Full text of DOI:10.1111/1475-4762.00045

Area (2001) 33.4, 391–403
The discursive nature of environmental
conflicts: the case of the Öresund link
Hannah Dekker Linnros and Per Olof Hallin
Department of Social and Economic Geography, Lund University, Solvegatan 13, 223 62 Lund, Sweden
Email: Per-Olof.Hallin@kulekgeo.lu.se
Revised manuscript received 30 March 2001
This paper analyzes the environmental conflict concerning the construction of a permanent
link between Malmo, Sweden and the Danish capital, Copenhagen. The conflict is
approached as both a discursive and institutional struggle, in which representations of
nature and the environment are used not only to legitimize, but also to question
institutional policies and development plans. The analysis focuses primarily on three of the
counter-discourses that have emerged in conflict with the hegemonic, institutional
discourse, and also indicates how spatial representations have become important
constituents of the discourses.
Key words: Sweden, environment, conflict, discourse, space, representation
The plans for bridging the Sound between Sweden
and Denmark have been controversial and a source
of many protracted and heated debates. In the early
Introduction: The birth of a (contested)
geographical vision1
During the last two decades, an increasing number of 1960s, a geographical vision and an institutional
environmental conflicts, originating in controversies discourse of an integrated Öresund region gradually
over infrastructure investment, planned development evolved. In this vision, a fixed link over the Sound
of natural sites and negative consequences of exploi- became one of the key prerequisites. By the end of
tation of natural resources for local communities, the 1970s, the vision of an Öresund region seemed
have emerged. A common feature of these conflicts to have temporarily lost its attraction, only to re-
is their discursive nature, where representations of appear on the political agenda in the middle of the
nature, the environment and the future are used not 1980s. Today, the region is still predominantly a
only to legitimate, but also to question institutional social construct, but an influential elite, consisting
policies and development plans (Harrison and of business people, politicians, planners, journalists
Burgess 1994). In this article, the environmental and academics, is strongly promoting the idea. A
conflict over the Öresund Link will be analyzed.
discourse of the region has been constructed,
A permanent communication link, such as a bridge expressed through oral presentations, written docu-
or tunnel, between Scania, the southernmost part of ments, images and maps.
Sweden, and Denmark, had been proposed from the
However, the vision of the Öresund region has
late nineteenth century. Schemes of varying practi- not evolved without criticism. In particular, the nega-
cality have been put forward, the most optimistic of tive environmental impact of a permanent link over
which suggested reclamation of the Sound (see Ek the Öresund has been emphasized, and gradually
and Hallin 1996). Agreements have been reached a different counter-discourses have emerged. As with
number of times between the Swedish and Danish many other European infrastructure projects, the
governments, but the plans were not put into effect Öresund Link has become a focus of public reaction
until 1991.2
and direct action, with the planning process more an
ISSN 0004-0894 ꢀ Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2001

392 Linnros and Hallin
issue of conflict resolution than ‘rational planning’ dialogue, contrast or opposition to other utterances
(Nijkamp and Blaas 1994). The environmental con- or discourses. This means that discourses are not
flicts over the Öresund Link will be approached in socially neutral, but are organized around practices
this article as a discursive and institutional struggle, of exclusion and relations of power (Richardson
where representations of nature, the environment 1996; Mills 1997, 11, 12). They are ordered in
and the future are used not only to legitimize, but discursive orders, where some discourses become
also to question the construction plans. The aim of hegemonic and thus determine what is to be consid-
the article is to analyze different counter-discourses ered as truth, knowledge and common sense
that have emerged in conflict with a hegemonic, (Foucault 1972; Fairclough 1995; Hajer 1995). How-
institutional discourse, and how spatial represen- ever, discursive formations must not be viewed as
tations have become important constituents of the isolated domains of social life. They are internally
discourses.
related to other aspects of the flow of social and
material processes, such as power, social relations,
institutions, beliefs and material practices (Harvey
1996, 78ff.). Processes which together are crystal-
Discourse analysis
Environmental conflicts may be regarded as excep- lized into material landscapes, such as the Öresund
tionally illuminating examples of the fact that the Link and the Öresund region. Consequently, on the
relation between social life and material space can one hand, the approach in this paper moves beyond
only be theorized indirectly, through social medi- a perspective that focuses solely on texts and linguis-
ation. This social mediation takes place through tic structures; on the other hand, we do not fully
social practice, itself situated in time and space assert a position where discourse is viewed as occu-
(Simonsen 1996, 497). As discourse is an important pying a hegemonic or deterministic place in social
mode of social practice (Fairclough 1995), discourse processes.
analysis may be a useful way to explore how space
As a way of understanding the order of dis-
is being socially constructed and, as in the case of course, Hedrén (1994, 13) introduces the concept
the Öresund Link, contested. The relevance of of discursive core in order to illustrate how state-
discourse in the analysis of environmental and ments or ideas are perceived as more or less
planning conflicts consequently has gained increas- natural, more or less correct or self-evident. In the
ing attention in recent years (see, for example, core of the discourse stand utterances and state-
Whatmore and Boucher 1993; Harrison and Burgess ments that are considered self-evident and un-
1994; Hajer 1995; Harvey 1996; Macnaghten and questionable; in the periphery of the discourse are
Urry 1998).
statements that are considered unessential or
The study of discourse is practised in a broad field unimportant. Furthermore, it is from this peripheral
of disciplines, and consequently several different point of departure that a critical and reflexive
definitions have been employed (for reviews see, for analysis of the discourse is possible. An advantage
example, Macdonnell 1986; Mills 1997; van Dijk with this discursive core–periphery model is that
1997a 1997b; Howarth 2000). According to it can be applied to different levels of discourse. In
Howarth (2000, 6ff.), theories of discourse have this article we will use the model to clarify both
undergone three significant transformations: the relationships within the different discourses of resist-
investigation of ‘language use’; discourse extended ance, as well as the relationship between these
to a wider set of social practices and phenomena; discourses and the hegemonic discourse of regional
and finally the expansion of the scope of discourse evolution.
analysis so as to include non-discursive practices and
Another concept that will be important in the
elements. In this paper, discourse is defined as following analysis is the discursive arena. Discursive
‘bounded ways of representing the world’ (Harvey arenas are defined here as the spaces where texts,
1996, 83), with ‘the use of language seen as a form utterances or other forms of discursive and social
of social practice, and discourse analysis is then the practices are performed. They are spaces where
analysis of how texts work in socio-cultural practice’ discourses become visible, but also where lines of
(Fairclough 1995, 7); furthermore, discourses must conflict are manifested. These discursive arenas
be seen ‘as practices that systematically form the could be institutions such as planning departments
objects of which they speak’ (Foucault 1972, 49). and courts of law, as well as city squares or news-
However, discourses do not occur in isolation, but in papers. By introducing the concept of discursive

The discursive nature of environmental conflicts 393
arena, we wish to draw attention to the fact that
discursive practices are always situated in space.
The formation of a hegemonic discourse
of the Öresund region
At the end of the 1950s, the formation of a discourse
of the Öresund region was initiated by a small
number of Danish and Swedish planners, academics
and journalists.3 Gradually, these first tentative steps
assumed more institutionalized forms, and in 1964 a
specific council was set up with representatives from
15 Swedish and Danish municipalities plus several
regional organizations.4 However, the national gov-
ernments were not represented, and the public had
limited, if any, access to information. It was predomi-
nantly experts and politicians that were able to
force the issue, while others were excluded from the
discursive arenas. Another important part of the
formation of the discourse was the formation of
concepts, and their combination in different story-
lines. Of specific importance was the multi-modal
approach that was employed, where different modes
of representation such as written texts, maps and
other spatial representations became important
Focus groups
In this article, four different discourses of the
Öresund region will be presented. The first is rooted
in different institutions and has dominated the public
debate over the years. This discourse has been
analyzed by several scholars, and most of the con-
clusions presented here are based on this research
(Ek and Hallin 1996; Idvall 1997 2000; Tägil et al.
1997; Wieslander 1997; Bengtsson 1998; Dekker
Linnros 1999). In opposition to the dominating dis-
course, several counter-discourses have emerged.
These have evolved within and among NGOs
opposing the idea of an Öresund Link, and in this
article three of the most influential of these NGOs
will be analyzed. The research method used is focus
groups, and in order to obtain a background picture
of the organizations and a broader interpretative
context for the analysis of the focus group discus-
sions, other complementary sources of information
have been included, such as written texts, photo-
graphs and illustrations.
Focus group techniques have gained increasing
attention as a method of qualitative data analysis
(Burgess et al. 1988a 1988b; Byers and Wilcox 1991;
Burgess 1996; Goss and Leinbach 1996). In this
article, discussions in three focus groups, represent-
ing different perspectives of the opposition to the
Öresund Link, will be analyzed. The first group con-
sisted of six members of an organization called The
Scanian Environmental Action Group (SEAG, Aktion
Skåne Miljö), the second was composed of four
members of a local branch of The Swedish Youth
Association for Nature Studies and Environmental
Protection (SYANSEP, in Swedish Fältbiologerna or
the Field Biologists), and the third consisted of
three members of an action group called Stop the
Bridge! The participants were recruited through con-
tacts with representatives of the organizations, and
by ‘snowballing’. Each group met once, with one
of the co-authors as moderator and the other as
participant-observer. The discussions were audio-
taped and subsequently transcribed. After the ses-
sions, the group discussions were analyzed: discuss-
building blocks of
development.
a narrative of the region’s
The construction of a common narrative was one
of the key factors making the discourse, and enabled
the vision of an integrated Öresund region to survive
over the following four decades. The narrative can
be summarized as follows:
Predominantly in the Western world, some countries
and regions are leaving the industrial era and are now
entering a new phase of development. However, not all
countries or regions will be part of this process, and
only the most advanced will take this step into the
future. The Öresund region has the prerequisites to be
one of these regions. Its history, educated population,
industry, and institutions of higher education, together
with the region’s geographical location, constitute a
platform from which to take a leap forward into a
post-industrial society. This potential is being restrained
by the region’s low level of integration, with an ineffi-
cient transportation system one of the main barriers. In
order to improve the level of integration, investment in
infrastructure, such as the bridge between Copenhagen
and Malmo, are necessary. Without such investment,
the region will be surpassed by more successful and
far-sighted competitors. (Ek and Hallin forthcoming)
ing the themes and topics that came up and how At the very core of the discourse of the Öresund
different individuals responded to them. Finally, for region stands paradigm of development
a
every focus group a discursive ‘map’ was drawn, emphasizing the evolution of regions (Ek and Hallin
summarizing the most important story-lines (Davies forthcoming). From this discursive core, different
and Harré 1990; Hajer 1995) of the discourse.
themes or story-lines have developed. Some of these

394 Linnros and Hallin
have remained unchanged over the years, while soil. This development constitutes a threat both to
others have been excluded, toned down or incorpor- regional and global natural resources, and further-
ated in the discourse. In the present paper the more creates inhuman environments. The Öresund
narrative structure will not be analyzed in detail, but Link is only one of a number of infrastructure
during the late 1980s three story-lines have been of projects that open the floodgates to a disastrous
specific importance: European integration, European development.
regionalization and ecological modernization
(Dekker Linnros 1999; cf. Richardson 1997).
In the discourse of Fertile Earth, three different but
interrelated story-lines can be identified (see Figure
The narrative, and the discourse of the Öresund 1). The first emphasizes, as the name indicates,
region, have been developed, reformulated and conservation of soil as an important resource for
adapted during a period of more than 40 years and, future agriculture.6 This line of reasoning must be
with few exceptions, has dominated public debate. It viewed in the light of the environmental discourse of
was, however, not solely a process of concord. On the 1970s, in which scarce, and diminishing, natural
the contrary, it was characterized by conflicts of resources was one of the main topics, not only on a
interest, where three main areas of conflict arose: a national or regional level, but also on a global scale.
conflict between national perspectives and regional The Öresund Link, and all the infrastructure projects
interests; antagonism between different interests that have been planned in connection with it, are
within the Öresund discourse; and finally, conflicts consequently viewed as a threat to feeding a rapidly
between proponents of a fixed link and the environ- growing global population.
mental movement (Ek and Hallin forthcoming). It is
A second story-line focuses on unequal regional
this latter conflict that will provide the focus of the development: increased urbanization is expected to
article from this point onward.
lead to extensive urban agglomerations in predomi-
nantly the west of Scania, while other parts of
southern Sweden would decline. This development
is considered to constitute a threat to the environ-
Discourses of resistance
Opposition to the Öresund Link principally has ment and to people’s quality of life. Furthermore,
emphasized the environmental consequences, not uneven regional development is viewed as disturb-
only of the construction process per se, but also of ing the balance of both nature and society, trans-
the regional development as a whole. Even if the forming society from ‘a state of stability’ into ‘a state
fixed link has become a focal point and unifying of mobility’. If society is to survive, large-scale
symbol for many environmental conservationists, projects must be substituted by small-scale, decen-
several different counter-discourses have emerged tralized solutions. A third story-line emphasizes the
since the end of the 1980s based on different lack of knowledge: society’s negative development is
constructs of nature and justifying different positions. comprehended as a result not only of the public’s
In this article three of these discourses will be ignorance, but also of the lack of knowledge on the
analyzed: Fertile Earth, Protect Nature and ‘Concrete’ part of politicians and planners. Scientific facts are
Thinking.5
available, but they are not reflected upon, nor do
Fertile Earth was constituted with an organiza- they serve as a basis of decisions. Therefore, SEAG’s
tional basis in the SEAG activist group. The members main task is to inform these groups about modern
of the focus group had a high average age (67 years), society’s cul-de-sac.
and almost all had actively campaigned against the
In this campaign of enlightenment, the conflict
Öresund Link in the 1970s when the organization was to be resolved predominantly in the established
was founded. This discourse clearly has its ontologi- discursive arenas of policy formation and decision
cal roots in the conservationist movement of the making. Politicians have been petitioned, parliamen-
1960s and 1970s. The narrative that weaves the dis- tary bills tabled, letters written to editorial columns
course of Fertile Earth together can be summarized and information distributed to stakeholders. SEAG
as follows.
has striven for acceptance as a legitimate actor in the
The development of modern society has taken a formal, institutionalized discursive arena, and they
wrong and dangerous direction. Rapid urbanization have viewed knowledge as their weapon.
and extensive infrastructure investment have led to
If formal and institutionalized language has been
uneven regional development in areas such as the means to gain acceptance as a representative in
Scania, and overexploitation of the fertile Scanian the decision-making process, the discursive strategy

Figure 1 Discursive ‘map’ of Fertile Earth. The figure illustrates how story-lines can be represented graphically

396 Linnros and Hallin
to question the institutionalized representations of tendency to subdue and control the environment.
space has followed another path. SEAG supports an Instead, nature must be preserved, observed and
implicit spatial vision of Scania where small-scale, understood in its original and untouched state (cf.
dispersed patterns of settlement and a ‘balanced’ Macnaghten and Urry 1998). In accordance with
relationship with nature are the prerequisites for this view of nature, a Field Biologist places honour in
achieving a ‘Good Society’. This geographical vision understanding nature scientifically. Furthermore,
is not presented in pictures, films or other visual ‘being out in nature’ is not only a spatial, but also
forms of counter-representations. Instead, the insti- a social practice: it creates a social commitment, a
tutionalized representation of space has been ques- space for self-discovery and a context for learning
tioned by demonical caricatures of the expected new skills.
development. In one picture, the Öresund Link takes
The commitment to nature also underlies the
the shape of a giant octopus, stretching its tentacles environmental commitment in this group:
across the fertile Scanian landscape. This discursive
I think generally for most members of the Field Biolo-
strategy of presenting contrasting pictures is aimed
gists, and for all of us as well, it starts with an interest in
nature, and an interest in studying nature, and then one
discovers that there are threats and exploitation going
on. Then, gradually a commitment to environmental
issues arises. (Female member of SYANSEP)
at disclosing the ‘real’ consequences of the regional
development, and of deciphering the socio-spatial
practices that are claimed to be inherent in the
institutionalized plans (see Figure 2).
A second counter-discourse is entitled Protect
Nature. Protect Nature has its discursive core in a The vision of nature as unspoiled, and the desire to
specific view of nature, and its proponents express a preserve it as such, has triggered other spatial and
very strong emotional commitment to nature. Fur- social practices than those directly linked to nature.
thermore, this commitment is anchored in a spatial In the resistance to the plans for the Öresund Link,
practice of ‘being out in nature’, which was vividly public spaces have become discursive arenas where
expressed by the interviewed members of the the Field Biologists have tried to influence public
regional branch of The Swedish Youth Association opinion — not only by ‘traditional’ means such as
for Nature Studies and Environmental Protection petitions and demonstrations, but also by organizing
(SYANSEP). In contrast to Fertile Earth, there is not a mock funeral marches, sit-ins and other forms of
specific narrative about society in this counter- non-violent action characterized by performance
discourse. Its focus is nature, which is expressed and show. Such publicity stunts also serve to rein-
through several themes or story-lines that recurred force an image of being the Young and Angry.
constantly in the discussions among the members of Members of the Field Biologists are predominantly in
the focus group: commitment to nature, protection their teens or early twenties. They are in a process of
of nature and being ‘the young and angry’. In this identity testing, where the dramaturgic character of
organization, as in SEAG, there is a long history of their actions challenges dominant meaning systems
resistance to the Öresund Link, although in SYANSEP or symbols of contemporary everyday life. In this
the active members may not have been born when way, resistance to the Öresund Link plays an import-
the debate began in the early 1970s. ant role in their identity formation (Meluci 1989;
Commitment to nature is anchored in a spatial Eyerman and Jamison 1991, 48).
practice that characterizes the ‘Field Biologists’:
The spatial dimension is fundamental to the con-
stitution of the discourse of Protect Nature. A geo-
graphical vision of unspoiled nature, protected from
human influence, is at the very core of the discourse,
and spatial practices play an important role in at least
two ways. First, the personal experience of nature
through different spatial practices is crucial to the
discourse. Second, spatial practices, such as demon-
We talk a lot about commitment to nature, it’s some-
thing you get in the Field Biologists. You are out-
doors . . . in windy watchtowers, and sleep rough. You
get
a relationship, a relationship to nature which
strongly reinforces your commitment. (Male member of
SYANSEP)
Nature is experienced bodily, where all the senses strations in public spaces, are used to express dissat-
come into play. By hearing, seeing, smelling and isfaction with official plans that threaten natural sites
moving in nature, a mix of sensation and emotion is and species. These spatial practices can also be
generated. This spatial practice creates an intimacy viewed as constructing ‘representational spaces’,
with nature, a feeling that opposes modern society’s where space is ‘directly lived through its associated

The discursive nature of environmental conflicts 397
Figure 2 The Öresund Link as a giant octopus. Source: SEAG (1974)

398 Linnros and Hallin
images and symbols’ (Lefebvre 1991, 39). Indeed, based on questioning the formal process of decision
nature and public spaces have been the most making. Members of Stop the Bridge! consider them-
important discursive arenas for the Field Biologists.
selves the true representatives of the people and,
A third counter-discourse is labelled ‘Concrete’ unlike other organizations such as the SEAG, have
Thinking. This discourse has its foundation in the not striven for acceptance as legitimate negotiators.
organization Stop the Bridge!, and in order to They have contested the hegemonic discourse very
achieve a more significant impact on the formal consciously and, like the Field Biologists, also sym-
decision process, the organization has tried to co- bolically. When 509 VIPs attended the ceremony to
ordinate the resistance to the Öresund Link. At the cut the first turf at the bridge abutment, Stop the
end of the 1980s, some activists found it necessary Bridge! appealed to their members to form an even
to develop a common denominator for the multitude larger counter-demonstration and to bring spades
of organizations opposing the plans for a permanent which they used to symbolically fill the holes that had
link between Denmark and Scania.7 As a result, Stop been dug. They characterize their opposition to the
the Bridge! was founded, and ‘Save the Environment bridge as a battle, and the battle fields (discursive
— Stop the Bridge’ became a unifying slogan. How- arenas) have been the streets, squares and other
ever, despite the ambition to unite different branches forms of public spaces.
of resistance, this organization has very much devel-
oped its own counter-discourse.
Based primarily on written texts, an analysis of the
discourse of ‘Concrete’ Thinking shows that a geo-
‘Concrete’ Thinking has its discursive core in a graphical vision of a future Malmo region is not
critique of the Establishment with its modernistic explicitly contained in the discourse. However, focus
view of society, where large-scale projects and rigid group participants expressed opinions that indicated
processes of decision making are viewed as restrain- a vision of a ‘greener’ Malmo. Unlike large-scale
ing necessary change in the course of development. building projects that are viewed as making an old
Two distinct story-lines have dominated the dis- industrial structure permanent, the development of
course of ‘Concrete’ Thinking: large-scale projects the city is expected to involve small-scale projects,
and authoritarian decision making.
‘green thinking’ and citizen participation. In this
The development of late modern Malmo is char- process, and in order to produce a critical form of
acterized by large-scale building projects that have cultural politics (Hajer 1996, 262), Agenda 21 is
been intensely criticized by local public opinion. viewed as a pivotal document, and a lever for
Furthermore, in order to turn around the negative breaking previous commitments (Hajer 1996, 262).
economic development triggered by an industrial
decline in the 1970s and 1980s, politicians and other
decision makers have regarded comprehensive infra-
The order of discourse
structure investment as a necessity. Consequently, The hegemonic discourse of the Öresund region has,
the Öresund Link is a logical outcome of this pro- since its formation in the late 1950s, been in conflict
urban and growth-oriented philosophy. Many critical with other positions, where intense debate took
voices have been raised against what has been place during the early 1970s, at the end of the 1980s
perceived as bureaucratic and authoritarian planning and at the beginning of the 1990s. These conflicts
processes, where ordinary citizens have not had the were ‘fought out’ in newspapers, television, radio,
opportunity to influence the process. The expression public debates, institutions and public spaces. During
‘Concrete’ Thinking was used in the focus group the first period of conflict, the clash of opinions was
to symbolize both large-scale projects and a rigid triggered predominantly by the growing awareness
process of decision making, as well as referring to of diminishing global natural resources, which was
images of leading local politicians.
accentuated by the oil crisis in 1973. The discourse
of Fertile Earth could here serve as an example of an
opposing world view. The second and third periods
of conflict comprised a broader set of issues, and
involved more contrasting discourses and opinions
than previously. However, environmental problems
were still the dominating issue, being expressed
It’s partly about disregarding people’s opinions, not
listening at all . . . not reflecting on what voters and
other people think. For me, that’s concrete thinking.
(Female member of Stop the Bridge!)
Stop the Bridge! has focused primarily on the politi- through different discourses and organizations. In
cal process, and has developed a discursive strategy Table 1, the different discourses presented in this

The discursive nature of environmental conflicts 399
Table 1 Content and characteristics of the different discourses
Regional Evolution
Fertile Earth
Protect Nature
‘Concrete’ Thinking
Discursive core:
Discursive agents:
Regional evolution
Policymakers,
Earth
Activists as
Nature
Advocates of nature
Political process
Voice of the people
planners, journalists,
business people
Political institutions,
informal networks,
media
independent experts
Discursive arena:
Political institutions,
lobbying, media
Nature, public
spaces
Public spaces
Discursive strategy:
Exclusion, inclusion
Formal acceptance
Small-scale society
Opposition
Opposition
technologization
Greening of Malmo
Spatial representation: Modern utopia
Unspoiled nature
article are summarized according to their discursive necessity of a fixed link have recurred constantly.
cores, discursive agents, discursive arenas, discursive Furthermore, the two newspapers with the widest
strategies and spatial representations.
circulation in Scania (Sydsvenska Dagbladet and
As a result of the employment of a number of Arbetet) have exercised a strong influence on public
exclusionary procedures and internal mechanisms, opinion in favour of a permanent link, especially
the discourse of Regional Evolution has maintained through their editorials. Moreover, the opponents
its hegemonic position over the years, both in public have not launched a coherent, alternative view of
debate and in institutions of power. However, these the future, while the proponents have outlined a
exclusionary techniques have not only been comprehensive geographical vision in texts, pictures
employed by the proponents of the institutional and computer animations.
discourse, but have also been utilized in the produc-
Even if the opponents did not successfully ques-
tion of counter-discourses. Through different discur- tion the overall picture of a future Öresund region,
sive measures, such as exclusion on the basis of they succeeded in focusing on its weakest link: its
scientific criteria or through determination of the environmental consequences. During the first phase
conditions under which people are allowed to enter of intensive conflict, land use and the use of natural
the discourse, the inner constitution of a discourse resources were in focus, and anti-urban views, even
may be maintained as well as a distance created in at government level, were influential. Much of the
relation to other discourses (Foucault 1972).
conflict was focused in one word — Örecity —
One of the reasons for the successful mainten- which, in order to positively symbolize a future highly
ance of the discourse of Regional Evolution has been urbanized region, was coined by journalists and
its broader approach, where a comprehensive set of then promoted by regional newspapers. However,
issues has constituted the discourse, which in turn the concept did not concord with public opinion,
facilitated strong support among political and econ- and gradually the opponents took over and success-
omic interests as well as different institutions. The fully gave it a new and negative meaning. ‘Örecity’
discourse has emphasized economic growth and became a symbol for an unrestrained and inhuman
development, wealth and other aspects of traditional version of urban development. Large-scale solu-
modernistic thinking, while the opponents’ sugges- tions were criticized, and were often presented in
tions have been depicted as leading to the opposite dramatic and apocalyptic terms. Finally, in 1973 the
outcome. The discourse has been developed and Danish government terminated the agrement with
reproduced in comparatively closed networks, con- the Swedish government, its decision motivated by a
sisting of business people, politicians, planners, new and restrained economic order.
researchers, journalists and higher civil servants.
During the mid-1970s and at the end of the
Meetings, seminars and conferences have in general 1980s, the discourse of Regional Evolution was
been closed to opponents and have further been reproduced, not least through a number of public
strictly ritualized where statements about the inquiries that attempted to evaluate the economic
region’s inherent economic potential and the and social consequences of a fixed link between

400 Linnros and Hallin
Denmark and Scania, and through the influence of mentally friendly. Even the opponents were now
the lobbying activities of the European Round Table symbolically included in the discourse (Figure 3)!
of Industrialists (ERT) (see Richardson 1997). At the
end of the 1980s, the plans assumed a more con-
crete form, and in 1992 a new agreement was
signed between the Swedish and Danish govern-
ments. In response, conflict again arose: action
groups were formed and political parties expressed
Conclusions: the threat of ‘sustainable
development’ to environmental
opposition
their opposing views. At the Swedish national level, In this article, we have analyzed the environmental
the Socialist Party, the Green Party and the Centre conflict surrounding the construction of the Öresund
Party were strongly against the plans, while the Link between Denmark and Sweden. From this
Labour Party and the Conservative Party largely analysis, several conclusions can be drawn. Firstly,
promoted the idea.
this infrastructure project provides another illuminat-
As in the 1970s, apocalyptic themes characterized ing example of the fact that the production of
the debate. Critics emphasized environmental material space cannot be understood without an
aspects as before, focusing on the negative impact of analysis of the social practices involved in this pro-
increased vehicle traffic and the critical situation of cess. The construction of a permanent link could
the Baltic Sea. However, in contrast to the utopian thus be interpreted as an ontological transformation,
visions of the 1970s, proponents strongly empha- where the invisible geography of social relations is
sized the necessity of avoiding economic dystopia, transformed into a material reality (Olsson 1980
and the need to create the conditions for vitalizing 1995). It should be noted that this ontological trans-
the Copenhagen and Scanian regional economies. formation is not a one-way process, since the
Furthermore, and crucial to the success of the gradual, visible emergence of the bridge may in turn
Öresund Link, environmental issues were now incor- change people’s perception of it. As the construction
porated into the perspective of ecological modern- proceeded, and since the fixed link was inaugurated
ization, where solutions to environmental problems on 1 July 2000, it would seem as though people have
were viewed as determined by economic develop- become more positive towards the entire project.
ment (Hajer 1995). The representatives of the dis-
Secondly, the construction of an Öresund region
course of Regional Evolution had incorporated the can be seen as an expression of how powerful
opponents’ key issue and, moreover, they made it a geographical visions or representations of space may
vital part of a late modernistic view of development. be. In this case, the vision had a history of more than
This strategy of inclusion was complemented by four decades before it could be realized. To under-
making environment a disjunction marker, where stand the success of this geographical vision, it is
only science and scientific expertise could analyze necessary to analyze how the idea of the Öresund
and evaluate the environmental consequences of region has evolved in a constantly changing societal
various solutions (Hajer 1995, 269).
context. This leads us to our third conclusion, namely
This scientific line of reasoning was surprisingly the importance for planners to acknowledge the
supported by the Centre Party. In order to halt the significance of discourse in the production of space,
development plans, the Swedish Minister of the where specifically, its relations to power, social rela-
Environment, in the firm conviction that it would be tions, institutions, and social and material practices
impossible to accomplish, forced through an agree- must be emphasized. Discourse analysis places
ment which demanded a zero-solution: the bridge micro-politics in a wider socio-political context,
was not to influence or hinder sea currents through which makes it possible to understand local environ-
the Öresund. However, based on scientific models, mental conflicts, such as the one over the Öresund
some experts or ‘knowledge brokers’ (Litfin 1994) Link, in ways that relate to wider debates.
claimed it was possible. Environmental problems had
Fourthly, the environmental conflict concerning
now been reduced to a question of sea currents, and the Öresund Link provides an example of how
thereby excluded from a broader political arena. In interpretations and representations of nature change
this phase, most of the opponents’ arguments were over time. What counts as an environmental prob-
disarmed, and ironically representatives of the dis- lem is not something that is such at all times (see, for
course of Regional Evolution ascribed the opponents example, Pepper 1989; Hajer 1995). Environmental
for making the infrastructure investments so environ- issues that in the 1970s were perceived as serious

The discursive nature of environmental conflicts 401
Figure 3 The order of discourse represented according to the core–periphery model. In the figure, ‘regional
evolution’ constitutes the core of a broad discourse of development, which through the construction of
the Öresund Link comes into conflict with environmental counter-discourses, together constituting a
broad discourse of resistance
obstacles to the realization of the Örecity vision, detailed plans and grounded in social and material
such as the depletion of natural resources and the practices, that environmental arguments alone had
loss of land for recreation and conservation pur- no opportunity to be met with support. An inner
poses, have hardly been able to make the agenda of logic of the project was formed that made new or
the 1990s debate. Instead, the environmental impact old critical views impossible to include if they did not
of the project has in the current hegemonic, insti- adhere to the project’s main logic. The ‘zero-
tutionalized discourse almost exclusively been dis- solution’ was a critical standpoint that easily could
cussed in terms of sea currents and the so-called be included in the project, and furthermore could
zero-solution, an issue that was totally absent in the successfully be attained by dredging.
debates of the 1970s. Such dramatic changes of
Another important change in political context is
local environmental discourse cannot be explained the way environmental concerns have managed to
by references to changes in the ecological environ- reach the top of the political agenda through the
ment, and are only to a limited extent the result of discourse of sustainable development and ecological
the availability of new knowledge. Instead, explana- modernization. However, the success of the concept
tions must be sought in the way the social and of sustainable development does not seem to give
political context of the conflict has changed over the any real advantage to environmental activism. On
years, and also on how the inner dialectic of the the contrary, it may create a superficial consensus,
project proceeded. The environmental movement efficiently concealing the cultural politics of environ-
successfully brought up environmental problems mental conflicts. How to avoid such discursive
in the public debate and they lobbied support in inclusion and how to avoid ‘the end of critical
some influential political bodies. The plans for a fixed environmentalism’ are some of the major problems
link were so institutionally anchored, prepared in environmental movements have to face.

402 Linnros and Hallin
Byers P Y and Wilcox J R 1991 Focus groups: a qualitative
opportunity for researchers Journal of Business Com-
munication 28 63–78
Davies B and Harré R 1990 Positioning: the discursive
production of selves Journal for the Theory of Social
Behaviour 20 43–63
Acknowledgement
This project has been funded by The Swedish Council for
Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences.
Notes
Dekker Linnros H 1999 Nature, concrete and fertile earth
(in Swedish) Thesis Phil. Lic. Department of Social and
Economic Geography, Lund University, Lund
Dijk van T A ed 1997a Discourse as structure and process.
Discourse studies: a multidisciplinary introduction volume
1 Sage, London
— ed 1997b Discourse as social interaction. Discourse
studies: a multidisciplinary introduction volume 2 Sage,
London
1 This part of Sweden was for much of its history part of
Denmark.
2 The bridge was inaugurated on 1 July 2000, with several
other comprehensive infrastructure projects such as
motorways and metro systems and also new residential
and retail areas completed in the following years. The
total cost of the bridge is calculated at approximately
£2.3 billion.
3 Foucault (1972) outlines four important components of
the formation of discourse: (1) formation of objects that
consider the contexts where discourses emerge, and
how they are delimited and classified; (2) enunciative
modalities that enable only certain individuals to speak;
(3) formation of concepts and how they are internally
related; and finally (4) formation of strategies that include
basic theories and themes. However, once a discourse
has been formed, it is not stable: statements are re-
formulated, concepts are redefined and contrasting
arguments are neutralized or included in the rhetoric of
the discourse. In this article, different aspects of the
components mentioned above will be illustrated.
4 In 2000, more than 20 organizations are working on
different projects to integrate the Öresund region. They
cover a wide variety of areas, such as legislation, business
cooperation, transportation solutions and different forms
of political cooperation.
5 These are our names of the discourses, chosen on the
basis of the most prominent theme in each discourse.
6 In Swedish, the same word jord is used for both ‘soil’ and
‘earth’.
7 Over the years, more than 30 organizations joined Stop
the Bridge!, including environmental organizations, politi-
cal parties, women’s and youth organizations, and trade
unions.
Ek R and Hallin P O 1996 Geographical visions and the
dream of an Öresund Bridge (in Swedish) Svensk
Geografisk Årsbok 72 70–83
— forthcoming Images of the future — the social construc-
tion of the Öresund region Ecumene
Eyerman R and Jamison A 1991 Social movements. A
cognitive approach Polity Press, Cambridge
Fairclough N 1995 Critical discourse analysis Longman,
London
Foucault M 1972 The archeology of knowledge and the
discourse on language Pantheon Books, New York
Goss J D and Leinbach T R 1996 Focus groups as
alternative research practice: experience with trans-
migrants in Indonesia Area 28 115–23
Hajer M 1995 The politics of environmental discourse
University Press, Oxford
— 1996 Ecological modernization as cultural politics in
Lash S, Szerszynski B and Wynne B eds Risk, environ-
ment and modernity Sage, London
Harrison C M and Burgess J 1994 Social constructions of
nature: a case study of conflicts over the development
of Rainham Marshes Transactions IBG 19 291–310
Harvey D 1996 Justice, nature and the geography of
difference Blackwell, Oxford
Hedrén J 1994 The nature of environmental politics (in
Swedish) Linköping Studies in Art and Science 110,
Linköping
Howarth D 2000 Discourse Open University Press, Milton
Keynes
References
Idvall M 1997 The nation, the region and the bridge: the
importance of a hundred year project from a territorial
point of view in Tägil S, Lindström F and Ståhl S eds The
Öresund region — visions and reality (in Swedish) Lund
University Press, Lund 126–51
— 2000 The power of maps. The region as a societal vision
in the age of the Öresund Bridge (in Swedish) Nordic
Academic Press, Lund
Bengtsson M 1998 The Öresund bridge and environmental
discourse (in Swedish) Department of Social and Econ-
omic Geography, Lund University, Lund
Burgess J 1996 Focusing on fear: the use of focus groups in
a project for the Community Forest Unit, Countryside
Commission Area 28 130–5
Burgess J, Limb M and Harrison C M 1988a Exploring
environmental values through the medium of small
groups. Part one: theory and practice Environment and Lefebvre H 1991 The production of space Blackwell,
Planning A 20 309–26 Oxford
— 1988b Exploring environmental values through the Litfin K 1994 Ozone discourses. Science and politics in
medium of small groups. Part two: illustrations of a group
global environmental cooperation Colombia University
at work Environment and Planning A 20 457–76
Press, New York

The discursive nature of environmental conflicts 403
Macdonell D 1986 Theories of discourse: an introduction — 1997 The trans-European transport network: environ-
Blackwell, Oxford
Macnaghten P and Urry J 1998 Contested natures Sage,
London
Meluci A 1989 Nomads of the present Temple University
Press, Philadelphia
mental policy integration in the European Union
European Urban and Regional Studies 4 333–46
SEAG 1974 The Öresund bridge. One of the most important
planning issues in the Nordic countries. Critical examined
and debated (in Swedish) LT, Stockholm
Mills S 1997 Discourse Routledge, London
Nijkamp P and Blaas E 1994 Impact assessment and
Simonsen K 1996 What kind of space in what kind of
social theory Progress in Human Geography 20 494–512
evaluation in transport planning Kluwer Academic Tägil S, Lindström F and Ståhl S eds 1997 The Öresund
Publishers, London
region — visions and reality (in Swedish) Lund University
Olsson G 1980 Birds in egg/eggs in bird Pion, London
Press, Lund
— 1995 Aningars aning: glimtar av en humanvetenskaplig Whatmore S and Boucher S 1993 Bargaining with nature.
handlingsteori’ Nordiska Institutet för Samhällsplanering,
The discourse and practice of environmental planning
Stockholm
gain Transactions IBG 18 166–78
Pepper D 1989 The roots of modern environmentalism Wieslander A 1997 Constructing the Öresund region: from
Routledge, London
development optimism of the 1960s to regionalism of
the 1990s in Tägil S, Lindström F and Ståhl S eds The
Öresund region — visions and reality (in Swedish) Lund
University Press, Lund 76–125
Richardson T 1996 Foucauldian discourse: power and truth
in urban and regional policy making European Planning
Studies 4 279–92