Ideology-loaded national sustainability discourse: An eco-linguistic Analysis
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study investigates how the environmental sustainability ideology of Saudi Vision 2030 is constructed and reproduced in the Saudi secondary school Ecology textbook. Drawing on van Dijk’s socio‑cognitive model of Critical Discourse Analysis and Stibbe’s ecolinguistic framework, it examines lexicalization, agency, framing, pronoun use, and patterns of evaluation in the textbook discourse. Lexical analysis shows that the textbook consistently evaluates ecosystem sustainability positively and environmentally degrading activities negatively, while promoting conservation on religious, aesthetic, and economic grounds. These choices align the text with Vision 2030’s largely neoliberal–anthropocentric environmental perspective and help shape students’ mental models in ways that make this perspective appear both rational and morally justified. The study contributes to ecolinguistics and critical education research by showing how a national transformation plan with strong environmental elements is translated into educational discourse, and it provides insights to curriculum designers, policymakers, and teachers concerned with environmental education.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
How to Cite
Share
References
Al Darayseh, A. S., & AlHawamdeh, B. (2024). Science textbooks as education resources for sustainability: A content analysis. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(1), em2383.
AlGhamdi, R. A. (2025). The Impact of Science Curricula on Climate Change Mitigation in Saudi Arabia: A Sustainable Development Perspective. Journal of Ecohumanism, 4(1), 3797-3810.
Almaghlouth, S. (2022). Environmental sustainability in the online media discourses of Saudi Arabia: A corpus-based study of keyness, intertextuality, and interdiscursivity. Plos one, 17(11), e0277253.
Apple, M. W. (2014). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age. Routledge.
Berkovich, I., & Benoliel, P. (2024). Critical discourse analysis: Language, ideology, and power. In Analysing education policy (pp. 28-43). Routledge.
Blommaert, J. (2007). Sociolinguistics and discourse analysis: Orders of indexicality and polycentricity. Journal of multicultural discourses, 2(2), 115-130.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Harvard University press.
Cameron, D. (2004). Out of the bottle: The social life of metalanguage. LANGUAGE POWER AND SOCIAL PROCESS, 11, 311-322.
Cox, A. M. (2011). Policy and practice: Russian and Soviet education during times of social and political change. A Senior Honors Thesis Submitted to The College of Arts and Sciences Honors Department And Department of Political Science, Boston College.
Essa, S., & Harvey, B. (2022). Education for sustainable development in Saudi Arabia: A critical discourse analysis of media and government policy documents. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 18(2), e2266.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change.
Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 133-168.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Media discourse. Edward Arnold London.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse (Vol. 270). Routledge London.
Fairclough, N. (2013a). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2013b). Language and power. Routledge.
Glenn, C. B. (2004). Constructing consumables and consent: A critical analysis of factory farm industry discourse. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 28(1), 63-81.
Kliebard, H. M. (2004). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958. Routledge.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. Routledge.
Lakoff, G. (2010). Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environmental communication, 4(1), 70-81.
Larson, B. (2011). Metaphors for environmental sustainability: Redefining our relationship with nature. Yale University Press.
Ma, C., & Stibbe, A. (2022). The search for new stories to live by: A summary of ten ecolinguistics lectures delivered by Arran Stibbe. Journal of World Languages, 8(1), 164-187.
Machin, D., & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Nisbet, M. C. (2009). Communicating climate change: Why frames matter for public engagement. Environment: Science and policy for sustainable development, 51(2), 12-23.
Norton, C., & Hulme, M. (2019). Telling one story, or many? An ecolinguistic analysis of climate change stories in UK national newspaper editorials. Geoforum, 104, 114-136.
Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2005). Discourse and discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and antisemitism. Routledge.
Rogers, R. (2004). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education. In An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education (pp. 31-48). Routledge.
Rogers, R. (2011). Critical approaches to discourse analysis in educational research. In An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education (pp. 1-20). Routledge.
Saudi Green Initiative. (2021). Saudi Green Initiative. Retrieved from
https://www.sgi.gov.sa/about-sgi/
Saudi Green Initiative. (2025). SGI Day 2025: Promoting a culture of environmental stewardship. https://www.sgi.gov.sa/knowledge-hub/sgi-day-2025-promoting-a-culture-of-environmental-stewardship/
Saudi Vision 2030. (2016). Saudi Vision 2030. https://www.vision2030.gov.sa/media/rc0b5oy1/saudi_vision203.pdf
Schultz, P. W. (2001). The structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of environmental psychology, 21(4), 327-339.
Stibbe, A. (2012). Animals erased: Discourse, ecology, and reconnection with the natural world. Wesleyan University Press.
Stibbe, A. (2015). Ecolinguistics: Language, ecology and the stories we live by. Routledge.
Stibbe, A. (2017). Critical discourse analysis and ecology. In The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies (pp. 497-509). Routledge.
Stibbe, A. (2021). Ecolinguistics as a transdisciplinary movement and a way of life. Crossing borders, making connections: Interdisciplinarity in linguistics, 71-88.
van Dijk, T. A. (1993a). Elite discourse and racism (Vol. 6). Sage.
van Dijk, T. A. (1993b). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249-283.
van Dijk, T. A. (1995a). Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse & Society, 6(2), 243-289.
van Dijk, T. A. (1995b). Ideological discourse analysis. New Courant (06), 135-161.
van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach.
van Dijk, T. A. (2005). Discourse analysis as ideology analysis. In Language & peace (pp. 41-58). Routledge.
van Dijk, T. A. (2006a). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(3), 359-383.
van Dijk, T. A. (2006b). Discourse, context and cognition. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 159-177.
van Dijk, T. A. (2006c). Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11(2), 115–140.
van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge University Press.
van Dijk, T. A. (2011). Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction.
van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Critical discourse analysis. The handbook of discourse analysis, 466-485.
van Dijk, T. A. (2023). Analyzing frame analysis: A critical review of framing studies in social movement research. Discourse Studies, 25(2), 153-178.
van Leeuwen, T. (2013). The representation of social actors. In Texts and practices (pp. 32-70). Routledge.
Verhagen, F. C. (2008). Worldviews and metaphors in the human-nature relationship: An ecolinguistic exploration through the ages. Language and Ecology, 2(3), 1-19.
Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. Methods of critical discourse analysis, 1, 63-94.
Wodak, R. (2009). Discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh University Press.
Wodak, R. (2015). Critical discourse analysis, discourse-historical approach. The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction, 3, 1-14.
Wodak, R., & Reisigl, M. (2016). The discourse-historical approach. In Methods of critical discourse analysis (Vol. 1, pp. 63-94).
Woolard, K. A. (1992). Language ideology: Issues and approaches. Pragmatics, 2, 3.235-249.
Yasmin, M., Asif, S., Naseem, F., & Jabeen, T. (2026). Red, blue or green discourse: An Ecolinguistic analysis of educational indicators for sustainability in school textbooks in Pakistan. Sustainable Futures, 11, 101761.