Climate obstruction in unlikely contexts: de-thematization, scare frames, and strategic differentiation in Germany

Climate obstruction research is key to explaining why governments miss climate mitigation goals. Recent research goes beyond the traditional focus on denialism and the USA but concentrates on dedicated obstructionist actors and their publications. Yet how does climate obstruction work in contexts with strong favorable conditions for effective climate action? What kind of obstruction framing erodes climate policy attempts? To investigate these questions, we performed a media frame analysis on a key public policy debate in Germany, in which mainstream actors successfully obstructed an accelerated energy transition planned by the coalition government. We make three major contributions by showing that obstruction framing (1) de-thematizes climate issues altogether, (2) employs scare frames that evoke fears and threats, and (3) displays a strategic differentiation that connects opposing audiences. These findings provide vital insights into communicative strategies that contribute to contesting and dismantling climate policies even in favorable contexts.