Badgers in Dutch
newspapers 1900-2013:
same animals, different framings?
dr. Hens Runhaar,
Marjolein Runhaar M.Sc., BA,
Hans Vink
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Background and objectives
Analytical framework
Method
First results
Preliminary conclusions
1. Background
• Badgers in the UK: very controversial:
•
•
Badgers as ‘reservoirs’ of bTB
Culling of badgers to reduce bTB among cattle
• Controversy since the 1970s
• Cassidy (2012): controversy explained by
two opposing badger framings:
•
•
‘Good badger’: strong, brave, aesthetically pleasing
animals that symbolise the typical English countryside
‘Bad badger’: behaviours that bring them into conflict
with humans (digging, damage to crops, violent
behaviour etc.)
• Framings have historical roots
• bTB debate triggered their manifestation,
perhaps intensified framings, but did not
create them
• Badgers in the Netherlands:
•
Population at risk in 1960 due to prosecution; despite
more protection another 30% reduction until 1980
•
Since the 1980s gradual recovery and since 2000,
substantial increase
•
NL: no bTB, but other confrontations with humans
•
Overall attitude and behaviour towards badgers
nowadays seems positive (literature, newspapers)
• Poaching, digging, and baiting seldom reported anymore
• Active protection against ‘new’ threats (road kill)
Objectives
• Questions that emerged
•
•
•
•
•
Are badger framings in NL different from those in UK?
Have badger framings in NL changed over time?
Have framings of different actor categories changed
over time?
What explains differences/changes?
What influences do badger framings have on how
people behave towards badgers?
• Aims
•
Explore badger framings and how they change over
time, and explore the social consequences
2. Analytical framework
• Framings (or frames)
•
•
•
Selection devices with which people interpret and
give meaning to particular phenomena
Origin in various disciplines, many approaches
Usually presented as concepts or storylines, that
reflect the most salient aspects of the subject at issue
• What is framed?
•
•
•
Subtopics/aspects
Tone
Placement (situation, actor involved)
•
Framings in Cassidy’s (2012) paper
•
•
•
•
•
Not so much badgers in themselves, but more about badgers in
relation to humans
Placement: bTB, other situations? (farming, traffic, …)
Actors
Tone (positive, neutral, negative)
Explaining framings
•
•
Human-wildlife literature: framings influenced by information,
gender, age, location (familiarity), personal experiences
Consequences of framings
•
•
•
‘Good badger’  protect, ban on culling
‘Bad badger’  vermin, cull, manage, control
Irreconcilable framings  controversy and
deadlock
6. Method
• Steps:
• Identification of framings
• Exploring the consequences of framings
• Explaining (changes in) framings
• Step 1-2: newspaper article analysis
•
•
•
•
Newspaper articles 1900-2014
1900-1990: personal archive Hans Vink
1980-2014: LexisNexis
More or less complete since the 1980s (we think)
6. Method
• Newspaper articles:
- Potentially biased
- May influence framings rather than neutrally
presenting these
+ Allow for systematic, replicable, comparable and
longitudinal data collection
‘Check’ by literature and personal experiences Hans
Vink (additional interviews needed?)
6. Method
• Step 3: explanations:
• Literature (in part ‘grey’)
• Personal experiences Hans Vink (backed up with
examples if possible)
6. Method
• Coding newspaper articles
(1,184 articles; 1,478 frames)
•
•
•
•
Consistency in coding important
Two researchers
Iterative development of coding book
Eventual inter-rater reliability
Situation
Actor
Aspect
Claim
%
79%
91%
74%
79%
Kappa
.745
.819
.668
.699
6. Method
• Coding book
7. Results
• Newspapers do no show radical changes in
badger framings over time, but:
• Since 1980s (we need to
cluster older articles
differently)
• Overall picture
(biased by dominance
Das en Boom)
Framings of nature conservationists
Framings of public actors
• Changes over time:
• More often negative
• Badgers hindering
spatial developments
or protection too
expensive?
• Have to check notes
Framings of farmers
• Big difference with conservationists
• But small n
• Direct contact with
(negative aspects of)
badgers
Framings of farmers
Aspects focused on, in general
• Aspect that is focussed on, changes over
time:
• Mostly about ‘damage
done to badgers’
• Incidents versus
structural damage (A73)
• Increasingly about
recovery of badger
population
Claims (what is/should be done?)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
Kill, catch
th
er
O
ze
ns
Ci
ti
es
ic
Pu
bl
N
at
u
re
co
ns
er
v
at
io
au
th
or
iti
ni
st
s
he
rs
Po
ac
e
Hu
nt
er
s,
ga
m
Fa
r
m
er
s,
gr
o
w
ke
ep
er
s
er
s
0%
Remove, replace
Protect
Compensate
Raise interest
Convict (morally)
No/unclear
1918
1949
Claims and
framings from
the past?
8. Preliminary conclusions
• The two framings comparable to UK
• NB: large part of the NL population
probably has no framing of badgers at all
• Less barbarian framings/behaviour, why?
• Extra laws and Das en Boom as a watchdog
• Civilisation?
• Urbanisation/distance?
• Current trend: badgers ‘urbanise’
• Our impression: mixed picture, but not often welcome
• Placement seems to matter for framings!
End
• Thanks for your attention!
• Questions? Hints?
• See www.dassenwerkgroeputrecht.nl for
our work
4. Badgers in NL: a brief introduction
•
About 5,000 now
•
1,200 in 1960, 400
setts in 1980
•
Hunting, digging,
and baiting until 1960s
•
Traffic and habitat loss since 1980s
•
Legal protection since 1947 (setts 2003)
•
1981: foundation of Das en Boom