FORPOL-01019; No of Pages 5

Forest Policy and Economics xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Forest Policy and Economics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol

Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international

media reporting☆
Nazmus Sadath a, d,⁎, Daniela Kleinschmit b, Lukas Giessen a, c
a
Chair of Forest and Nature Conservation Policy, Georg August University, Göttingen, Germany
b
Department of Forest Products, Swedish University of Agriculture Sciences (SLU), Sweden
c
Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group, Wageningen University, The Netherlands
d
Forestry and Wood Technology Discipline, Khulna University, Bangladesh

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: International forest and environmental governance processes assume that ideas and concepts surrounding
Received 27 May 2012 biodiversity at the international level will be made accessible at a national level so that they can be easily
Received in revised form 20 March 2013 adopted by national forest and environmental policy arenas. One prerequisite for a seamless implementation
Accepted 26 March 2013
of these ideas and concepts is a common definition of specific problems at different political levels. Different
Available online xxxx
perceptions mirrored by media reporting on problems at different political levels may affect the implemen-
Keywords:
tation of policies that must be carried out at a national level, even if decisions concerning this implementation
Tiger are made at an international level. Using the illustrative case of human–tiger interaction, this article shows
Framing how national and international media reporting differ in their framing of a particular problem. Based on a
Media discussion theoretical framework consisting framing and media selection theory, and on initial empirical observations,
Biodiversity governance the article recommends blueprints for future in-depth research on the relationship between media framing
and policy at different political levels. This case study is based on quantitative content analysis of reports
on tiger–human interaction published between 2005 and 2010 in an international newspaper and a national
one from Bangladesh. Our example shows that the selected national newspaper frames the tiger as a threat to
the livelihood and well-being of local people, whereas the international newspaper stresses biodiversity and
climate-change related aspects of human–tiger conflicts. These results indicate that the framing of an issue in
the media can differ considerably at different levels and that this is a fruitful field for future in-depth research.
© 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction (Kar and Jacobson, 2012). As a result, human–tiger encounters are

International and national media reporting mirror the perceptions
of actors at different political levels. These perceptions can have an
influence on political decision-making, either by affecting the policy
agenda or by providing a platform for deliberation (Kleinschmit, 2012)
that supports the legitimacy of specific policy alternatives (Steffek,
2009). In this article the tiger–human conflict in Bangladesh is used
as an illustrative empirical example to study the differences in framing
found in national and international media reporting.
With fewer than 4000 individual tigers left in the wild at present
(Barlow, 2009), the tiger is among the most endangered species of
the cat family. Thus, not surprisingly, tiger conservation is an issue
that has commanded attention in global environmental politics
(GTI, 2010). The Sundarbans contains one of the largest populations
of the tiger subspecies, the royal Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris).
However, 1.5 million people use the same forest for their livelihoods
☆ This article belongs to the Special Issue: Forest and conservation policy in a changing
climate.
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +8801774779682; +49 5513919663; fax: +49 551393415.
E-mail addresses: mnsadath@yahoo.com, nsadath@gwdg.de (N. Sadath).
very common in that region, often leading to the death of either
humans or tigers. Though the human–tiger conflict constitutes an
age-old problem (Roy and Sah, 2012; Maikhuri et al., 2001). The con-
flict has been intensified during the last decades. The reason for this is
the marginalization and fragmentation of this species' habitat resulting
from various factors, not least of which is a changing climate (Rastogi et
al., 2012). Most often, the human–tiger conflict results in the straying
tiger being killed. This situation is contrary to the global biodiversity
concerns that aim to save this endangered species (CBD, 2012).
Based on the theoretical assumption that global rules become
institutionalized at a domestic level only if they infuse the values and
beliefs of the domestic actors (Nadelmann, 1990), it is argued that the
question of whether the global and national ways of framing the tiger
problem are congruent is vital for the acceptance of international envi-
ronmental rules and conservation strategies. Consequently, this study
seeks to analyze the framing of the human–tiger conflict in the public
national and international discussions. Since this study approaches
public media reporting from the aspect of framing, the following sec-
tion discusses relevant media framing theories along specific research
questions, before chapter three introduces the empirical methods

1389-9341/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.03.001

Please cite this article as: Sadath, N., et al., Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international media reporting, Forest Policy
and Economics (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.03.001
2 N. Sadath et al. / Forest Policy and Economics xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
employed. Results are then presented, before the last chapter draws
conclusions on the main differences between Bangladeshi and interna-
tional print media in the framing of the human–tiger conflict.
2. Using framing theory to understand media reporting at
different levels
The mass media are relevant public sources of information and
opinions with the power to give specific meaning to issues. Hence,
actors perceive the mass media as an efficient way to express their
perspective regarding forests and their relation to climate change.
This study concentrates on the media discussion of the tiger–human
conflict. National media is characterized by content which includes
language and substance which provide the public sphere for the
national perspective of certain issues (Rahman, 2010). Though the
media is generally acknowledged as being a driving force for globali-
zation (Sparks, 1998) the literature on international media lacks a
common ground for what international media is. In this study we
follow the definition by Reese, which states that transnational or
international media are those that can tap news sources and address
audiences and readership beyond national boundaries. e.g., the Inter-
national Herald Tribune, or Financial Times (Reese, 2010). Both the
national and the international media spheres are important factors
in their political setting. In particular, the ways in which certain issues
are framed, information is brokered and expertise is communicated
affect the governance of natural resources (Böcher et al., 2009;
Kleinschmit et al., 2009; Grundmann, 2009; Lövbrand, 2009).
According to Chong and Druckman (2007, 104), “the major premise
of framing theory is that an issue can be viewed from a variety of per-
spectives and be construed as having implications for multiple values
or considerations. Framing refers to the process by which people develop
a particular conceptualization of an issue or reorient their thinking about
an issue”. Hence, to make framing work, one must select specific “aspects
of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communication
text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, casual
interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for
the item described” (Entman, 1993). Frames highlight some pieces of
information about the subject and downplay others (Entman, 1993).
Bendford and Snow (2000) note that framing processes are strategic,
deliberative, utilitarian, and goal-directed, meaning that actors use
framing of a single issue or resulting broader discussion to pursue their
interests (Somorin et al., 2012). Arts et al. (2010) find that powerful
actors are able not only to frame but also re-frame issues. In this vein,
broader discussions were shown to influence national and interna-
tional political processes on natural resources (Kleinschmit et al.,
2009; Arts and Buizer, 2009; Humphreys, 2009; Mert, 2009; Medina
et al., 2009; Winkel, 2012; Kleinschmit, 2012; Giessen, forthcoming,
2013; Giessen et al., 2009). Because framing is a strategic exercise car-
ried out by actors, Chong and Druckman (2007) suggest taking a sys-
tematic approach and also include in their analysis the production
aspect of framing carried out by societal elites.
In the mass media, frames also help journalists assess the potential
newsworthiness of an issue and simplify complex content for lay
audiences. Framing also indicates how events and issues are organized
and understood, especially by media professionals and their audiences
(Reese, 2001; Feindt and Kleinschmit, 2011). In addition to media frames,
factors influencing the news (e.g., the newsworthiness of events) also
play a vital role in the media discussion. In the selection process by the
media, some events become news and some do not receive attention
(Galtung and Ruge, 1965; McQuail, 1994; Park, 2009; McQuail, 2010).
One of the major factors affecting different geographical levels of com-
munication is “proximity”. The proximity of an event is understood to
be its geographical immediacy to the audience. According to Schulz
(2005) and Eilders (1997) these events will be given higher priority
for publishing as compared to those events that take place far from
the audience.
Please cite this article as: Sadath, N., et al., Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international media reporting, Forest Policy
and Economics (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.03.001
Conflictive issues, such as the human–tiger conflict, usually have a
set of competing frames. Bendford and Snow (2000) identify three
types of successful frames: diagnostic frames, which point out prob-
lems and their causes; prognostic frames, which indicate solutions
to problems; and motivational frames, which indicate the graveness
and urgency of an issue by, for example, naming a victim (Feindt and
Kleinschmit, 2011). This study analyzes diagnostic (i.e., cause of the
problem) and motivational (i.e., victim of the problem) frames of the
human–tiger conflict issue by different speakers in national and inter-
national print media. Strong frames must not be confused with intellec-
tually or morally superior arguments (Chong and Druckman, 2007). As
Feindt and Kleinschmit (2011) find, “Mediatisation models suggest that
political actors implant their agenda in frames in a condensed manner
to reach specific effects in a given audience”. Said otherwise, both polit-
ical actors and mass media use frames strategically to pursue their own
goals and interests. Political actors are continuously and strategically
creating and maintaining frames of individual issues (Pan and Kosicki,
2001 in Hayden, 2003). Frames are also a conceptual tool used to deter-
mine how political actors allocate particular significance to specific
social events (Somorin et al., 2012; similar Hajer and Laws, 2006). The
way that an actor or a specific print media frames an issue influences
how the respective (media) discussion is shaped.
Following these theoretical assumptions this study raises the follow-
ing research questions: i) How has human–tiger interaction been framed
in the international and national print media?, ii) Who are the respective
speakers in both media? iii) and What are the main differences between
the national and the international levels when it comes to framing?
3. Research framework
We selected one newspaper each at the national and the interna-
tional level to gain insight into media framing at different political
levels. Newspapers were chosen because they are still generally rec-
ognized as having a major influence on public opinion. Particularly,
political decision makers rely on them when searching for indicators
of public opinion (Kleinschmit and Krott, 2008). To analyze the dif-
ferences in the ways in which print media frame the human–tiger
conflict in national vs. international media discussions, the following
recognized daily newspapers were selected: The Daily Ittefaq was se-
lected to represent the national print media discussion in Bangladesh
because of the circulation of the newspaper and its readership, which
includes Bangladeshi political elites and decision-makers. The Guardian
was selected to represent the print media discussion at an international
level due to its international audience and focus on issues relevant to
a wide range of countries (in particular the Commonwealth, which
includes Bangladesh). Both newspapers were analyzed in respect of
the differences in their framing of human–tiger conflicts and of the
speakers within each frame. Relevant articles were identified using the
digital archive database for The Guardian. The relevant articles from The
Daily Ittefaq were collected using the National Library Archive of Bangla-
desh. The search was limited to the years 2005 to 2010 for two reasons:
the human–tiger conflict has increased since 2005 (FD, 2010), and sec-
ondly, data access to the digital archive of the Bangladeshi newspaper
started in 2005. The database search for relevant articles in the archives
of both newspapers was performed using the keywords ‘tiger conserva-
tion’, ‘human tiger conflict’, or ‘killed by tiger’, along with ‘Bangladesh’.
As a result, 63 articles were identified. Out of this sample The Guardian
yielded 10 articles, whereas The Daily Ittefaq yielded 53 articles.
Quantitative-content analysis was then applied to these newspaper
articles in order to assess the framing of the human–tiger conflict. Con-
tent analysis can be defined as a method of elevating social reality, with
both a manifest text and a non-manifest context (Neuman, 2006). To
interpret the data, a coding system was developed for this content
analysis. This coding system used two units of analysis: the article
and the statement. A statement refers to what has been said by a spe-
cific speaker (i.e., actor) on the selected issue. For this study to better
 N. Sadath et al. / Forest Policy and Economics xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 3

explain the construction of media framing, individual actors who ad-

dress the issue directly or indirectly were coded as speakers. First, the
articles were coded according to date, news factors, event, and newspa-
per section. Second, at the statement level, each speaker was placed in
one of the following categories: politician, journalist, scientist,
non-governmental organization (NGO), forest administration 1, local
people, and civil society. NGOs adhere to a non-governmental,
non-profit model, while civil society is comprised of individuals and
larger social groups formed by individuals. The selected ten articles
from The Guardian contained 15 statements by different speakers
whereas the 53 Daily Ittefaq articles consisted of 59 speakers' statements.
The types of statements were categorized according to the ways
they framed the tiger, as the cause (i.e., the diagnostic frame) or the
victim (i.e., the motivational frame) of the problem (Bendford and Fig. 1. Absolute frequency of articles dealing with human–tiger conflicts in the selected
Snow, 2000). The victim-oriented frame includes three categories: national and international print media by year.

tiger, human, and both tiger and human as potential victims of the
human–tiger conflict. In contrast, the cause-oriented frame includes
the following categories: tiger, human, climate change, and habitat
degradation as potential causes of the human–tiger conflict. These
categories emerged from the pre-screening of the articles and were
informed by the work conducted by Bendford and Snow (2000).
The resulting data was then arranged in descriptive statistics to
illustrate potential differences between media framing at national and
international levels.
4. Results
4.1. Media framing of the causes and victims in the human–tiger conflict
The relative importance of the human–tiger conflict is reflected
in the growing attention it received in the analyzed national and in-
ternational print media published between 2005 and 2010 (Fig. 1).
While reporting in the national media increased after 2006 and
reached a peak in 2010, international reporting remained relatively
stable over the study period. The relatively higher frequency of rele-
vant articles in the national print media compared to the rather low
frequency of articles in the international print media shows that
this conflict is not considered to have a high news value at the inter-
national level. The following analysis is twofold, looking both at
the way these media reports have framed the human–tiger conflict
(in terms of causes and victims) and at the way different speakers
contribute to the framing.
The analysis indicates a difference in how the national and interna-
tional media framed the main cause of human–tiger conflicts. The major-
ity of statements in the national media framed tigers as the main cause of
the problem (63%), while the same media source mentioned environ-
mental change to a much lesser extent (8% cited loss of habitat and
19% cited climate change). Humans were reported as the main cause of
the problem in only 11% of national newspaper articles (Fig. 2). The arti-
cles published in The Guardian show no dominant frame for the cause of
the problem. Instead, the distributions of categorized causes are similar.
Humans (20%), tigers (27%), and environmental change at local (habitat
loss at 27%) and global (climate change at 27%) levels were framed as the
main cause of the problem (Fig. 2). The results suggest an asymmetry in
respect of the dominant framing. The national print media framed pre-
dominantly the tiger as the cause of the problem, while the international
print media used diverse framings for the causes of the problem, includ-
ing environmental reasoning. Therefore the study indicates a difference
in diagnostic framing of the human–tiger conflict between national and
international media reporting.
The analysis also indicates a difference between the national and
international media reporting for motivational framing, i.e., pointing
out who is the victim in human–tiger conflicts. The majority of
1
In Bangladesh the forest administration is responsible for forest wildlife protection.
statements in the national media (62.7%) framed humans as the gen-
eral victim in the conflict, whereas tigers were framed as the victim in
only a minority of cases (35.6%). Additionally1.7% of statements in the
national print media framed both human and tiger as the victims of
the conflicts. In contrast, the majority of statements in the interna-
tional media (73%) framed tigers as the victim in the conflict, while
humans were considered victims less often (27%). Almost no article
interpreted both humans and tigers as victims of the conflict. The
framing of the victim differed between the national and the interna-
tional print media; in the former, mostly humans were framed as
the victim, while in the latter it was mainly the tiger.
The aforementioned results suggest an asymmetric framing of
causers and victims in the human–tiger conflict media discussions.
In the following section we will investigate the role of specific speaker
groups in the framing of causers and victims in the human–tiger
conflict.
4.2. The speaker's role in framing causes and victims in the
human–tiger conflict
Regarding the main speaker groups involved in framing the human–
tiger conflict, this study also finds differences between national and
international print media. Reporting at the national level relied on a
variety of speakers (Table 1). Journalists were dominant as speakers
in framing the problem (73%). They were supplemented by members
of the forest administration (8%), scientists (8%), politicians (3%), mem-
bers of civil society (3%), and NGOs (2%). Reporting in international
media is also characterized by different speakers, and the discussion
there is also dominated by journalists (47%). However, it includes a
higher representation of NGOs (20%) scientists (13%), and local people
(13%), with civil society playing a minor role (7%). Compared to the
international media, the national media relies on a more diversified
set of speakers. The articles published in the national and the interna-
tional media have one common trait, that journalists are the main
Fig. 2. Framing of the main causes of human–tiger conflicts in the selected national and
international print media.

Please cite this article as: Sadath, N., et al., Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international media reporting, Forest Policy
and Economics (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.03.001
4 N. Sadath et al. / Forest Policy and Economics xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Table 1
Relative percentage of speakers contributing to the framing in the selected national and international print media.
Speaker (in percentages)
Politician Forest administration
National: The Daily Ittefaq (n:59) 3 8
International: The Guardian (n:15) 0 0
speakers. Scientists, NGOs and local people appear more often in inter-
national media. In contrast, the national media refers to the forest ad-
ministration and politicians more frequently.
In the national media, the majority of journalists (36 statements)
and local people (only one statement) framed the tiger as the cause
of the problem. For instance, staff reporter Satkhira of The Daily
Ittefaq reported a conflict event starting with the statement (translated
from Bengali) “The man eater came out of the forest and killed 3 people
and 2 cattle in the Jelepara village last evening” (The Daily Ittefaq,
21.06.2008). Other speakers, such as scientists (5 statements), members
of the forest administration (5 statements), members of civil society
(2 statements), NGOs (1 statement), and politicians (2 statements)
typically framed environmental changes (i.e., habitat degradation and
climate change) and humans as causes of the problem. For instance,
the Divisional Forest Officer of the Sundarbans West Division blamed
climate change for the tiger attack in a nearby village: “due to climate
change the mangrove habitat is suffering from frequent cyclonic events,
which have an severe effect on the prey population of the tiger”. This
leads tigers to stray outside the forest and into the human settlements
nearby, which eventually intensifies the conflict (The Daily Ittefaq, 24
January 2010).
In contrast to domestic journalists, international media journalists
frame mainly climate change as the cause of the problem (4 statements).
As John Vidal of The Guardian wrote, “Climate change is a reality in the
Sundarbans. Rising sea levels, constant erosion and increasingly salty
waters make life in the tangle of islands and mangrove forest harder
for animals”, although his report on the human–tiger conflict was titled
“There Are Many Tiger Widows Here”, where the tiger had killed 3
people in an adjacent village of the Sundarbans. Journalists in interna-
tional media discussions do not blame the tiger as being the cause of
the human–tiger conflict (2 statements). Along with environmental
factors, scientists and NGOs in the international media also point out
human factors as the causes of the problem (3 statements). For exam-
ple, Bivash Pandey of the WWF stresses the human factor as a problem
in tiger conservation: “…protection from poachers – even in reserves
and national parks – are far from OK now” (The Guardian, 09 November
2010). However, in the international media, local people frame the tiger
as the cause of the problem (2 statements).
The analysis to determine which speakers framed humans and/or
a tigers as victims bears a resemblance to what was observed in the
framing of causes. Specifically, the majority of journalists and local
people in the national media (36 statements) framed humans as the
victims of the problem. For instance, in a report by staff reporter
Bagerhat (translated from Bengali): “A woman was killed in a tiger
attack in the Dhanbari village in Mongla upazila on Monday evening.
The woman was identified as Sathia Begum, 45, of the Rekhamari village
of the upazila” (The Daily Ittefaq, 12 July 2010). In contrast, most of
the other speakers in the national media e.g., scientists (5 statements),
forest administration (4 statements), civil society (2 statements), NGOs
(1 statement), and politicians (1 statement) framed the tiger as the vic-
tim of the problem. As Dr. Md Anwarul Islam writes (translation from
Bengali): “tigers are threatened in Bangladesh by direct loss, prey deple-
tion, and habitat degradation” (The Daily Ittefaq, 30 June 2010). How-
ever, politicians also framed humans as the victim of the problem and
ultimately attributed the role of victim to both parties (1 statement).
In the international media, the majority of journalists (5 statements),
NGOs (3 statements) and some scientists (2 statements) and members
of civil society (1 statement) framed the tiger as the victim of the
Please cite this article as: Sadath, N., et al., Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international media reporting, Forest Policy
and Economics (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.03.001
Local people Journalist NGO Civil society Scientist
2 73 2 3 8
13 47 20 7 13
problem. For instance, Alan Rabinowiz a zoologist said, “..the primary
cause of tiger death – like many of the big cats – people killing tiger
themselves and people killing their food” (The Guardian, 19 February
2010). In two statements by journalists in the international media,
humans are also framed as the victims of the problem. Like in the
reporting by the national media, local people, who have been personally
affected by the conflict, framed humans as the victims of the problem in
the international media.
5. Discussion and conclusions
The result of this study indicates that the human–tiger conflict is
considered to be a national, if not local, problem in Bangladesh.
Following the news value theory by Schulz (2005), this can be explained
by the lack of proximity of these kinds of events for the international
media.
The framing of the tiger as a cause and threat seems to have been
influenced by the imminent threat to human life posed by straying
tigers. Journalists are inclined to craft their reporting to suit their
audience and tend to stay in line with the sentiments held by the
majority of the audience who had experienced losses to the tigers.
In comparison, the international media devotes more attention to
framing environmental changes as the cause of the problem, even
though, according to Mountfort (1969), the royal Bengal tiger in the
Sundarbans has a worldwide reputation as a proven man-eater, with
the highest record for killing humans in the world (Reza et al., 2002;
Barlow, 2009). The global dimension of environmental concerns, like
biodiversity and climate change, better matches the scope of the audi-
ence of an international newspaper like The Guardian than would the
local conflict resulting from a tiger attack. The scope of the newspaper,
and with that, the expected interest of the audience could also be used
as an explanation for the use of the victim frame. In the national media
humans are framed as victims, whereas international media frames
mainly the tiger as the victim. In the latter case, the international print
media framed the tiger as a victim of environmental change, namely
climate change and habitat loss. When seen in this light, the tiger is
framed as an asset to biodiversity and an endangered species. This sup-
ports the global view regarding the importance of protecting the tiger.
Considering the media's function of mediating public debate, the fram-
ing of print media discussions at the national and international levels
may indicate incongruent public information and opinion about the
issue under consideration.
This explorative study also indicates that media discussion and its
framing of the human–tiger conflicts are influenced by specific speaker
groups. At both media levels, journalists are the most influential
speakers. However, state forest administrations and scientists also par-
ticipated in the national media discussion, whereas participation of
NGOs and local people are noticeable in the international media. This
seems reasonable, since the national media has more access to actors
involved on the ground. However, it is interesting to note that local
people participate in the national media much more infrequently
than they do in the international media.
The results of this study suggest that the framing used in media
reporting at different political levels seems to be an applicable indica-
tor for the public perception in specific cases, like the human–tiger
conflict in Bangladesh. Similar research on other biodiversity or forest
issues, e.g., REDD, which have more international media representation,
 N. Sadath et al. / Forest Policy and Economics xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
could provide an opportunity to identify discrepancies between different
political levels concerning the problem definition.
References
Arts, B., Buizer, M., 2009. Forests, discourses, institutions. A discursive-institutional
analysis of global forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (5–6), 340–347.
Arts, B., Appelstrand, M., Kleinschmit, D., Pülzl, H., Visseren-Hamakers, I., et al., 2010.
Discourses, actors and instruments in international forest governance. In: Rayner,
J., Buck, A., Katila, P. (Eds.), Embracing Complexity: Meeting the Challenges of
International Forest Governance: IUFRO World Series, vol. 28, pp. 57–74.
Barlow, A.C., 2009. The Sundarbans Tiger: Adaptation, Population Status, and Conflict
Management. University of Minnesota, Minnesota.
Bendford, R.D., Snow, D.A., 2000. Framing processes and social movements: An
overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology 26 (1), 611–639.
Böcher, M., Giessen, L., Kleinschmit, D. (Eds.), 2009. Discourse and Expertise in Forest
and Environmental Governance: Special Issue of: Forest Policy and Economics, 11
(5–6) (149 pp.).
CBD, 2012. COP11. Retrieved May 22, 2012, from Convention of Biological Diversity
http://www.cbd.int/cop11/logo/.
Chong, D., Druckman, J.N., 2007. Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science 10,
103–126.
Eilders, C., 1997. Nachrichtenfactoren und Rezeption. Eine empirische Analyse zur Auswahl
und Verabeintung politischer Informationen. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen.
Entman, R.M., 1993. Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of
Communication 43 (4), 51–58.
FD, 2010. Wildlife Conservation. Retrieved November 30-11-2010, 2010, from Bangladesh
Forest Department: http://www.bforest.gov.bd (November 30).
Feindt, P.H., Kleinschmit, D., 2011. The BSC crisis in German newspapers: reframing
responsibility. Science as Culture 20 (2), 183–208.
Galtung, J., Ruge, M.H., 1965. The structure of foreign news. Journal of Peace Research 2
(1), 64–91.
Giessen, L., 2013. Fragmentierung“ als Schlüsselfaktor des internationalen
Waldregimes: von einem mono- zu einem multi-disziplinären methodischen
Rahmen zur vertieften Forstpolitikforschung. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung.
Giessen, L., 2013. Reviewing the main characteristics of the international forest regime
complex and partial explanations for its fragmentation. International Forestry
Review 15 (1), 60–70.
Giessen, L., Kleinschmit, D., Böcher, M., 2009. Between power and legitimacy — discourse
and expertise in forest and environmental governance. Forest Policy and Economics
11 (5–6), 452–453.
Grundmann, R., 2009. The role of expertise in governance processes. Forest Policy and
Economics 11 (5–6), 398–403.
GTI, 2010. The St. Petersburg Declaration on Tiger Conservation. Global Tiger Initiative,
Saint Petersburg, Russia (йил 23-November).
Hajer, M., Laws, D., 2006. Ordering through discourse. The Oxford handbook of public
policy 249–266.
Hayden, C.A., 2003. Power in media frames: thinking about strategic framing and
media system dependency and the events of September 11, 2001. Global Media
Journal 2 (3).
Humphreys, David, 2009. Discourse as ideology: neoliberalism and the limits of inter-
national forest policy. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (5–6), 319–325.
Kar, S.P., Jacobson, M.G., 2012. Market constraints in NTFP trade: household perspec-
tives in Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh. International Forestry Review 14,
50-61(12).
Please cite this article as: Sadath, N., et al., Framing the tiger — A biodiversity concern in national and international media reporting, Forest Policy
and Economics (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.03.001
5
Kleinschmit, D., Krott, M., 2008. The Media in Forestry: Government, Governance and
Social Visibility. In: Sikor, T. (Ed.), Public and Private in Natural Resource Governance:
A False Dichotomy? Earthscan, London.
Kleinschmit, D., 2012. Confronting the demands of a deliberative public sphere with
media constraints. Forest Polica and Economics 16, 71–80.
Kleinschmit, D., Böcher, M., Giessen, L., 2009. Discourse and expertise in forest and
environmental governance — An overview. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (5–6),
309–312.
Lövbrand, E., 2009. Revisiting the politics of expertise in light of the Kyoto negotiations
on land use change and forestry. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (5–6), 404–412.
Maikhuri, R.K., Nautiyal, S., Rao, K.S., Saxena, K.G., 2001. Conservation policy-people
conflicts: A case study from Nanda Devi Biodiversity Reserve (a World Heritage
Site, India). Forest Policy Economics 2, 355–365.
McQuail, D., 1994. Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. SAGE, London,
ThousandOaks, New Delhi.
McQuail, D., 2010. Global Mass Communication, In: McQuail, D. (Ed.), McQuail's Mass
Communication Theory, 6th edition. SAGE, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore,
Washington DC, pp. 247–270.
Medina, G., Pokorny, B., Weigelt, J., 2009. The power of discourse: hard lessons for
traditional forest communities in the Amazon. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (5–6),
392–397.
Mert, A., 2009. Partnerships for sustainable development as discursive practice: shifts
in discourses of environment and democracy. Forest Policy and Economics 11
(5–6), 326–339.
Mountfort, G., 1969. The Vanishing Jungle. Collins Clear-Type Press, London and Glasgo.
Nadelmann, E., 1990. Global prohibition regimes: The evolution of norms in interna-
tional society. International Organization 44, 479–536.
Neuman, W.L., 2006. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitavie Approach,
Sixth ed. Pearson, USA.
Pan, Z., Kosicki, G.M., 2001. Framing as a Strategic Action in Public Deliberation.
Park, M.S., 2009. Media Discourses in Forest Communication: The Issue of Forest
Conservation in the Korean and Global Media. Cluvillier Verlag, Göttingen.
Rastogi, A., Hickey, G.M., Badola, R., Hussain, S.A., 2012. Saving the superstar: A review
of the social factors affecting tiger conservation in India. Journal of Environmental
Management 113, 328–340.
Rahman, M., 2010. Climate change coverage on the mass media of Bangladesh. Global
Media Journal Pakistan Edition 3 (1).
Reese, S.D., 2001. Framing Public Life. Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of
the Social World. Mahwah, New Jersy.
Reese, S.D., 2010. Journalism and globalization. Sociology Compass 4 (6), 344–353.
Reza, A.H., Feeroz, M.M., Islam, M.A., 2002. Man–tiger interaction in the Bangladesh
Sundarbans. Bangladesh Journal of Life Sciences 14 (1&2), 75–82.
Roy, P.B., Sah, R., 2012. Economic loss analysis of crops yield due to elephant raiding: a
case study of Buxa Tiger Reserve (West), West Bengal, India. Journal of Economics
and Sustainable Development 3 (10), 83–88.
Schulz, W., 2005. Nachrichtenanalysen und Nachrichtenwerttheorie.
Somorin, O.A., Brown, H.C., Visseren-Hamakers, I.J., Sonwa, D.J., Arts, B., Nkemd, J.,
2012. The Congo Basin forests in a changing climate: policy discourses on adapta-
tion and mitigation (REDD+). Global Environmental Change 22 (1), 288–298.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.08.001.
Sparks, C., 1998. Is There a Global Public Sphere? In: Thussu, D.K. (Ed.), Electronic
Empires: Global Media and Local Resistance. Arnold, London/New York, NY.
Steffek, J., 2009. Discursive legitimation in environmental governance. Forest Policy
and Economics 11 (5–6), 313–318.
Winkel, G., 2012. Foucault in the forests — A review of the use of ‘Foucauldian’ concepts
in forest policy analysis. Forest Policy and Economics 16, 81–92.