Hogne Lerøy Sataøen

Since the 1990s, environmental policy has shifted toward ecosystem protection and biodiversity conservation, a development often described as an ecological turn. This article argues that in practice this turn has taken the form of an ecological “U‐turn,” as environmental ambitions are subordinated to production‐oriented objectives. While earlier research has documented tensions between production and environmental protection in forest governance, less attention has been paid to how ecological measurements and indicators become central sites of political struggle. Drawing on expert interviews and policy documents from Norway and Sweden, the article analyses how ecological goals were translated into forestry through new forms of measurement, monitoring, and assessment, and how these instruments became contested. Combining insights from Peter Hall's theory of policy change, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, and research on policy instrumentation, we show that the ecological turn reconfigured forest governance by introducing new environmental goals, instruments, and forms of expertise, and by temporarily rebalancing relations between competing coalitions within the forest‐policy subsystem. Over time, however, this more collaborative dynamic gave way to a more adversarial subsystem, in which measurement practices shifted from supporting the identification and protection of ecological values to defining thresholds for acceptable degradation and legitimizing trade‐offs. The article shows how technical measurements do not simply inform policy learning but also reshape environmental conflict. Though rooted in forest governance, these findings speak to broader cross‐cutting tensions in environmental policymaking, where technical measurements may obscure political choices embedded in ecological turns and other sustainability transformations.

Purpose: This article investigates how promotional strategies used by work inclusion organizations reflect broader shifts in the role of work within occupational rehabilitation and active labor market policies (ALMPs). By situating the analysis in the historical trajectory from sheltered workshops to governance-oriented models of inclusion, the study examines how branding practices, viewed through the lens of brand society theory, reshape representations of work and welfare in the Scandinavian context. Design/methodology/approach: A multimodal critical discourse analysis is conducted on promotional materials from two prominent organizations, Samhall (Sweden) and Work and Inclusion (Norway). The analysis is grounded in historical and theoretical perspectives, particularly the evolution of work in occupational rehabilitation and the concept of the brand society. Findings: The findings indicate that promotional materials adopt corporate aesthetics and idealized portrayals of work, aligning with branding logics. The use of personal confessions as a branding tool raises ethical questions related to authenticity and agency. While promoting inclusion, these materials also reinforce support for national welfare state models. Originality/value: This study contributes to the understanding of how branding practices intersect with work inclusion policy in Scandinavian welfare contexts. It offers an original theoretical synthesis of brand society and multimodal discourse analysis applied to ALMP implementation.

This study explores the evolving, however also “messy”, role of communication professionals in higher education institutions (HEIs), who are involved in organizational science communication. Despite substantial growth and professionalization within HEIs' communication departments, limited research delves into these professionals' own perspectives and their self-understanding. Our investigation employs a metaphors-in-use perspective, through 26 interviews in ten Scandinavian HEIs. The paper contributes to the research on organizational science communication by unraveling the metaphors used by communication professionals: the salesman, the marketplace-facilitator, the police, the missionary, the storyteller, and the overhead-cost, gaining an understanding of how communication professionals perceive their own role.

At a time when disasters, pandemics, pollution, and other crises gain prominence, local governments bear a crucial responsibility for effective risk communication. Yet, there remains a gap in our understanding of how municipalities approach risk communication before a crisis occurs. This qualitative study, involving seven focus groups and 29 semistructured interviews across two Nordic countries, raises questions about ownership of municipal risk communication: What challenges do municipalities face in managing ownership in risk communication? How does the organization of communication influence municipal risk communication? The results underscore three key considerations: First, there is a critical need for municipalities to engage in definitional clarification of risk and crisis communication. Establishing a shared understanding is paramount for effective communication strategies. Second, reframing uncertainty in municipal risk communication ownership as an opportunity is suggested. Embracing the inherent uncertainties and dependencies can offer a valuable perspective. Lastly, recognizing the underappreciation of risk communication emphasizes the imperative for municipal decision makers to address resource allocation issues. This involves ensuring that communication professionals have the confidence and resources needed, vis‐à‐vis other functions involved in risk management.

Purpose: The aim of the study is to deepen the knowledge about municipalities' risk communication for preparedness. This objective was pursued by analyzing how risk communication functions were organized in municipalities and by scrutinizing tensions in risk communication management.Design/methodology/approach: The study relies on 19 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with communication practitioners in Swedish municipalities. The sample was purposive and included Swedish municipalities varying in number of inhabitants, geographical location, degree of urbanization, size and risk profile.Findings: Risk communication is seen as a sub-field of crisis communication in municipalities' communication management. The task of initiating risk communication activities and campaigns is frequently assigned to the municipalities' safety units or emergency coordinators and is normally not part of communication practitioners' duties. Municipal communication practitioners often face challenges in trying to demonstrate the significance of the practitioners' role in risk communication and other risk-related activities within the municipality. The practitioners' work is characterized by four categories of tensions that are identified as follows: constitutional/legal, organizational, cultural and technological.Practical implications: The identified tensions in risk communication are important for reflexive practitioners to consider, and the paper suggests three steps that municipal communication managers can take to handle them.Originality/value: The study contributes with novel knowledge about municipal communication management in a context of risk communication. The study challenges the existing and dominant risk communication research and offers a more contextual and reflexive understanding of actual risk communication processes in municipalities.