 people, but with a lot of people arriving and leaving throughout so they felt maybe 300 was not a bad estimate.

The protesters did a roar for climate (klimabrøl) in front of the Norwegian Parliament at noon.

There was a lot of young protestors. I talked to one of the parents who accompanied her twelve year old daughter and her friends. This mother told me that they had been to a few of these demonstrations because her daughter was very dedicated to the climate movement and that they had been following the updates from FFF on Facebook and Twitter. The youngest protestors left around one o’clock, but there was still some people around when I left around two in the afternon, those present then where mainly young adults about 18-25 years old. The age range of the group of protestors was roughly as follows: 15-20 per cent under 15, ca 40 per cent aged 15-20, 20-25 per cent aged 20-25, the last 20 per cent where over 25 (my estimates). The organizations present on the day where: Naturvern-studentene (Nature conservation students), Amnesty, LO (the Norwegian trade union confederation), Natur og ungdom (Nature and Youth), Besteforeldre for klimastreik (Grandparents for climate strike), Fridays for future, Extinction Rebellion and Greenpeace, judging from what I could identify on the banners and buttons. From the media there were reporters from NRK and Friheten, I also watched a news video from the event on the Norwegian TV2 later that same evening.

(13)

This information was passed on to the research team and taken into consideration when the research group made plans and arrangements for the collection of survey-data.

2.3 Survey

The goal of the survey was to collect data about protestors from a Friday demonstration in Oslo on the 27th of September 2019 in connection with the United Nations (hereby UN)

«Climate Action Summit», where member countries of the UN were debating climate change and how to deal with them in New York on the 23rd of September 2019. The survey questions where premade by the protest-survey research network and identical in all the participating countries. There were almost one hundred questions in the survey, both open-ended questions and multiple-choice questions. The questions are based on a quantitative research design, but some of the questions can be utilized for qualitative analysis.

The demonstrators received a QR code on a piece of paper at the protest and were then admitted to the Qualtrics survey by scanning this code with their smartphones. In preparation for the data collection, the Norwegian research group, including me, had translated all the questions in the questionnaires, the information slips and so on to Norwegian from English and Swedish to make it easier for the protestors to answer the survey. The QR code gave the option of answering in English or Norwegian.

We recruited 15 students to do surveys and perform the short interviews on the actual day, this was specified by the Protest-survey research design. These students from sociology and criminology departments at the University of Oslo, where trained in two sessions before the actual survey day. We had a hope that there would be around 1000 protesters participating on the day (the 27th) because of the international attention to the UN summit. The protest-survey organization was going to do the same survey as we had planned in Oslo in many different cities across Europe and the world at the same time. This had already been done

simultaneously in many different cities earlier, but it was the first time for Oslo to participate.

The expectations for a large attendance where high due to a large protest on the 30^th of August, 2019, where approximately 3000 protestors did a large roar for climate. On the morning of the 27th of September the researchers and students met in front of the faculty of law at the University of Oslo, close to the site for the protest in front of the Norwegian

(14)

parliament. Sadly the weather was not on our side and we faced a torrential downpour for the entire event.

«Caught in the Act of Protest: Contextualizing Contestation» (CCC) (Van Stekelenburg et al.

2012) is the project that the Norwegian research team was participating in. The survey data collection was planned to follow a specific routine developed by Van Aelst and Walgrave (2001), this has been utilized by the project-survey researchers in all the previous protests including this one. We had no idea how big the population of the planned demonstration would be and the guidelines are adapted to make a probabilistic sample to ensure the

representativeness of the data in case of a big population. The system was designed to make sure that every protestor was going to have an equal chance of being included in the sample.

The surveys should be evenly distributed across the crowd. We used printed flyers with standardized basic information about the survey and the QR-code. Data collection was

supposed to follow three principles in order to maximize the representativeness of the sample.

The first was the use of pointers to determine who the recruited students was going to interview. These pointers would in our case be the research team. This was to ensure a wide variety of interview objects and avoid interviewers unconsciously choosing the interview objects that seemed most approachable. The second was the instruction given to the pointers:

a systematic selection procedure was described. There were different guidelines for pointing in moving and static demonstrations. Our demonstration was a static demonstration and pointers were instructed to place their interviewers evenly along the edges of the protesting public. They would then start from the outer circle and hand out an invitation to the person standing two steps further in the direction of the centre of the crowd. Finally the third

principle: the on-the-spot, face-to-face interviews were supposed to take place with every fifth demonstrator approached “collecting data on socio-demographics (age, education, gender), attitudes (political interest and satisfaction with democracy), political behaviour (past

participation in demonstrations and the time of decision to participate in this demonstration)”

(Van Aelst and Walgrave. 2001). Since the demonstration in Oslo generated such a small population we deviated from the planned process and handed out surveys to everybody and did the short interviews with every fifth person instead of using the pointers.

We only managed to hand out 135 QR codes to the very few protestors who attended. The final result was 55 partially completed surveys and 28 completed and 23 face to face short interviews. This was not at all enough to be able to conclude anything else than that

(15)

Norwegian youth do not like to protest when it is raining in Oslo. We then started to plan for the next demonstrations. The first was planned for November, but it got cancelled due to snow. The next after that would be in March 2020. At that time, the Covid 19 pandemic started and put an end to large gatherings of people.

2.4 Qualitative interview

Interviews are very often used in qualitative research. I have added some interviews to the data-material of this thesis. Holsten and Gubrium (2003, p 67) describes interviews as “..a way of generating empirical data about the social world..” Interviews are a good source for mapping out any inconsistencies or preconceived notions or misunderstandings. Active interviews performed face to face or by phone are most effective as they give the option of spontaneous interaction. An email interview or survey are more neutral to impact from social circumstances, as in such cases, the researcher has less impact on what the interview subject answers (Holsten and Gubrium, 2003).

In the initial phase of this thesis I performed one face to face open interview with the leader of Nature and Youth in Oslo, one of the main organizations in the climate and nature

preservations movement. I met Andreas Randøy at the Nature and Youth office in Oslo. We had an open conversation with a very loosely structured interview guide. Interview by phone with the representative for the Christian People’s Party Youth division (KrfU) Edel-Marie Haukland, an E-mail interview with Halvard Raavand in Greenpeace, Hulda Holtvedt from the Green Youth Party (Grønn Ungdom) and Chrisian Hansson from Extinction Rebellion. I e-mailed the interview guide to several politicians and organizations and followed up several times but I did not get many responses. Interview guides can be found in the appendix.

2.4.1 Face to face open-Interview

I did one open interview as an explorative start and to get good descriptive statements. This interview was with the Andreas Randøy, representing Nature and Youth “Natur og Ungdom”, performed by me at the organisation’s office in Oslo on the 27th of February 2020. Kvale and Brinkmann (2017) categorize academics and experts as part of a highly qualified group who must therefore be interviewed with this in mind. Active members of an organization or political party fall within this category. This requires that the interviewer has made good preparations, and that the interviewer allows the interview subjects to give exhaustive

(16)

descriptions in the conversation, which will be slightly different than in ordinary interviews (Kvale and Brinkmann. 2017). Since the interview object is a very active member of the organization, I chose a loose and conversation-based style of interview. A certain

confrontational style was nevertheless used to get interview subject on to new tracks and perhaps create an opportunity for new thinking. This is described in Kvale and Brinkmann (2017. p.176) as a method that «can lead to new knowledge». This was an attempt at active interviewing, aiming to uncover some preexisting answers or perceptions and hopefully lead to new reflection. Kvale and Brikmann (2017. p.187) describe this process as «narrative production». I used my own participation in the organization as a gateway to arouse the interest of the interviewee so that he would also feel at ease with me and not have to put his guard up. I informed the interviewee that the conversation was going to be used in connection with the empirical chapter in my master's thesis. This is referred to as good ethical interview practice in Kvale and Brinkmann (2017).

2.4.2 Phone interview

During the ongoing pandemic authorities have advised against meeting people face to face.

Therefore I have worked hard to get some responses by phone and e-mail interviews. In the case of the phone interview, the interview subject was in Bodø while I was located in

Drammen, so it would have been difficult to meet in person anyway. This respondent asked if it was possible to do a phone interview instead of an e-mail interview. This implied a better conversational style compared to a text-based interview. I transcribed the interview

immediately after the conversation to be able to remember as much as possible. The conversation lasted for approximately one hour. I did not record the conversation. The interviewee was allowed to read what I had quoted from her interview and she gave her permission to use the statements in my thesis.

2.4.3 E-mail interview

The e-mail interviews where based on exactly the same interview guide as the phone

interview, thus providing a basis of comparison. I only got two replies by e-mail from the 40 respondents I tried to contact. After a few reminders I got one more reply. This gave me the total of three e-mail interview subjects. A problem associated with this kind of interview is that the research might loose out on good descriptive answers (Kvale and Brinkmann. 2017),

(17)

but I evaluate politicians and climate activists as good communicators that are eager to speak their case.

2.5 Validity

The concepts of validity and reliability are mostly – even in introductions to qualitative, case- oriented research – defined with reference to quantitative, variables-oriented research using large datasets (Yin, 2018). In contrast, Lincoln and Guba (1985, p. 294 ff) have argued that qualitative research (what they call “naturalistic” research, by which they mean research in which researchers participate in what is being studied) have to use alternative definitions that match the specific nature of this way of gaining knowledge about society. The discuss the conventional notions of internal and external validity, reliability and objectivity. First, they argue that instead of “internal validity”, qualitative research should secure “adequate representation”. Since actors in social situations may have multiple views on that situation, these differing views (“multiple realities”) should all be adequately represented. Secondly, they argue that instead of “external validity”, qualitative research should strive to evaluate and reflect on the transferability of its findings: no finding in social research can be immediately generalized across all contexts (they are not general in time or space). Thus, qualitative researchers should investigate the transferability of the knowledge that they have arrived at in one context. This can only be done by also judging the receiving context into which the knowledge is to be transferred. Third, when it comes to “reliability”, Lincoln and Guba

suggest that “dependability” is a better term. Reliability is mostly linked to replication. This is relevant also in qualitative research to the extent that one must always reflect on the quality of the instruments used during research (in qualitative studies: field work, interviewing, etc). On the other hand, if the target of research itself changes, replication will not help. Thus, if replication is carried out, it is necessary to check whether the object under investigation has changed. This will contribute to knowledge that can be depended on. Finally, and fourth, they suggest that “objectivity” should be replaced by the concept of “confirmable knowledge”, with reference to the qualities of the testimonies and evidence brought up in research that gains knowledge by participating in social situations.

2.6 Consent and Ethics

Consent to use the quotes from the expert interviews was given by e-mail from each

individual interview subject. The fact that all the interviewees themselves are active members

(18)

of an organization or political party and that they have given their written consent by e-mail, leads me to believe that the interview subjects do not need additional information and that the interviews have been given voluntarily, informed and understood (Annas, 1992). The project has been registered and approved by NSD. NESH (2016) points out that as a researcher one should always put the individual first and as best it can avert negative consequences for the interviewees. The consequence of statements has been assessed before publishing any results of the research, to prevent possible negative experiences (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2017). When analyzing the data, I have reviewed critical several times to ensure that they are justified and that my analysis findings treat individuals gently (Kvale & Brinkmann2017). The expert status of the interview subjects means that they are used to seeing their own statements in print and thus do not experience the process as negative.

Research adheres to ethical guidelines and legal frameworks (Johannessen, Tufte &

Christoffersen. 2016). I use interviews as a data collection technique. Interviews involve people and as a researcher, I have therefore considered specific issues related to consent, confidentiality, consequences and my own role (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2017). It has been taken into account that many of those who participate in these demonstrations are below the age of 15. This required that when we handed the survey codes, we had to include consent forms that parents must sign and upload online together with survey answers. Questionnaires and data processing comply with EU GDPR legislation. At the same time, face-to-face interviews were conducted, there were interview forms attached to every fifth OR code. The data generated in the survey was anonymous. The method used to collect the data was determined by the international research group. 55 responses to the questionnaire were received and 23 face-to- face interviews were completed on the day of the demonstration. None of the registered respondent where under 15 years old.

2.7 Critique

Politicians as interview subjects can be problematic if the interviewer is not prepared for the topic to be interviewed (Kvale and Brinkmann. 2017). A skewed power relationship such as that which exists between a student and an experienced politician can lead to difficulty in finding new knowledge. The politicians have possibly been interviewed about this many times before and have rehearsed answers ready (Kvale and Brinkmann. 2017). Interviewing more subjects would be useful in this assignment, but I have only managed to get in contact

(19)

with four for the phone- and e-mail interviews. It will be possible to provide a more holistic and comprehensive picture by talking to more of the involved actors (Yin, 2018). It proved time-consuming to find politicians with climate change policy as an area of expertise and representatives from climate and environmental organizations.

3. Theory

When a society perceives a risk or threat big enough to affect many individuals and thus also society and its values, they will look at ways to avoid that risk. For climate change to be perceived as a risk that needs to be dealt with, there must be a common perception in society that action must be taken. If authorities are not taking the risk seriously enough, there will be social mobilization, as various social groups engage in various activities in order to make authorities deal with the challenges. The movement against climate change – and more broadly the environmental movement – implies that groups in civil society responds to the climate crisis, demanding that more needs to be done than what governments are doing today.

A social movement consists of several different organizations. As for the most recent mobilization of young people against climate change, the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg has become an icon of the movement.

3.1 Risk society

Ulrich Beck’s Risk Society (1986, English 1992) had a major impact on the sociology of risk.

In the Western world, democratic governance of nation states has helped to establish welfare schemes and various forms of industrial support (Engen et al. 2016). Beck claims that the Western world had reached a post-industrial stage (Beck, 2009). Classic industrial society was a thing of the past, we post-industrial society is a «risk society». In industrial society, risks were linked to class position, while the environmental risks of risk society could affect anyone, independent of class position. Beck related particularly to the risks of nuclear power stations melting down (the Chernobyl case), but later extended his arguments to the climate crisis, which also hits any citizen independently of class position. According to Beck (2009), the opposites chance and danger are the two faces of risk.

A normative horizon may be disturbed by breaches of trust and lost sense of security. Often, actors will face risk in the form of a probability calculation or some other abstract number,

(20)

which is difficult to relate to emotionally. One must strike a balance based on belief in the abstract. Beck (2009) calls this “implicit ethics”. Beck also claims that the concept of risk breaks with science's monopoly of rationality, as it relates to conflicting interests of the various actors in society.

“The category of risk opens up a world within and beyond the clear distinction between knowledge and non-knowing, truth and falsehood, good and evil” (Beck, 2009. p 5).

Experts have the power to define what acceptable risk is. But there is also unacceptable risk.

In such cases, even the least probability of an accident is too high, when an accident can mean destruction (Beck, 2009). "Need is hierarchical, smog is democratic" writes Beck (1986, p 48). Social hierarchies are not discriminated against by climate change, it represents a risk that will affect everyone across social classes. But because people in the upper social classes have greater access to funds to rebuild their lives in the wake of a crisis (unless the crisis is of an apocalyptic nature), the crisis will still not affect all classes in equal ways. Beck argues that rich industrialized countries often relocate production to poor countries and areas where there are low wages and few protests over emissions. But he holds that human society cannot continue to defend that progress, prosperity, economic growth and scientific rationality are maintained through the exploitation of natural resources into the future. The responsibility and payment for risk reduction should not only be charged to the nation state. The accounts should be settled with reference to those who profits, Beck (2009) writes between the lines.

Global economic dependence shapes the politicization of "risk of modernization". Beck sees here a kind of “morality” in which natural disasters are neglected for economic gain. Society is blinded and is incapable of take action against the negative consequences.

Society is basically dependent on natural resources to survive: "Nature can no longer be understood without society, and society can no longer be understood without nature" (Beck, 1992. p 80). Understanding of risk can be culturally or socially conditioned (Engen, et al.

2017). Risk perception can to a certain extent be subjective. It is about forming a common frame of reference that accounts for how the risks following from climate change can affect society. Risk perception clarifies what future consequences the introduction or non-

introduction of measures can have. A common knowledge base with a common understanding of the degree of risk and the vulnerabilities involved can motivate both local and international politicians and other actors to work together to find a solution (Engen, et al. 2017).

(21)

Deborah Lupton describes “The weak social constructionist thesis” in her book on Risk (2013, p, 41), While social construction is often linked philosophically to anti-realism, Lupton argues that such a weak thesis is compatible with the tradition of critical realism, which has been very influential in British sociology. She argues that phenomena categorized by social actors as risk will exist in parallel with the perception of the phenomenon. Due to

socialization, individuals have learned to decode risk from the vantage point of their social position.

"If a risk is understood as a product of perception and a cultural understanding, then to draw a distinction between real risk and false risk is irrelevant" (Lupton. 2013, p.

48).

How society and the individual act in the face of risk does not depend on whether risk perception is based on real dangers identified by experts, but rather on risk as it is perceived by everyone in a society (Lupton, 2013). Risk perception and risk communication refer to how different actors may have different perceptions of how or where the risk lies. As an example, after an event that has made a negative impact, the "narrative" is communicated - what has happened, how and why, to the outside world. The reaction and action from societal institutions in the aftermath can be a source of conflicts for the different interest groups and can result in a delayed decision-making process (Aven et al. 2004).

The term "governmentality" indicates that government is the most important social institution when it comes to defining risk perceptions and taking precautions. Through its reports to the parliament, government defines and sets the guidelines for how Norwegian society is to deal with the risk climate change represent to our country. The Government also decides what measures to fund when it comes to actions to stop climate change from evolving to unacceptable levels, as defined by the Paris agreement.

“..societies develop a system of strategies and beliefs in an attempt to deal with, contain and prevent danger”(Lupton, 2013. p 3).

Lupton refers to Foucault’s discussion of how experts are the most influential actors when it comes to the evaluation of decisions in a democratic society such as the one we have in Norway. Foucault’s "governmentality" theory holds that society is governed by experts through democratically elected governments. Citizens trust that these experts will make

(22)

decisions that protect of our society from the effects of individuals' selfish interests (Lupton, 2013). By electing representatives, voters make society “reflexive”, as their attitudes are reflected by their representatives.

«From this perspective, risk may be understood as a governmental strategy of regulatory power by which populations and individuals are monitored and managed through the goals of neo-liberalism. Risk is governed via a heterogenous network of interactive actors, institutions, knowledges and practices” (Lupton, 2013. p 116-117).

3.2 Social movements

Sociological theories of social movements originated from the researchers’ wish to identify what makes people act and react across institutions and social layers, mobilizing and acting collectively to reach common goals. Sidney Tarrow (1998) compares Marxist theories of social movements and collective action to modern theories about social movements and collective actions. Early theories about collective actions built upon Marxist theories of class struggle, but Tarrow also links them to Durkheim’s concept of “anomie”: “in which

individuals – unhinged from traditional roles and identities – sought new collective identities through personal reintegration in movements” (Tarrow, 1998, p 14).

Blumer (1969. p. 99) made one of the first definitions of social movements: «the collective enterprises seeking to establish a new order of life». In his view, a social movement emerges when people get together and form an informal or formal group with a common goal to change the society they live in and actively work together to reach such goals. Blumer called this “the collective enterprise”. He held that the motivation to form such an enterprise was dissatisfaction with how the community is moving forward and how it is run by political forces. The way this collective enterprise unfolds is determined by the goals set by the movement and the aggregated power of the individuals that drive the organization forward.

“The career of a social movement depicts the emergence of a new order of life” (Blumer, 1969 p. 99). The goal of a movement is to change society, and the “career” of the movement is determined by the buildup of “momentum” around the movement.

Eyerman and Jamison (1991, p 4) suggests that social movements should be perceived as

“temporary public spaces, as moments of collective creation that provide societies with ideas, identities and even ideals”. The inclusion of the term “public spaces” in an attempt to bridge

(23)

the gap between certain individual’s former private thoughts and debates performed in networks closed to public view, and the launching of these ideas into public view for public debate (Crossley, 2002). Studies of the environmental movement led Eyerman and Jamison to this emphasis on this bridging of the private and public gap. Although not completely without controversy, this addition creates a more colourful image of what goes in inside a social movement. They have also studied the foundation of the climate and environmental movements: They agree with Beck that these movements rely on accessibility to knowledge and science in modern society (Beck. 1992).

Tarrow (1998) is critical of the emphasis on momentous action that is implied in these definitions. He adds the dimension of durability to social movements. If we are to define a demonstration or protest event as a movement, there must to be a pattern of repetition. One single event does not constitute a movement. A network might have an appearance of being just temporary, but the involved network contains the collective perceptions, creating a collective definition which then represents the cultural foundation of the movement. (Tarrow, 1998).

An optimistic outlookof the development of capitalist industrial society was introduced by ideology originating in the Marxist tradition. The labour movement claims would according to Marx solve all societal problems worldwide (Engelstad, 1992). Nature as a restraint on human activity was not included in Marxism, and not in later classical sociology either. Early sociological theory was developed in relation to the market and the state. Although Weber studied the role of technology and nature, he still regarded social problems as related to human interaction, not human/nature interaction (Weber, 2012). His cultural criticism feared the convergence of purposive rationalities that undermine civilized life through mechanizing human nature. Social disorders began to manifest themselves in society and sociologists started to diagnose the ailments. The Anomie thesis of Durkheim meant a weakening of normative constraints on needs for people in the society, leading to very concrete societal problems such as low birth rates, increased rates of suicide and crime (Durkheim. 2012).

The cultural pessimism of Weber was absorbed in the interwar period by a generation of Frankfurt school thinkers, who decided that the labour movement had accepted to the reign of rationality. Sociology was preoccupied with anxiety and cultural pessimism born from social science reflexivity. But this pessimism was balanced by other currents suggesting that

(24)

production of knowledge could solve the social problems emerging from the development of industrialized society, by means of social engineering. The need to fight for the environment and nature came as a consequence of the way industrialized society has dumped chemicals, industrial waste and exploited limited natural resources for economic

gain. The health consequences from pollution in urbanized areas after the industrial revolution made people gather in this social movement to demand change. The early claims of the

movement emphasized that the market should not be in charge of nature conservation, but the nation states. On of the first consequences was the establishment of natural parks and

wilderness areas (Britannica, 2021). Americans first started nature preservation organizations, followed by the European and other industrialized countries.

The sociology of knowledge developed a constructivist line of study in the field of social problems and risk perception. Social constructivism in its modern form is based on an exclusive focus on social relations and relations between people. The fundamental problems of society is the basis for evolution and change by politicians, intellectuals and social

movements. “Reality” is by constructionism diffuse, it’s a matter of view.

“There may be some environmental problems out there, but we can never know whether this is so or not. This implies that environmental problems are “constructed”

by social movements, politicians and environmental bureaucracies, all competing to sustain the credibility of their specific interpretation” (Mjøset, 2002. p 6).

Constructionism in its purest form emphasizes, however limited, that science cannot accumulate knowledge about what “reality” is. The complexity and multitude of

interpretations of this reality should not be reduced to power struggles of the power to define, but in a search to find the best solutions based on scientific knowledge within the scope of the movement (Mjøset, 2002). This criticism of constructionism within environmental sociology visualize how and why there is no unanimous trust in science and the claims made by the movement, the actors represent conflicting interests will all have their own reality and perception of what is the right thing to do.

Tilly and Tarrow (2015) trails back to the 17^th century and the creation of nation states and parliamentary structures in the Western world to explain why present social movements are organized the way they are. The have been counterforces to the ruling elites and have pushed

(25)

the democratization process forward in many cases. Tilly and Tarrow (2015, p 28-29) define a social movement as a combination of these four elements:

“1) Sustained campaigns of claims making.

2) an array of public performances including marches, rallies, demonstrations, creation of specialized associations, public meetings, public statements, petitions, letter writing and lobbying.

3) repeated public displays of worthiness, unity, numbers, and commitment by such means as wearing colours, marching in disciplined ranks, sporting badges that advertise the cause displaying signs, chanting slogans, and picketing public buildings. They draw on 4) the organizations, networks, traditions, and solidarities that sustain these activities – social movement bases.”

If a social movement is going to be seen as a serious actor in contentious politics, they must bring on the agenda contentious issues (claims): “claims that are not (alt least not

immediately) allowed into the routine channels of policy making.” (Mjøset, 2019 p 6). These claims can be different and difficult to solve through the normal policy routine channels (they are contentious given the present structure of social and political interests), the claims make clear the injustices and contradictions of the old systems and forces the system to change (Mjøset, 2019).

A unified society despite different individual interests, creates a collective identity which is the substance of social movements. The universal human need of belonging drive many people to search for unity with others within the many different institutions and structures of society (class, nationality, ethnicity, religion, politics) (McGarry and Jasper, 2015). Social movements have traditions for public performances. In the case of the climate change movement, Thunberg’s school strike an example of such public performance. She has also engaged in lobbying the way Greenpeace and Nature and Youth describes in their interviews.

The protests include the public displays of connection with the movement and the

organizations that the protestors belong to. There are several organizations within the climate and environmental movement. Many have been active since the 80s and 90s and they sustain these activities and help recruit to the movement through these events.

(26)

«A collective identity is an act of imagination, a trope that stirs people to action by arousing feelings of solidarity with their fellows and by defining moral boundaries against other categories” (McGarry and Jasper, 2015 p 1).

Tilly and Tarrow (2015, p 119) claims that the identity of a movement has four components:

1-Boundaries, identifying who is on the outside of the group and who are insiders or allies.

2-Relations to the inside, rules of engagement with allies.

3-Relations to the outside, how to communicate and relate to others across pre-defined borders.

4-Interpretation of the boundaries and relations, common understanding of the two on the inside and the outside of an organization or movement.

These four components help to create a common identity across all movement members and to help distinguish those who are not connected to the movement. An identity is not connected to any particular individual in a group, but to shared values and claims that represents the movement they are active in. An identity can also have a political character if it is connected to a political party or political cause where authorities are involved at some level. These boundaries and relations can change and this may lead to politics becoming routine, diffused or even more widespread (Tilly and Tarrow, 2015). Tilly (1993) describes how social

movements can create a public space that gives them the ability to influence a transfer of power in a society, moving closer to democracy. The complex structures of social interaction that a social movement constitute creates political debate and change policies. The main goals for social movements are to promote their claims both internally and externally. It is possible to control the internal factors through the organization or movement itself, but external forces in a society are mostly outside the control of the movement. This can influence changes in the movement (Lindekilde and Olesen, 2015). The lifecycle of most social movements includes a transition from movement to institutionalization into bureaucratic organizations. At that point, change occurs and the movement has reached its goal. It may then die out or find a new purpose and meaning, whereby it reemerges (Rootes, 2007). When several different

organizations unify their effort in one movement, this can lead to a diffusion of the message

(27)

or values in the original movement, which has a potential to weaken the political force of a movement or stop the recruitment of new members (Lindekilde and Olesen, 2015). New groups that join the movement can bring with them violent elements and behavior that require more action from authorities. One example of this was the transformation of the non-violent movement of Los Indignados (15M- movement) as the movement spread from Spain to New York. Here several radical groups joined, amongst them the Global Justice movement. This resulted in the Occupy Wall Street movement, which engaged in violent protests and civil disobedience as their preferred action method to gain attention from politicians and the media (Romanos, 2016:Tilly & Tarrow, 2015).

“When backed by dense social networks and galvanised by culturally resonant, action- oriented symbols, contentious politics leads to sustained interaction with opponents”

(Tarrow, 1998. p 2).

The introduction of the term “contentious politics” (Tilly and Tarrow, 2015, p 25-27) – the meeting point between contention, collective action and politics, opens up an area where cultural elements within groups are invented. This happens in interaction with the opposing side and also by those inside the social movement. This creates opposite identities in the conflict. Tilly used the thw words abbreviated as WUNC – “worthiness, unity, numbers, commitment” – about properties of social movements (Tilly, 1993. p 7, see Tilly and Tarrow’s third point in the list above). Claims between what Tilly names “powerholders and

challengers” through interactions is one of the sides of contention. Such political

performances involve the following actors: “Powerholders – the object of claims – Activists- from minor contributors to leaders – Subject population – those activists are making claims or supporting claims” (Tilly, 1993. p 15). There may be overlaps between these three and other collective actors in society that also receive these claims and messages, with or without intent from the challengers. Social protest should not be not described as intentionally violent or revolutionary, but as calm actions to show discontent, indirect actions are also included in this definition. The movements’ goal is to inspire authorities to make systemic and policy

changes. Successful protest may influence the choices of normal voters in the next general election, resulting in governmental or policy change (Tilly, 1993).

Social movements processes concerning the environment are not just collective actions oriented around conflicts related to preidentified political opponents or competing

(28)

organizations in the network. Shared identities and solidarity play a particular role. The claims pursued or the specific cases/events addressed may be stronger than any temporary coalitions or campaigns. (Diani & Bison, 2004, p 283).

“..although environmental action often displays a conflictual element, when it takes the form of sustained collective efforts, involving a variety of groups and

organizations, attempting to protect the environment through voluntary work, or to transform environmental consciousness through education, it approximates a consensus movement process” (Diani & Bison, 2004, p 287).

Shared identities maybe stronger than individual opinions or the views of one single organizations, at least when there is consensus in the movement. The movement keep changing continuously and solidarity between the actors in the network is reinforced by redefinitions of the boundaries of the various components within the social movement. These processes are just as important as the development of contentious processes with authorities.

«a specific type of network processes – are the movement. Indeed, movement action has to do as much with the constant redefinition of identity and solidarity links between actors – i.e., with the drawing and re-drawing of network boundaries – as with challenges to powerholders» (Diani & Bison, 2004, p 304).

The network comes together in mutual political claims that constitutes the movement, forming ideas that leeds to suggestions of policy changes. These changes do not neccesarily always convey a political message or aim to influence politicians, sometimes the claims can be directed at influencing actors outside the political system, aiming to influence discourses or public opinion, gathering symphaty or momentum for a special cause.

“Analysts have become similarly aware of the fact that collective action does not always imply the formulation of political demands (through confrontational as well as conventional repertoires)” (Della Porta & Diani, 2015. p 3).

Such collective action can be seen as a process of producing collective goods. The process starts with the environment movement coming together to create a common platform for instance around alternative lifestyles. The process ends when there is burden-sharing of mutual aid between the various actors.

(29)

3.3 The modern climate and environmental movement

The modern climate movement has changed from an informal and loosely knit organization to something much more organized, formalized and bureaucratic, both seen from the inside and the outside (Rootes, 2007). There has been a change in the movement messages and values from the pure nature conservation area and pollution-oriented sphere, to voicing a message of reducing the risk of climate change. Bosso (2000) defines the modern climate movement as a movement moving on from just being a collection of different interest groups to a movement who does lobbying that influence politics and companies in both visible and hidden ways. The present movement have an array of different organizations affiliated through old and new organizations. Nature and Youth and Greenpeace are well established groups with organized leadership that have been around for a long time, and these have a strategy of lobbying the political sphere for change. Greenpeace is more institutionalized in its organizational form than Nature and Youth who holds on to the more action-based and loose connections. The most recent additions to the movement are organizations like Fridays For Future and Extinction Rebellion who have a strong presence by regular demonstrations and have a large media visibility in Norway, through traditional media and also via social media such as Facebook and Twitter. In the last few years the climate and nature preservation movement in Norway has had a spur of growth, not unlike the global trend.

Some climate strikes were registered previous to Thunberg´s strike. The first originated from environmentalist activist groups in New York. Ben Manski and Jill Stein from the People's Climate Convergence wrote a call to action in 2014: "The Global Climate Strike: Why We Can't Wait". This protest was a part of the People's Climate March, referring to the claims of the climate and environmental movement, brought forward to delegates of the World Social Forum, the Global Greens and the COP21 UN Climate Change Conference in Paris. The call to action led to actions in Australia (Climatestrike. 2019).

In combination with this strike there was a series of coordinated webinars coinciding with The Global Climate Convergence and Earth Day to May Day coordinated actions. This was an attempt to popularize the idea of the global climate strikes. Jill Stein (an academic physician) was a politician in the Green Party, who nominated Stein to be their US presidential candidate both in 2012 and 2016. Ben Manski is an activist from Wisconsin, he was later known as one of the brains that came up with the idea of a Green New Deal (Climatestrike. 2019). Manski

(30)

and Stein voiced three demands: 100% clean energy, keep fossil fuels in the ground, and aid to climate refugees.

Australia became the scene of active climate strike efforts in the following two years (2015- 2017). Australian youth continued to arrange annual “Earth Day to May Day” mobilizations every April 22^nd through May 1^st. They aimed to put climate democracy on the agenda in the Global Climate Convergence’s conference. The protests then spread to other countries in Europe and fused with Greta Thunberg´s movement.

To achieve the goal of limiting the increase in average temperature to 1.5 °C, each country must determine must define their NDC (Nationally Determined Contribution). They must make plans and regularly report on their contributions. These plans will include the best measures and locally relevant policies to contribute to the international effort. The measures will be implemented and the effects researched, measured and reported. The German Ministry for Environment Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) set up the CAT project (Climate Action Tracker) as a surveillance organ of the NDC. It keeps track of how the various signatory states of the Paris Agreement are able to realise their NDC to global emissions reduction (Climate action tracker, 2019). The involved states have consider their proposed contributions as their “fair share” of global emissions reduction. The task of the Climate Action Tracker is to rate the NDC´s from the 2020 level, to secure the success of the long-term targets and remind politicians and international organizations if any of the states do not fulfil their pledges. A highly technological assessment methodology is applied. CAT also share and forward knowledge and scientific information to governments in need. The Paris Agreement implies that evaluation and adjustments will take place at each assessment period set to 2020, 2025 and 2030.

3.4 Previous research

Clare Saunders (2015) have compared two climate demonstrations, investigating the

collective identity of those who participated in the protests (McGarry and Jasper, 2015). Her research is based on quantitative studies of the National climate change marches in London in 2009 and 2010, her data is also related to the protest survey network and conducted in

accordance to their data collection method described in chapter two of this thesis. In the first demonstration there was about 15000 participants and in the second only 1500 (McGarry and Jasper, 2015). Saunders claim that climate movement identity depends on how and which

(31)

areas the study focus on. She refers to the research done by Christopher Roots on the climate movement. He suggests renaming collective identity as «shared concerns». Roots claims that this demands a certain level of consensus within the movement (McGarry and Jasper, 2015).

Saunders on the other hand points out that individuals who participate in climate protests do not necessarily know the other demonstrators there, and that they do not have a strong personal network within the other demonstrators in the network.

In the 2009 demonstration, 41,2 per cent said that they had never earlier participated in a climate demonstration, whilst in 2010 7,1 per cent said that they had never before participated in a climate related demonstration. Diffusion of identity feeling was especially apparent in the larger demonstrations where the motives to participate were diverse (McGarry and Jasper, 2015). Saunders split the collective identity into dimensions on the one side «liquid or set»,

«formal or informal», «weak or strong» and «easy or difficult identifiable affiliation», and on the other side which abilities shared between tactical preferences, biological and social characteristics (McGarry and Jasper, 2015. p 103).

«Climate change protesters appear to have fluid identities, although their strong association with protest organizers (particularly in 2010) suggests that these identities might be formalized” (McGarry and Jasper, 2015. p 103).

Many of the protesters are members of several different organizations who are involved in the organization of the demonstration, and because the movement is constantly changing, all individuals will not have the same affiliations or motivations at the same time (McGarry and Jasper, 2015). The survey data from the 2009 demonstration show that 39.4 percent of the demonstratorsexperienced a shared identity with the organizations arranging in the protest.

In 2010 this increased to 44,5 percent. At the same time (2009) 41.8 percent said that they identified very strongly with the other demonstrators, the following year (2010) that dropped to 39 percent. In other words, there is an increase in those who identify most strongly with organizations, and a slight decrease in those who identify with the other participants of the demonstrations. According to these survey data, protestors are more closely attached to the organization and the message it represents than to the other members participating (McGarry and Jasper, 2015).

Motivations and claims of the Climate and Environmental movement in Oslo