The aim of the article is to discuss the theoretical paradigm of ecological modernization which represents one of the attempts to theorize the issues of enviromental care that only recently became an object of sociological analysis (Catton ir Dunlap, 1979; Buttel, 1987). The article is being developed in a few directions. First, the author develops a comparative analysis of the main sociological perspectives on the environmental care: ecological modernization (Mol, 1995; Weale, 1992; Hajer 1995; Spaargaren, 1997; Rinkevičius, 1998), the theory of risk society and reflexive modernization (Beck, 1992; Beck, Giddens ir Lash 1994), conception of self-purposive capitalistic production (Schnaiberg, 1980) and ecological socialism (Pepper, 1993; Dickens, 1992). Second, in developing such a comparative analysis, the author critically discusses the different theories by concerning both the environmental problems that contemporary societies face and the changes that the societies undergo in the spheres of values and institutions.
This article explores the structural roots of institutional fields of tensions. It singles out four societal domains – bureaucratic, economic, academic, and civic – and elaborates on different doctrines, steering mechanisms and ethos prevailing in such domains. It draws on Max Weber's concepts of "ideal types' of politically and economically-oriented action as a theoretical predecessor of the concept of domains and institutional tensions. It also draws on Giddens' interpretation of social structuring processes, and develops a notion of institutional learning by proposing a concept of inter-institutional learning. The recent case of developing a new nuclear power plant in Lithuania is deployed in this article inter alia as an illustration of the tensions arising between different institutional domains, as an illustration of dominance of certain principles, steering
mechanisms and ethos pertaining to particular institutional domains, e.g. bureaucratic and economic, whereas other domains such as civic are neglected or marginalized. It is also conceived as an example illuminating the opening of possible ways in the search for institutional innovations.
This article explores the structural roots of institutional fields of tensions. It singles out four societal domains – bureaucratic, economic, academic, and civic – and elaborates on different doctrines, steering mechanisms and ethos prevailing in such domains. It draws on Max Weber's concepts of "ideal types' of politically and economically-oriented action as a theoretical predecessor of the concept of domains and institutional tensions. It also draws on Giddens' interpretation of social structuring processes, and develops a notion of institutional learning by proposing a concept of inter-institutional learning. The recent case of developing a new nuclear power plant in Lithuania is deployed in this article inter alia as an illustration of the tensions arising between different institutional domains, as an illustration of dominance of certain principles, steering mechanisms and ethos pertaining to particular institutional domains, e.g. bureaucratic and economic, whereas other domains such as civic are neglected or marginalized. It is also conceived as an example illuminating the opening of possible ways in the search for institutional innovations. ; Šiame straipsnyje pateikiama originali institucinių įtampos laukų koncepcija ir sociologinė jos interpretacija. Analitiškai skiriamos keturios visuomenės institucinės sritys (domenai): biurokratinis, ekonominis, akademinis ir pilietinis. Socialinių veikėjų požiūrius ir elgesį šiuose domenuose struktūrizuoja juose dominuojantys, institucionalizuoti bruožai – vertybinės orientacijos, veiklos tikslų ir būdų samprata bei elgesį norminantis etosas. šiuo požiūriu, domenai prilygintini Maxo Weberio teorijoje išskirtiems idealiesiems tipams, kuriais apibūdinama socialinių veikėjų veikla, orientuota politiškai ir ekonomiškai. Veikėjų elgesio struktūrizavimo atskiruose domenuose sociologinei analizei straipsnio autorius pasitelkia Anthony Giddenso pasiūlytą teorinį modelį. Skirtinga domenams būdinga socialinės veikos orientacija ir būdai kelia dichotomiškas priešpriešas, įtampas tarp šioms sritims priklausančių veikėjų. Straipsnyje, remiantis Romualdo Grigo pasiūlyta socialinių įtampos laukų koncepcija, teoriškai grindžiamas institucinių įtampos laukų, kylančių tarp atskirų domenų, struktūrinis priežastingumas. Pateikiama keletas empirinių pavyzdžių bei interpretacijų, grįstų teorinėmis įžvalgomis. Pateikiama originali tarpinstitucinio mokymosi bei institucinės inovacijos sąvoka bei jos empirinės iliustracijos (svarstoma aktuali naujos atominės jėgainės Lietuvoje plėtros problema).
This paper aims at diagnosing change in policy culture in Central and Eastern Europe, particularly Lithuania, focusing on the field of environmental policy. The article analyzes public participation in the Soviet period, the years of break down of the Soviet system, and contrasts it with social change during the years of transition to a market economy and democratization of society. Based on interviews with relevant actors, secondary data analysis, and discourse analysis, this paper illuminates the shift of public involvement in environmental science and technology policy to a different mode. This shift, or dialectics of policy culture, is epitomized by a changing mode of citizen participation – from latent forms and "double faced" culture in the Soviet times towards euphoria about civic democratic governance and direct participation during the years of "Singing revolution", and towards another round of colonization of public policy by the bureaucratic domain and the private sector during the 1990s.
This paper aims at diagnosing change in policy culture in Central and Eastern Europe, particularly Lithuania, focusing on the field of environmental policy. The article analyzes public participation in the Soviet period, the years of break down of the Soviet system, and contrasts it with social change during the years of transition to a market economy and democratization of society. Based on interviews with relevant actors, secondary data analysis, and discourse analysis, this paper illuminates the shift of public involvement in environmental science and technology policy to a different mode. This shift, or dialectics of policy culture, is epitomized by a changing mode of citizen participation – from latent forms and "double faced" culture in the Soviet times towards euphoria about civic democratic governance and direct participation during the years of "Singing revolution", and towards another round of colonization of public policy by the bureaucratic domain and the private sector during the 1990s. ; Straipsnyje siekiama atskleisti politinės kultūros pokyčius Vidurio ir Rytų Europos šalyse, sutelkiant dėmesį į aplinkosaugos politikos raidą Lietuvoje. Analizuojamas piliečių dalyvavimas ir įtaka aplinkosaugos politikos formavimui tarybiniu laikotarpiu, tautinio atgimimo laikotarpiu ir pereinamuoju į naują santvarką laikotarpiu. Remiantis interviu, dokumentų ir antrinių šaltinių tyrimais bei diskurso analize, straipsnyje parodomi du lūžiai Lietuvos politikos formavimo kultūroje. Pirma, posūkis nuo "dviveidžio" (oficialaus ir latentinio) politinės kultūros tipo prie euforiško tikėjimo piliečių tiesioginiu dalyvavimu ir demokratiniu šalies valdymu, pasireiškusiu "dainuojančios revoliucijos" laikotarpiu. Antra, perėjimas (arba grįžimas) prie aplinkosaugos ir ūkio politikos formavimo kultūros, kuriai būdingas valdžios struktūrų ir privataus sektoriaus dominavimas.
This paper aims at diagnosing the current state and change of Lithuanian society from the perspective of a theory of risk-society (Beck, 1992) and reflexive modernization (Beck, Giddens, Lash, 1994). Paper illuminates a 'double-risk' character of Lithuanian society arguing that contemporary transitional and developing societies, e.g. Lithuanian, are turning into 'risk-societies' not after the urgent issues of social distribution of 'goods' are resolved, as the risk-society theory would suggest in the case of Western affluent societies. By contrast, a 'double-risk' society is characterised by mutual acuteness and inter-twined importance of both kinds of societal issues: creation and distribution of social welfare ('goods') as well as reduction and social distribution of risks ('bads'). A double-risk society, similarly as a risk society is characterized by decreasing unquestionable faith in the modern institutions of science and technology, whereas a double risk-society is characterized by the painful and complex processes of transition from state-socialism that leads to disillusionment in other institutional pillars of modern society, namely the market economy and democratic governance. At the same time, a double-risk society encompasses and reflects most of the features pertaining to the risk-society – depleting social and geographical 'boundaries vis-a-vis societal exposure to the variety of risks (environmental, nuclear); increasing importance of sub-politics with its characteristic aspects-vested interests and manipulative capacity of certain professions to shape social perceptions of risk; and decreased societal faith in the capacity of modern institutions of science and technology to cope with the globalizing risks.
This paper aims at diagnosing the current state and change of Lithuanian society from the perspective of a theory of risk-society (Beck, 1992) and reflexive modernization (Beck, Giddens, Lash, 1994). Paper illuminates a 'double-risk' character of Lithuanian society arguing that contemporary transitional and developing societies, e.g. Lithuanian, are turning into 'risk-societies' not after the urgent issues of social distribution of 'goods' are resolved, as the risk-society theory would suggest in the case of Western affluent societies. By contrast, a 'double-risk' society is characterised by mutual acuteness and inter-twined importance of both kinds of societal issues: creation and distribution of social welfare ('goods') as well as reduction and social distribution of risks ('bads'). A double-risk society, similarly as a risk society is characterized by decreasing unquestionable faith in the modern institutions of science and technology, whereas a double risk-society is characterized by the painful and complex processes of transition from state-socialism that leads to disillusionment in other institutional pillars of modern society, namely the market economy and democratic governance. At the same time, a double-risk society encompasses and reflects most of the features pertaining to the risk-society – depleting social and geographical 'boundaries vis-a-vis societal exposure to the variety of risks (environmental, nuclear); increasing importance of sub-politics with its characteristic aspects-vested interests and manipulative capacity of certain professions to shape social perceptions of risk; and decreased societal faith in the capacity of modern institutions of science and technology to cope with the globalizing risks. ; Straipsnio tikslas – išnagrinėti rizikos visuomenės teorijos (Beck 1992) teiginius apie šiuolaikinės visuomenės raidos ypatumus bei skirtumus lyginant su "paprastosios modernybės" (simple modernity) raidos etapu ir ištirti šios teorijos tinkamumą posovietinių visuomenių raidos sociologinei diagnostikai. Siekiant šio tikslo, straipsnyje taip pat gvildenama glaudžiai susijusi refleksyvios modernizacijos teorija (Beck, Giddens, Lash 1994). Šių teorijų perspektyvoje analizuojami šiandieninės Lietuvos visuomenės raidos bruožai. Nagrinėjami empiriniai atvejai bei jų sociologinė interpretacija patvirtina rizikos visuomenės teorijos teiginių pagrįstumą Lietuvoje vykstančių procesų atžvilgiu, tačiau kartu atskleidžia poreikį šią teoriją plėtoti. Viena iš svarbiausių tokios plėtotės sričių - didžiosios politikos bei subpolitikos struktūrinė įtaka visuomenės požiūriams, ekologinių bei kitokių grėsmių suvokimui ir atitinkamai elgsenai, priklausančiai nuo visuomenės į(si)bauginimo. Tarpusavyje persipynęs abejojimas tiek gerovės teisėto paskirstymo visuomenėje, tiek ir ekologinių grėsmių išvengimo institucine geba leidžia apibūdinti Lietuvos, kaip ir daugelio kitų šalių, visuomenę dabartiniu raidos laikotarpiu kaip dvigubos rizikos visuomenę. Tokioje visuomenėje branduolinio, ekologinio bei kitokio pobūdžio nesaugumo ir neapibrėžtumo pojūtis bei suvokimas persipina su dvejonėmis bei mąžtančiomis iliuzijomis dėl svarbiausių modernios visuomenės institucijų – rinkos, mokslo ir technologijos, valstybės demokratinių institucijų - gebėjimo spręsti kylančias naujo pobūdžio problemas.
The article is aimed at discussing the role of social movements in shaping the climate change knowledge and public discourse from the perspective of social movement theory, which has been relatively neglected in the scientific literature on climate change and knowledge. The article reviews relevant studies and theories of social movements with special attention to the role of knowledge making in social movements. It discusses the shaping and identity of social movements and relations between social movements and climate change knowledge from the 1970s to the present. The paper traces the emergence of climate change as an issue of public concern within the context of the environmental movements of the 1970s and 1980s. By contrast, paper argues that climate
skepticism was shaped, in significant ways, by the neo-conservative and neo-nationalist movements that grew to political significance in the 1980s and 1990s. The neo-liberal movements of the 1990s and 2000s – albeit providing controversial views, food for public debates and narrowing the discourse to cost-benefit based approaches to climate change - are seen to have helped shaping the recent rise to public attention of climate change as an overarching political problem. In the concluding section, the article discusses how concerns with "climate justice" have emerged as part of a social movement for global justice, and contrasts the different social movements that have affected and influenced the making of climate change knowledge.
The article is aimed at discussing the role of social movements in shaping the climate change knowledge and public discourse from the perspective of social movement theory, which has been relatively neglected in the scientific literature on climate change and knowledge. The article reviews relevant studies and theories of social movements with special attention to the role of knowledge making in social movements. It discusses the shaping and identity of social movements and relations between social movements and climate change knowledge from the 1970s to the present. The paper traces the emergence of climate change as an issue of public concern within the context of the environmental movements of the 1970s and 1980s. By contrast, paper argues that climate skepticism was shaped, in significant ways, by the neo-conservative and neo-nationalist movements that grew to political significance in the 1980s and 1990s. The neo-liberal movements of the 1990s and 2000s – albeit providing controversial views, food for public debates and narrowing the discourse to cost-benefit based approaches to climate change - are seen to have helped shaping the recent rise to public attention of climate change as an overarching political problem. In the concluding section, the article discusses how concerns with "climate justice" have emerged as part of a social movement for global justice, and contrasts the different social movements that have affected and influenced the making of climate change knowledge. ; Straipsnyje gvildenama klimato kaitos diskuro ir žinojimo raida, remiantis socialinių judėjimų teorija, kuri iki šiol menkai taikyta klimato ir tvaraus, darnaus vystymosi tematiką nagrinėjančioje mokslinėje literatūroje. Prieš aptariant sąryšį tarp socialinių judėjimų ir žinojimo apie klimato kaitą, besiformavusį nuo 1970-ųjų iki šiol, straipsnyje apžvelgiami reikšmingi socialinių judėjimų tyrimai ir teorijos, ypatingą dėmesį skiriančios žinojimo formavimuisi socialiniuose judėjimuose. Pirmą kartą klimato kaita, kaip visuomenei aktuali problema, aplinkosauginių judėjimų kontekste iškilo 1970–1980-ųjų laikotarpiu. Tuo tarpu skepticizmas šiais klausimais įvairiais keliais formavosi kaip neokonservatyvizmo bei neonacionalistinio judėjimo sudėtinė dalis, politinę reikšmę įgijusi 1980-1990 m. Neoliberalūs judėjimai 1990-2000-ųjų laikotarpiu interpretuojami kaip tokie, kurie – kvestionuodami radikalias ankstyvojo ekologinio judėjimo nuostatas ir telkdami dėmesį į kaštų-naudos santykį viešojoje politikoje – sukelė diskursyvią prieštarą, kontroversiją ir tuo pačiu padėjo sutelkti pastarųjų metų visuomenės dėmesį į klimato kaitą kaip bendrą politinę problemą. Galiausiai straipsnyje aptariama, kaip "klimato teisingumo" socialinių judėjimų raida susijusi su globalaus socialio teisingumo judėjimų raida. Straipsnyje prienama prie išvados apie tai, kaip skirtingi socialiniai judėjimai sąlygojo klimato kaitos žinių ir diskurso formavimąsi globaliame darnaus, tvaraus vystymosi diskurso kontekste.
The modern governments are conceived as to draw their legitimacy based on universal rational knowledge and the concept of controllable and calculable risks as a tool for ensuring progress and welfare of society. The multiple risks and uncertainties of modernisation that the governments were incapable to deal with caused a deficit of legitimacy and institutional ambiguity (or the institutional void as Hajer suggested calling it). Consequently, new actors and new political arenas or spaces have emerged and are expected to lead to institutional innovation. The Soviet system represents the version of the modern state which based its legitimacy on the principle of rationalism applicable towards external nature and was challenged by multiple risks and side effects of its industrial development that led to the deficit or even absence of legitimacy. The crisis of legitimacy of the Soviet state and institutional void, this paper argues, was a key premise for the former Soviet republics such as Lithuania to restore its' statehood and independence in search of new democratic participatory modes of governance. The theoretical perspective based on governance transformations induced by the crisis of legitimacy, uncertainties of modernisation and institutional void in the former Soviet system of governance is illuminated by two empirical cases rooted in the nuclear energy sector, namely the accident at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine in 1986, and public controversy around the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant in Lithuania.
The modern governments are conceived as to draw their legitimacy based on universal rational knowledge and the concept of controllable and calculable risks as a tool for ensuring progress and welfare of society. The multiple risks and uncertainties of modernisation that the governments were incapable to deal with caused a deficit of legitimacy and institutional ambiguity (or the institutional void as Hajer suggested calling it). Consequently, new actors and new political arenas or spaces have emerged and are expected to lead to institutional innovation. The Soviet system represents the version of the modern state which based its legitimacy on the principle of rationalism applicable towards external nature and was challenged by multiple risks and side effects of its industrial development that led to the deficit or even absence of legitimacy. The crisis of legitimacy of the Soviet state and institutional void, this paper argues, was a key premise for the former Soviet republics such as Lithuania to restore its' statehood and independence in search of new democratic participatory modes of governance. The theoretical perspective based on governance transformations induced by the crisis of legitimacy, uncertainties of modernisation and institutional void in the former Soviet system of governance is illuminated by two empirical cases rooted in the nuclear energy sector, namely the accident at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine in 1986, and public controversy around the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant in Lithuania. ; Modernios valdžios institucijos grindžia savo institucinius pamatus bei legitimaciją universaliu racionaliu žinojimu, o šis žinojimas neatsiejamas nuo kontroliuotinos ir apskaičiuotinos rizikos, – neatsiejamo visuomenės pažangos atributo. Iš Apšvietos laikotarpio kildinama racionalaus pažinimo, objektyvaus, racionalaus mokslo ir progreso samprata buvo pasitelkiama modernių valstybių, siekiant pateisinti jų vykdomą politiką, sprendimus bei prievartą individo atžvilgiu. Vėlyvuoju modernybės laikotarpiu sparti mokslo raida ir intensyvi industrinė plėtra sąlygojo naujų rizikų atsiradimą, kurių modernusis mokslas nepajėgė išspręsti. Daugialypė modernybės rizika ir neapibrėžtumai, su kuriais susidūrė šiuolaikinių valstybių valdžia, ėmė ilgainiui kelti jų legitimumo stoką bei tam tikrą institucinę krizę, kurią kai kurie autoriai (Hajer 1995) pavadino instituciniu vakuumu (tuštuma). Savo ruožtu, į politinės viešosios raiškos erdvę ėmė kilti nauji veikėjai, naujos politinės terpės, kuriose per naujas legitimacijos paieškas, naują socialinių veikėjų raišką, ėmė rastis naujo pobūdžio socialinių arba institucinių naujovių – inovacijų – prielaidos ir galimybės. Dėl daugialypių modernizacijos rizikų ir neapibrėžtumų, iš esmės keičiasi politinis landšaftas: galia jau nebėra sukoncentruota formaliose valdžios institucijose, o plėtojama pilietiniu įvairių suinteresuotų grupių dalyvavimu grindžiamais sprendimų priėmimo procesais. Šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjami du sovietinio laikotarpio paskutiniųjų metų atvejai: Černobylio katastrofos bei Ignalinos atominės elektrinės dilemos, atspindinčios tiek institucinės tuštumos (ar bent neįgalumo) tezę, taip pat naujo pobūdžio socialinių bei institucinių erdvių, kuriose galima įžvelgti naujo pobūdžio pilietines naujotvaras, užuomazgas. Straipsnyje Černobylio ir Ignalinos atvejai nagrinėjami remiantis moderniomis bei postmoderniomis socialinėmis teorijomis, kurių interpretacijai pasitelkiama gana gausi, ypač lietuviškosios realybės, empirinė medžiaga.
This article investigates Lithuanian "brain drain"causes: push and pull factors and its manifestation betweendifferent migrant groups. Traditionally internationallabour migration is interpreted as a response tothe existing gaps in wage levels between countries. Butthe causes of migration should not be simplified to economic(usually wage/income) conditions. Even if economicfactors dominate in most countries migratoryprocesses, migration flows of each country are still influencedby the specific conditions or changes in localeconomy as well as country's historical perspective.Therefore migration determinants might be different inseparate countries, especially when talking about highlyskilledmigration. Perception of dominating factors in theLithuania's highly-skilled migration is needed to obtainan objective evaluation of the "brain drain" problem andto solve it in proper ways.Empirical research gives us a general picture of aLithuanian highly-skilled migrant as being a young personwith higher skills who treats his or her socioeconomicstatus at rather satisfactory level before departureand is more inspired by pull effects.Factor analysis reveals us four main factors of interrelatedvariables in Lithuania's highly-skilled migration:professional attraction in foreign countries, socioeconomicconditions having mostly push effects, stateacademic system and collaboration manifesting itselfboth in push and pull effects, and state macroeconomicconditions and governmental policy showing mostly migrants'discontent with the general situation of Lithuania.Other factors such as ecological conditions and familyreunification play much lesser role in this phenomenonof brain drain.The article consist of two parts: first part deals withthe concept of "brain drain" and its recent tendencies, inthe second part Lithuanian brain drain causes: push andpull factors and their manifestation between different migrantgroups are investigated.
Straipsnyje analizuojamos bioetikoje vyraujančio pagarbos asmens autonomijai principo prielaidos. Remiantis antropologų L. Dumont'o ir C. Geertzo darbais parodoma, kaip pagarbos asmens autonomijai principas yra susijęs su vakarietiška, krikščioniška, individualistine asmens samprata bei iš to plaukiančiu racionalumo reikšmės įtvirtinimu informuoto sutikimo koncepte. Taip pat ginama idėja, kad būtina atsižvelgti į rūpesčio etikos, pabrėžiančios emocijų svarbą moralėje ir paremtos reliacinio asmens prielaida, pasiūlytas įžvalgas. Straipsnyje parodoma, kaip rūpesčio etikoje pasiūlyti normatyviniai rūpesčio idealai gali būti pritaikomi bioetiniame kontekste – konceptualizuojant rūpestį medicinos sferoje galima pritaikyti Bourdieu pasiūlytą habitus konceptą ir išryškinti ne tik tarpasmeninių santykių svarbą moraliniam vystymuisi, bet ir įvairias sociokultūrines bei istorines įtakas, lemiančias tam tikrus mūsų elgsenos modelius.
This article aims at analysing public perceptions and mass-media discourse of climate change in Lithuania. Global discourse on climate change stretches from alarmist to sceptical discourses, reaching far behind political and scientific agendas. The empirical evidence, presented in this article, is based upon representative public opinion survey and mass-media monitoring. The results identify, that public discourses on climate change in Lithuania are prevailed by reproducing of knowledge and opinions of foreign sources. That leads to social perceptions of climate change as more threatening to the world in general than to Lithuania in specific. The urgency of climate change problem is situated as least important among other social and economic problems in public consciousness. The debates on climate change in mass media in Lithuania is lacking the critical discussions on climate change causes and effects on the one side, and the issues of social consequences and adaptation to climate change on the other side. Climate change remains as a minor issue of concern both in public perceptions and in mass media discourse.
This article aims at analysing public perceptions and mass-media discourse of climate change in Lithuania. Global discourse on climate change stretches from alarmist to sceptical discourses, reaching far behind political and scientific agendas. The empirical evidence, presented in this article, is based upon representative public opinion survey and mass-media monitoring. The results identify, that public discourses on climate change in Lithuania are prevailed by reproducing of knowledge and opinions of foreign sources. That leads to social perceptions of climate change as more threatening to the world in general than to Lithuania in specific. The urgency of climate change problem is situated as least important among other social and economic problems in public consciousness. The debates on climate change in mass media in Lithuania is lacking the critical discussions on climate change causes and effects on the one side, and the issues of social consequences and adaptation to climate change on the other side. Climate change remains as a minor issue of concern both in public perceptions and in mass media discourse. ; Straipsnyje siekiama atskleisti klimato kaitos – kaip nūdienio aktualaus globalaus socialinio ir politinio klausimo – suvokimą Lietuvos visuomenėje pastaraisiais metais. Tyrimu siekiama atsakyti į klausimus: kokios Lietuvos gyventojų nuostatos, požiūriai į klimato kaitą, jos priežastis bei sprendimo galimybes; koks diskursas artikuliuojamas Lietuvos žiniasklaidoje klimato kaitos tematika; kaip žiniasklaidos diskursas siejasi su Lietuvos gyventojų viešąja nuomone. Sociologinė pastarųjų klausimų analizė nagrinėjama rizikos ir aplinkosaugos sociologijos teorijų kontekste, interpretacijas pagrindžiant visuomenės nuomonės apklausos, atliktos VMSF remiamo projekto RINOVA 2008 m. duomenimis ir analogiško laikotarpio žiniasklaidos turinio monitoringo tyrimų rezultatais. Straipsnio išvadose konstatuojama, kad nors pasauliniame kontekste klimato kaitos klausimai yra socialinio ir politinio diskurso centre, Lietuvoje globalias rizikas užgožia vietos problemos, o klimato kaitos klausimai, ypač žiniasklaidoje, neretai paliekami paraštėse.
