IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v106y2019ic6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Depicting the peril and not the potential of forests for a biobased economy? A qualitative content analysis on online news media coverage in German language articles

Author

Listed:
  • Ranacher, Lea
  • Ludvig, Alice
  • Schwarzbauer, Peter

Abstract

Forests play an increasing role in bioeconomy policies, providing the material for bio-based products. However, public opinion regarding forest management in Europe is contested, which is considered a potential drawback for the social license to operate for the forest-based sector. News media articles on forest management are considered an important source of information for public opinion building processes because media provides and creates images. Therefore, this study investigates online news media coverage to analyze existing media representation of forest management using a qualitative content analysis. German-language articles were collected over a period of one year (01/13/2016–01/12/2017) with Google Alert, using the search term “Forstwirtschaft” (Engl. forest management). The sample consists of 613 articles from online nation-wide and regional newspapers, as well as other online news media platforms. The results reveal that the online news media coverage on forest management concentrates on regional media, and the media representations are condensed to ten core topics: state of forests, forest conservation, forest management, technology, work force, forest products, economic performance, promotion and events, political issues, and recreation. There are differences in terms of article frequency and content across different media. A substantial part of the articles reports on ecological and economic aspects of forests, which illustrates the challenge presented by the forest as a central raw material supplier that needs to be managed sustainably. In conclusion, this represents a potential risk for the societal acceptance of a forest-based bioeconomy. Thus, in order to support public opinion building processes regarding forests' potential for bioeconomy, a shift in the publicly communicated topics regarding forest management is required.

Suggested Citation

  • Ranacher, Lea & Ludvig, Alice & Schwarzbauer, Peter, 2019. "Depicting the peril and not the potential of forests for a biobased economy? A qualitative content analysis on online news media coverage in German language articles," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:106:y:2019:i:c:6
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101970
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934118304672
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101970?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Larcinese, Valentino & Puglisi, Riccardo & Snyder, James M., 2011. "Partisan bias in economic news: Evidence on the agenda-setting behavior of U.S. newspapers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1178-1189.
    2. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin & Phin, Sopheap, 2017. "Sustainable management of forest in view of media attention to REDD+ policy, opportunity and impact in Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 10-21.
    3. Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Rahman, Sabrina, 2016. "Forest in crisis: 2 decades of media discourse analysis of Bangladesh print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 16-21.
    4. Fabra-Crespo, M. & Rojas-Briales, E., 2015. "Comparative analysis on the communication strategies of the forest owners' associations in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-30.
    5. Park, Mi Sun & Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2016. "Framing forest conservation in the global media: An interest-based approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 7-15.
    6. Ranacher, L. & Lähtinen, K. & Järvinen, E. & Toppinen, A., 2017. "Perceptions of the general public on forest sector responsibility: A survey related to ecosystem services and forest sector business impacts in four European countries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 180-189.
    7. Riedl, Marcel & Hrib, Michal & Jarský, Vilém & Jarkovská, Martina, 2018. "Media analysis in a case study of Šumava National Park: A permanent dispute among interest groups," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 71-79.
    8. Tobias Stern & Ursula Ploll & Raphael Spies & Peter Schwarzbauer & Franziska Hesser & Lea Ranacher, 2018. "Understanding Perceptions of the Bioeconomy in Austria—An Explorative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    9. Sutterlüty, Andrea & Šimunović, Nenad & Hesser, Franziska & Stern, Tobias & Schober, Andreas & Schuster, Kurt Christian, 2018. "Influence of the geographical scope on the research foci of sustainable forest management: Insights from a content analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 142-150.
    10. Christopher J. Coyne & Peter T. Leeson, 2009. "Media, Development, and Institutional Change," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12848.
    11. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Markus M. Bugge & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2016. "What Is the Bioeconomy? A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karnatz, Caroline & Kadam, Parag & Pfeuffer, Alexander & Dwivedi, Puneet, 2021. "The portrayal of forest certification in national and state newspapers of the United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    2. Sophia Dieken & Sandra Venghaus, 2020. "Potential Pathways to the German Bioeconomy: A Media Discourse Analysis of Public Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-24, September.
    3. Park, Mi Sun & Shin, Seongmin & Lee, Haeun, 2021. "Media frames on urban greening in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. Mangani, Andrea, 2021. "When does print media address deforestation? A quantitative analysis of major newspapers from US, UK, and Australia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin & Phin, Sopheap, 2017. "Sustainable management of forest in view of media attention to REDD+ policy, opportunity and impact in Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 10-21.
    2. Karnatz, Caroline & Kadam, Parag & Pfeuffer, Alexander & Dwivedi, Puneet, 2021. "The portrayal of forest certification in national and state newspapers of the United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    3. Sophia Dieken & Sandra Venghaus, 2020. "Potential Pathways to the German Bioeconomy: A Media Discourse Analysis of Public Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-24, September.
    4. Erik Gawel & Nadine Pannicke & Nina Hagemann, 2019. "A Path Transition Towards a Bioeconomy—The Crucial Role of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    5. Takala, Tuomo & Lehtinen, Ari & Tanskanen, Minna & Hujala, Teppo & Tikkanen, Jukka, 2019. "The rise of multi-objective forestry paradigm in the Finnish print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    7. Zabulionienė Erika & Pranskūnienė Rasa, 2021. "Personal Experiences of Bioeconomy Development: Autoethography Approach," Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development, Sciendo, vol. 43(3), pages 346-353, September.
    8. Durwin H.J. Lynch & Pim Klaassen & Lan van Wassenaer & Jacqueline E.W. Broerse, 2020. "Constructing the Public in Roadmapping the Transition to a Bioeconomy: A Case Study from the Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Luke Kelleher & Maeve Henchion & Eoin O’Neill, 2019. "Policy Coherence and the Transition to a Bioeconomy: The Case of Ireland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-25, December.
    10. Takala, Tuomo & Lehtinen, Ari & Tanskanen, Minna & Hujala, Teppo & Tikkanen, Jukka, 2020. "Discoursal power and multi-objective forestry in the Finnish print media," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    11. Aurenhammer, Peter K., 2017. "Forest land-use governance and change through Forest Owner Associations – Actors' roles and preferences in Bavaria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 176-191.
    12. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2023. "Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Spatial Aspects and a Call for a New Research Agenda," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, January.
    13. Bastian Winkler & Anika Maier & Iris Lewandowski, 2019. "Urban Gardening in Germany: Cultivating a Sustainable Lifestyle for the Societal Transition to a Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, February.
    14. Daniela Pasnicu & Mihaela Ghenta & Aniela Matei, 2019. "Transition to Bioeconomy: Perceptions and Behaviors in Central and Eastern Europe," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(50), pages 1-9, February.
    15. Mangani, Andrea, 2021. "When does print media address deforestation? A quantitative analysis of major newspapers from US, UK, and Australia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    16. Zeug, Walther & Bezama, Alberto & Thrän, Daniela, 2020. "Towards a holistic and integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of the bioeconomy: Background on concepts, visions and measurements," UFZ Discussion Papers 7/2020, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    17. Maja Farstad & Pia Piroschka Otte & Erika Palmer, 2024. "Socio-cultural conditions for social acceptance of bioeconomy transitions: the case of Norway," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 18559-18574, July.
    18. Gianmaria Tassinari & Dušan Drabik & Stefano Boccaletti & Claudio Soregaroli, 2021. "Case studies research in the bioeconomy: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(7), pages 286-303.
    19. repec:aud:audfin:v:21:y:2019:i:50:p:9 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Sören Richter & Nora Szarka & Alberto Bezama & Daniela Thrän, 2022. "What Drives a Future German Bioeconomy? A Narrative and STEEPLE Analysis for Explorative Characterisation of Scenario Drivers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-32, March.
    21. Kieran Harrahill & Áine Macken-Walsh & Eoin O’Neill & Mick Lennon, 2022. "An Analysis of Irish Dairy Farmers’ Participation in the Bioeconomy: Exploring Power and Knowledge Dynamics in a Multi-actor EIP-AGRI Operational Group," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-39, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:106:y:2019:i:c:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.