Vol. 36 (2026): Volumen 36
Artículos de Investigación

Discursive disputes on Mexico's Energy Reform: symbolic power and the legitimation of sustainable development models

PDF (Español (España))
  • Raúl Magaña Jaimes,
  • Rodrigo Gómez Monge
Raúl Magaña Jaimes
Economy Faculty, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo
Rodrigo Gómez Monge
Economy Faculty , Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15174/au.2026.4769

Published 2026-03-25

How to Cite

Magaña Jaimes, R., & Gómez Monge, R. (2026). Discursive disputes on Mexico’s Energy Reform: symbolic power and the legitimation of sustainable development models. Acta Universitaria, 36, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.15174/au.2026.4769

Copyright (c) 2026 Raúl Magaña Jaimes, Rodrigo Gómez Monge

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This article analyzes discursive disputes surrounding Mexico’s 2013 Energy Reform through comparative critical discourse analysis (CDA). A corpus of legal texts and newspaper articles was examined. The objective was to identify ideological dimensions that structure meanings about energy, development, and sustainability. Using standard CDA procedures, comparable discursive categories were constructed. Results show clear divergences: legal texts legitimize the model through technocratic frames, whereas the press deploys counter-narratives with a socio-environmental emphasis. It is concluded that discourse not only accompanies the reform and its secondary laws, but it also configures them symbolically. The study contributes with evidence from the Global South on the influence of language in the legitimacy of energy policy.

PDF (Español (España))

References

  1. Belmont, E., Rojas, G., & Martínez, E. (2020). La cara oculta de la reforma energética. Trabajo y Sociedad, 21(35), 493–515. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=7557019
  2. Cámara de Diputados del H. Congreso de la Unión. (2015). Ley de Transición Energética. Secretaría General, Secretaría de Servicios Parlamentarios. https://portalhcd.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LTE.pdf
  3. Cámara de Diputados del H. Congreso de la Unión. (2021). Ley de Hidrocarburos. Secretaría General, Secretaría de Servicios Parlamentarios. https://portalhcd.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/PortalWeb/Leyes/Vigentes/PDF/LHidro_200521.pdf
  4. Cámara de Diputados del H. Congreso de la Unión. (2022). Ley de la Industria Eléctrica. Secretaría General, Secretaría de Servicios Parlamentarios.
  5. Castells, M. (2012). Redes de indignación y esperanza. Alianza Editorial.
  6. Daly, H. E. (1996). Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development. Beacon Press.
  7. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing.
  8. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
  9. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. Routledge.
  10. García-Garza, M. G., Ortiz-Rodriguez, J., Picazzo-Palencia, E., Munguia, N., & Velazquez, L. (2023). The 2013 Mexican energy reform in the context of sustainable development goal 7. Energies, 16(19), 6920. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16196920
  11. Gobierno de la República. (2013). Reforma Energética. https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/10233/Explicacion_ampliada_de_la_Reforma_Energetica1.pdf
  12. Instituto Mexicano para la Competitividad [IMCO]. (2022). Informe Anual 2022. https://imco.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/IMCO-informe-anual-2022.pdf
  13. Jenkins, K. E. H., McCauley, D. A., Heffron, R., Stephan, H., & Rehner, R. W. M. (2016). Energy justice: A conceptual review. Energy Research & Social Science, 11, 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.10.004
  14. Krzywda, J., Krzywda, D., & Androniceanu, A. (2021). Managing the energy transition through discourse. The case of Poland. Energies, 14(20), 6471. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14206471
  15. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: towards a radical democratic politics (2a ed.). Verso.
  16. McMillian, R. (2022). Using critical discourse analysis to operationalize discursive violence in school closure education reform policy. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2022.2112783
  17. Natorski, M., & Solorio, I. (2023). Policy failures and energy transitions: the regulatory bricolage for the promotion of renewable energy in Mexico and Chile. npj Climate Action, 2(8). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-023-00039-4
  18. Pardo, N. G. (2012). Análisis crítico del discurso: conceptualización y desarrollo. Cuadernos de Lingüística Hispánica, 19, 41–62. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3222/322227527004.pdf
  19. Pardo, N. G. (2022). Comunicación: espacios y memorias colectivas. Estudio de caso. Lengua y Sociedad, 21(2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.15381/lengsoc.v21i2.22554
  20. Patiño, R. (2022). Políticas públicas en México y fuentes renovables de energía en Yucatán. Avance y Perspectiva, 8(1). https://ayp.cinvestav.mx/politicas-publicas-en-mexico-y-fuentes-renovables-de-energia-en-yucatan/
  21. Rivera, C. A. (10 de julio de 2024). Política energética: retos fiscales 2024-2030. https://ciep.mx/VT2M
  22. Sovacool, B. K., & Griffiths, S. (2020). Culture and low-carbon energy transitions. Nature Sustainability, 3, 685–693. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0519-4
  23. van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and context: a sociocognitive approach. Cambridge University Press.
  24. Vieira, S., Falcao, M. F., Bezerra, A. R., & da Luz, G. R. (2020). Concepts and forms of greenwashing: a systematic review. Environmental Sciences Europe, 32(19). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-020-0300-3
  25. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2015). Methods of critical discourse studies (3a ed.). SAGE Publications.
  26. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future. Oxford University Press.
  27. Yamada, S., Kanoi, L., Koh, V., Lim, A., & Dove, M. R. (2022). Sustainability as a moral discourse: its shifting meanings, exclusions, and anxieties. Sustainability, 14(5), 3095. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14053095
  28. Yu, X., & Zheng, H. (2023). An overview of research on discursive legitimation. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 11(10), 112–127. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2023.1110008

Most read articles by the same author(s)