| Abstract [eng] |
Master thesis analyses the objectives that influence U.S. climate policy and its decisions to participate in multilateral agreements on climate change. The objective is to determine the differences between climate change policy framing in rethoric of U.S. presidents: George Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, when talking about international multilateral agreements. Also, to determine whether the framing reflects the factual objectives that influence national climate policy. The research problem is to find out how U.S. presidents – G. Bush, B. Obama and D. Trump – frame their own decision of (non)participation in cases of Kyoto Protocol and Paris Accord in order to legitimize political decisions. Master thesis seeks to prove that factual objectives that influence U.S. climate policy do not change or change slowly and gradually. Therefore, cardinally different climate policy pivots – (non)participation in Kyoto Protocol, leadership in Paris Accord and withdrawal from Paris Accord can only be explained by discourse and framing. U.S. climate policy drivers are liberal market economy, presidential system, dependency on carbon energy and growing population. These factors mostly reflect in president D. Trump’s discourse. By theory, these climate policy drivers prevent U.S. from implementing strict environmental regulations. Therefore, the only way to reach Paris objectives is to invest in energy efficiency and clean energy. B. Obama’s discourse analysis shows that this path is the most convenient for the States. However, in the conclusions the idea is formulated that multi-track approach recommended by the theory, in reality becomes an object of political manipulation, especially with powerful countries like U.S. The decision made by president D. Trump to withdraw U. S. from Paris Accord is an example of that. President’s discourse analysis proves it. |
