Argumentation and Identity: A Normative Evaluation of the Arguments of Delegates to the COP26 UN Climate Change Conference

Abstract Arguments may sometimes be advanced with a non-standard function. One such function, it is suggested, the expression of identity, practice which play significant role in political representation. This paper sets out to examine number short addresses given at High-Level segment Cop26 conference, are considered contain instances argumentation. Their content analysed and evaluated by means Comprehensive Assessment Procedure for Natural Argumentation (CAPNA), an attempt made highlight purposes delegates addressing conference. At more fundamental level, goal this work assess possibility identifying arguments as being meant largely statements identity or representation, suitability CAPNA other norm-based systems evaluating discourse. The speakers studied include representatives from OPEC, Trade Unions, leaders Vietnam Liechtenstein. Ultimately, study concludes that while further necessary both on understanding relationship between argument arena, application norms representational discourse, evaluations kind meaningful informative.