TY - JOUR
T1 - “Ad hoc policy decisions” in the news: Media framing analysis of a pesticide import ban in Sri Lanka
AU - Schölin, Lisa
AU - Hashini, Pramila
AU - Kanapathy, Rajaratnam
AU - Schalkwyk, May CI van
AU - Eddleston, Michael
AU - Konradsen, Flemming
AU - Weerasinghe, Manjula
PY - 2024/7/16
Y1 - 2024/7/16
N2 - Modern agriculture relies on pesticides to maximise outputs. While many highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) are banned in places like the European Union due to concerns about harm to the environment and human health, their use continues in many low- and middle-income counties (LMICs). Pesticide suicide is a public health problem unique to countries where HHPs are used, and Sri Lanka has successfully implemented several HHP bans as part of a suicide prevention strategy. On 27 April 2021, the Sri Lankan government announced an imminent import ban of all fertilizers and pesticides which was later revoked in November 2021. The aim of this article was to explore the media framing of the import ban as it pertained to pesticides. Guided by Entman’s typology of frame functions, we analysed newspaper articles from nine Sri Lankan newspapers (N = 102) between 20 April to 31 October 2021. Overall, most framings were supportive of the ban, captured by framings that articulated the ban through a health, environment, and organic farming narrative. Framings that foregrounded farmer or industry livelihoods and the pesticide market were primarily adopted to express opposition to the ban. The presence of frames opposing the ban within media articles increased over time during the study period. There was a greater proportion of opposing frames in private newspapers compared to government (78% vs 22%). Many of the articles analysed described the widespread impact of the ban, but only 11% of articles represented the voices of policy end users. This study adds understanding to the ways communication via outlets like mainstream newspapers may shape public support or opposition to pesticide bans in a LMIC. Mass media is an under-recognised factor in policy implementation and this study may inform planning to implement pesticide bans in other countries.
AB - Modern agriculture relies on pesticides to maximise outputs. While many highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) are banned in places like the European Union due to concerns about harm to the environment and human health, their use continues in many low- and middle-income counties (LMICs). Pesticide suicide is a public health problem unique to countries where HHPs are used, and Sri Lanka has successfully implemented several HHP bans as part of a suicide prevention strategy. On 27 April 2021, the Sri Lankan government announced an imminent import ban of all fertilizers and pesticides which was later revoked in November 2021. The aim of this article was to explore the media framing of the import ban as it pertained to pesticides. Guided by Entman’s typology of frame functions, we analysed newspaper articles from nine Sri Lankan newspapers (N = 102) between 20 April to 31 October 2021. Overall, most framings were supportive of the ban, captured by framings that articulated the ban through a health, environment, and organic farming narrative. Framings that foregrounded farmer or industry livelihoods and the pesticide market were primarily adopted to express opposition to the ban. The presence of frames opposing the ban within media articles increased over time during the study period. There was a greater proportion of opposing frames in private newspapers compared to government (78% vs 22%). Many of the articles analysed described the widespread impact of the ban, but only 11% of articles represented the voices of policy end users. This study adds understanding to the ways communication via outlets like mainstream newspapers may shape public support or opposition to pesticide bans in a LMIC. Mass media is an under-recognised factor in policy implementation and this study may inform planning to implement pesticide bans in other countries.
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003497
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003497
DO - 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003497
M3 - Article
SN - 2767-3375
VL - 4
JO - PLOS Global Public Health
JF - PLOS Global Public Health
IS - 7
M1 - e0003497
ER -