4.2 Article

The Swedish Media Debate on GMO Between 1994 and 2018: What Attention was Given to Farmers' Perspectives?

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2021.1960406

Keywords

Biotechnology; CRISPR; media; discourse; opinion

Funding

  1. Mistra, the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research (Stiftelsen for Miljostrategisk Forskning)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that media coverage of GMO in food and agriculture in Sweden decreased overall from the mid-1990s to 2018, with a shift towards more neutral attitudes. Farmer perspectives were given more attention than expected in the media discourse, while discussions on smallholder farming and food security in the Global South did not significantly impact media narratives in Sweden.
This paper presents a longitudinal study of the debate on GMO in the Swedish media, comparing coverage of the topic in the general press and agricultural press. We studied 1399 articles about GMO in food and agriculture published between 1994 and 2018 in Sweden's daily and evening newspapers and agricultural publications. A combination of content analysis and statistical simulation techniques was used to identify structural breaks in the dataset and contribute understanding about how the debate shifted over time. Particular attention was paid to issues of importance to farmers in the Swedish media discourse. Our findings indicate that the debate was most intense in the mid-1990s, after which the frequency of reporting on GMOs declined overall and the debate steadily became less negative. Farmers' perspectives were given more attention than expected in the general media but, surprisingly, smallholder farming and food security in the Global South, which has been central to global and elite debates on GMO, did not appear to substantially affect media discourses in Sweden.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available