How do legislators frame contentious megaprojects during democratization? Insights from Myanmar’s decade of parliamentary experiment (2011-2021)

Little is known about how legislative actors engage with social movements in framing contests over conflictual policy issues, particularly during democratization. This article investigates the case of Myanmar and enquires into how such framing activity can play out in a resurgent, post-authoritarian legislature. It focuses on two megaprojects that generated intense public debate during the country’s decade of liberalisation (2011-2021): the Letpadaung copper mines and the Myitsone dam. It builds on the analysis of the Union legislature’s plenary records across two legislatures to uncover how legislators contextualised and framed such large-scale infrastructure projects and the social conflicts they have caused. The findings reveal that legislators sought to position themselves as informed policy actors, eager to highlight misconduct of past regimes, while deploying three major frames involving good governance, environmental damage, and injustice related to land expropriation. Yet, legislators addressing such megaprojects largely avoided emotionally loaded narratives and nationalistic tropes that other social actors in Myanmar – the media, civil society – typically mobilized. The findings enhance our theoretical understanding of how public and legislative officials engage in competitive framing processes, while providing evidence of how parliamentary elites can construe controversial megaprojects during democratization.