Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Policy Area
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Keyword
Program Calendar
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Search Tips
Policy frames serve as instrumental tools for conveying beliefs and shaping policies. In environmental and energy policy debates -- where diverse values often conflict, how problems and solutions are defined and framed significantly influences policy outcomes. This study investigates how policy actors employ diverse framing strategies to advance competing beliefs and influence policy debates in the context of energy policymaking. Drawing insights from a combination of policy process theories, including the Advocacy Coalition Framework, it analyzes how actors define policy problems and solutions to embed conflicting values within federal energy transition debates in the United States. The study uses Discourse Network Analysis to examine 254 policy statements extracted from news articles between 2020 and 2021 -- a critical period marked by a shift in federal leadership and intensifying controversy over energy development policies. The findings reveal that the use of policy frames varies significantly across actor types and evolves in response to political context, yet certain patterns of association between organizational type, policy belief, and power persist. This study contributes to the theoretical and empirical understanding of how different policy actors engage in contested environmental debates by strategically deploying frames that resonate with broader institutional and political dynamics.