Article published in:
Environmental Argumentation
Edited by Marcin Lewiński and Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1] 2019
► pp. 91111
Dimitrov, Radoslav S.
2016The Paris Agreement on climate change: Behind closed doors. Global Environmental Politics 16:3. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H. & Rob Grootendorst
2004A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Isabela
2019Deontic power and institutional contexts: The impact of institutional design on decision-making in the UK fracking debate. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 136–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Isabela, & Norman Fairclough
2012Political Discourse Analysis: A Method for Advanced Students. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fisher, Roger, William Ury, & Bruce Patton
2011Getting to Yes: Negotiating an Agreement without Giving In, 3rd ed. London: Random House.Google Scholar
Goodwin, J.
2019Sophistical refutations in the climate change debates. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 40–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krabbe, Erik C. W.
2002Profiles of Dialogue as a Dialectical Tool. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 153–167). Amsterdam/Newport News, VA: Sic Sat & Vale Press.Google Scholar
Van Laar, Jan Albert, & Erik C. W. Krabbe
2016Splitting a difference of opinion. In Patrick Bondy & Laura Benacquista (Eds.), Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), May 18–21 2016 Windsor, ON: OSSA. (pp. 1–19). Windsor, Ontario: OSSA.Google Scholar
2018aSplitting a difference of opinion: The shift to negotiation. Argumentation, 32(3), 329–350. Reworked part of van Laar & Krabbe 2016. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018bThe role of argument in negotiation. Argumentation, 321, 549–567.Google Scholar
Lewiński, Marcin, & Dima Mohammed
2019The 2015 Paris Climate Conference: Arguing for the fragile consensus in global multilateral diplomacy. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 65–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mohammed, Dima
2018Argumentation in Prime Minister’s Question Time: Accusations of Inconsistency in Response to Criticism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, S., Lewiński, M., & Üzelgün, M. A.
2019Environmental manifestoes: Argumentative strategies in the Ecomodernist Manifesto . Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 12–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017Climate: Get the Big Picture. Retrieved, March 20, 2017 from: http://​bigpicture​.unfccc​.int​/#content​-the​-paris​-agreemen
Tweede Kamer [Dutch House of Commons]
2017Uitkomsten klimaattop Parijs [Results climate summit Paris]. In: Handelingen 2015 – 2016 [Proceedings, 2015 – 2016], number 85, item 17, May 19 2016 Retrieved on March 20 2017 from: https://​zoek​.officielebekendmakingen​.nl​/h​-tk​-20152016​-85​-17
Walton, Douglas N., Chris Reed, & Fabrizio Macagno
2008Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weinstock, Daniel
2013On the possibility of principled moral compromise. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16(4): 537–556. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, Fabian
2016Compromise, Peace and Public Justification: Political Morality Beyond Justice. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Godden, David & John Casey
2020. No Place for Compromise: Resisting the Shift to Negotiation. Argumentation 34:4  pp. 499 ff. Crossref logo
Goodwin, Jean
2019. Sophistical refutations in the climate change debates. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 40 ff. Crossref logo
Lewiński, Marcin & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
2019. Environmental argumentation. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Rodrigues, Soledade, Marcin Lewiński & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
2019. Environmental manifestoes. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 12 ff. Crossref logo
van Laar, Jan Albert & Erik C. W. Krabbe
2018. The Role of Argument in Negotiation. Argumentation 32:4  pp. 549 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.