Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Toby Townsend, S. Ramsden, P. Wilson (2015)
How do we cultivate in England? Tillage practices in crop production systemsSoil Use and Management, 32
Paul Kellstedt (2000)
The Mass Media and the Dynamics of American Racial Attitudes: Media Framing and the Dynamics of Racial Policy PreferencesAmerican Journal of Political Science, 44
D. Tilman, Christian Balzer, Jason Hill, Belinda Befort (2011)
Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agricultureProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108
G. Logsdon (1992)
Filling the white space between the adsAgriculture and Human Values, 9
LV Dicks, DC Rose, F Ang, S Aston, ANE Birch, N Boatman, EL Bowles (2019)
What agricultural practices are most likely to deliver “sustainable intensification” in the UK?Food and Energy Security, 8
(2013)
Purposeful sampling
Általános tudományok (2010)
Diffusion of Innovations
R. Cox (2006)
Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere
Joseph Poore, T. Nemecek (2018)
Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumersScience, 360
(2020)
Farmers guardian
J. Richelson, Mark Strauss (2006)
The Whole World is WatchingBulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 62
Dietram Scheufele, David Tewksbury (2007)
Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects ModelsJournal of Communication, 57
C. Maier (2013)
Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere, 3rd ed.Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18
Jean Polfus, D. Simmons, Michael Neyelle, Walter Bayha, Frederick Andrew, L. Andrew, B. Merkle, Keren Rice, M. Manseau (2017)
Creative convergence: exploring biocultural diversity through artEcology and Society, 22
R. Entman (2007)
Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of PowerJournal of Communication, 57
T. Kutter, S. Tiemann, R. Siebert, S. Fountas (2011)
The role of communication and co-operation in the adoption of precision farmingPrecision Agriculture, 12
J. Lyytimäki (2018)
Renewable energy in the news: Environmental, economic, policy and technology discussion of biogasSustainable Production and Consumption
R. Hays, A. Reisner (1990)
Feeling the Heat from Advertisers: Farm Magazine Writers and Ethical PressuresJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 67
(2018)
Farm structure survey 2013: focus on agricultural labour in England and the United Kingdom
PM Kellstedt (2000)
Media framing and the dynamics of racial policy preferencesAmerican Journal of Political Science, 44
J. Ulrich-Schad, S. Jalón, N. Babin, A. Pape, L. Prokopy (2017)
Measuring and understanding agricultural producers' adoption of nutrient best management practicesJournal of Soil and Water Conservation, 72
W. Wanta, Guy Golan, Cheolhan Lee (2004)
Agenda Setting and International News: Media Influence on Public Perceptions of Foreign NationsJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81
M. Krauss, R. Ruser, T. Müller, S. Hansen, P. Mäder, A. Gattinger (2017)
Impact of reduced tillage on greenhouse gas emissions and soil carbon stocks in an organic grass-clover ley - winter wheat cropping sequenceAgriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 239
A. Reisner, R. Hays (1989)
Media ethics and agriculture: Advertiser demands challenge farm press's ethical practicesAgriculture and Human Values, 6
R. Evenson, D. Gollin (2003)
Assessing the Impact of the Green Revolution, 1960 to 2000Science, 300
L. Marks, N. Kalaitzandonakes, Lee Wilkins, L. Zakharova (2007)
Mass media framing of biotechnology newsPublic Understanding of Science, 16
Stella Zaryan (2017)
Truth and Trust : How Audiences are Making Sense of Fake News
Glenn Leshner (2000)
Research in Mass Communication: A Practical GuideJournalism & Mass Communication Educator, 55
C. Vreese (2005)
News framing: Theory and typologyInformation Design Journal, 13
L. Nowell, J. Norris, Deborah White, N. Moules (2017)
Thematic AnalysisInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16
A. Delshad, L. Raymond (2013)
Media Framing and Public Attitudes Toward BiofuelsReview of Policy Research, 30
P. Lowe, David Morrison (1984)
Bad News or Good News: Environmental Politics and the Mass MediaThe Sociological Review, 32
Liz Carlisle (2016)
Factors influencing farmer adoption of soil health practices in the United States: a narrative reviewAgroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 40
K. Prager, H. Posthumus (2010)
Socio-economic factors influencing farmers' adoption of soil conservation practices in Europe
J Thomson, L Dininni (2005)
What the print media tell us about agricultural biotechnology: will we remember? choices: the magazine of foodFarm & Resource Issues, 20
(1992)
From where do dairy farmers get their information
Xinsheng Liu, A. Vedlitz, Letitia Alston (2008)
Regional news portrayals of global warming and climate changeEnvironmental Science & Policy, 11
Allison Adams, A. Harf, R. Ford (2014)
Agenda Setting Theory: A Critique of Maxwell McCombs & Donald Shaw’s Theory In Em Griffin’s A First Look at Communication Theory, 4
M. Nyström, Jean-Baptiste Jouffray, Jean-Baptiste Jouffray, A. Norström, B. Crona, B. Crona, P. Jørgensen, P. Jørgensen, S. Carpenter, Ö. Bodin, V. Galaz, V. Galaz, C. Folke, C. Folke (2019)
Anatomy and resilience of the global production ecosystemNature, 575
K. Ahchong, Rachel Dodds (2012)
Anthropogenic climate change coverage in two Canadian newspapers : the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail, from 1988-2007Environmental Science & Policy, 15
R. Lahmar (2007)
Adoption of conservation agriculture in europe. Lesson of the KASSA project
G. Berg (2009)
Plant–microbe interactions promoting plant growth and health: perspectives for controlled use of microorganisms in agricultureApplied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 84
S. Batel (2020)
Re-presenting the rural in the UK press: An exploration of the construction, contestation and negotiation of media discourses on the rural within post-carbon energy transitionsEnergy Policy, 138
M. Pedelty (2015)
Environmental communication and the public sphereEnvironmental Communication, 9
Robert Thomas (2011)
Tilling New Soil: Coverage of Organic Agriculture in Farm Journal, Successful Farming, and Progressive Farmer from 1985 to 2005
Wesley Tourangeau (2018)
Power, discourse, and news media: Examining Canada’s GM alfalfa protestsGeoforum, 91
G. Steede, C. Meyers, Nan Li, E. Irlbeck, Sherice Gearhart (2019)
A Content Analysis of Antibiotic use in Livestock in National U.S. NewspapersJournal of Applied Communications
A. Downs (1972)
Up and Down with Ecology--The Issue Attention Cycle
E. Shaw (1979)
Agenda-Setting and Mass Communication TheoryGazette, 25
Niki Rust, Lucy Ridding, C. Ward, B. Clark, L. Kehoe, M. Dora, M. Whittingham, P. McGowan, A. Chaudhary, C. Reynolds, C. Trivedy, Nicola West (2020)
How to transition to reduced-meat diets that benefit people and the planetThe Science of the Total Environment, 718
N. Newman, David Levy, R. Nielsen (2014)
Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2015Information Systems & Economics eJournal
D. Whitney, E. Wartella (1987)
Mass Communication Review Yearbook
Y. Soon, S. Malhi, R. Lemke, N. Lupwayi, C. Grant (2011)
Effect of polymer-coated urea and tillage on the dynamics of available N and nitrous oxide emission from Gray LuvisolsNutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 90
L. Klerkx, A. Proctor (2012)
Beyond fragmentation and disconnect: Networks for knowledge exchange in the English land management advisory systemLand Use Policy, 30
B. Campbell, D. Beare, E. Bennett, J. Hall‐Spencer, J. Ingram, F. Jaramillo, R. Ortiz, N. Ramankutty, J. Sayer, D. Shindell (2017)
Agriculture production as a major driver of the Earth system exceeding planetary boundariesEcology and Society, 22
Nagwan Zahry, J. Besley (2017)
Genetic engineering, genetic modification, or agricultural biotechnology: does the term matter?Journal of Risk Research, 22
P. Merante, C. Dibari, R. Ferrise, B. Sánchez, A. Iglesias, J. Lesschen, P. Kuikman, J. Yeluripati, Pete Smith, M. Bindi (2017)
Adopting soil organic carbon management practices in soils of varying quality: Implications and perspectives in EuropeSoil & Tillage Research, 165
R. Hays, A. Reisner (1991)
Farm Journalists and Advertiser Influence: Pressures on Ethical StandardsJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 68
M. Roberts, W. Wanta, Tzong-Horng Dzwo (2002)
Agenda Setting and Issue Salience OnlineCommunication Research, 29
A. Shaw (2002)
“It just goes against the grain.” Public understandings of genetically modified (GM) food in the UKPublic Understanding of Science, 11
J. Greenberg, Sean Hier (2009)
CCTV Surveillance and the Poverty of Media Discourse: A Content Analysis of Canadian Newspaper CoverageCanadian journal of communication, 34
Niki Rust, P. Stankovics, Rebecca Jarvis, Zara Morris-Trainor, J. Vries, J. Ingram, J. Mills, J. Glikman, Joy Parkinson, Zoltan Toth, R. Hansda, R. McMorran, Jayne Glass, M. Reed (2021)
Have farmers had enough of experts?Environmental Management, 69
D. Feliciano, C. Hunter, B. Slee, Pete Smith (2014)
Climate change mitigation options in the rural land use sector: Stakeholders’ perspectives on barriers, enablers and the role of policy in North East ScotlandEnvironmental Science & Policy, 44
Joan Thomson, Laura Dininni
The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues What the Print Media Tell Us about Agricultural Biotechnology: Will We Remember?
Rothamsted Repository Download
Adam Baumgart-Getz, L. Prokopy, Kristin Floress (2012)
Why farmers adopt best management practice in the United States: a meta-analysis of the adoption literature.Journal of environmental management, 96 1
M. McCombs, Salma Ghanem (2001)
The Convergence of Agenda Setting and Framing
G. Walter (1996)
The Ideology of Success in Major American Farm Magazines, 1934–1991Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73
Niki Rust (2015)
Media Framing of Financial Mechanisms for Resolving Human–Predator Conflict in NamibiaHuman Dimensions of Wildlife, 20
M. Ehlers, L. Sutherland (2016)
Patterns of attention to renewable energy in the British farming press from 1980 to 2013Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 54
S. Soroka (2002)
Issue Attributes and Agenda‐Setting by Media, the Public, and Policymakers in CanadaInternational Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14
V Braun, V Clarke, N Hayfield, Jonathan A Smith (2015)
Thematic analysisQualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods
(1993)
Theory and method in the study of social representations
(1956)
The diffusion process: special report No 18, agricultural experiment station 18, agricultural experiment station
T. Selfa, Albert Iaroi, M. Burnham (2015)
Promoting ethanol in rural Kansas: local framings and cultural politics.Journal of Rural Studies, 39
A. Delshad (2012)
Revisiting “Who Influences Whom?” Agenda Setting on BiofuelsCongress & the Presidency, 39
G. Walter (1995)
A “curious blend”: The successful farmer in American farm magazines, 1984–1991Agriculture and Human Values, 12
A. Oberschall, Todd Gitlin (1980)
The Whole World Is Watching
(2019)
Farm practices survey 2018—England
K. Alskaf, D. Sparkes, S. Mooney, S. Sjögersten, P. Wilson (2019)
The uptake of different tillage practices in EnglandSoil Use and Management, 36
R. Naylor, W. Manley, D. Maye, G. Enticott, B. Ilbery, A. Hamilton-Webb (2017)
The framing of public knowledge controversies in the media: a comparative analysis of the portrayal of badger vaccination in the English national, regional and farming pressSociologia Ruralis, 57
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations
There is growing political pressure for farmers to use more sustainable agricultural practices to protect people and the planet. The farming press could encourage farmers to adopt sustainable practices through its ability to manipulate discourse and spread awareness by changing the salience of issues or framing topics in specific ways. We sought to understand how the UK farming press framed sustainable agricultural practices and how the salience of these practices changed over time. We combined a media content analysis of the farming press alongside 60 qualitative interviews with farmers and agricultural advisors to understand whether the farming press influenced farmers to try more sustainable practices. Salience of sustainable agricultural practices grew between 2009 and 2020. Many of the practices studied were framed by the press around economic and agronomic aspects, and farmer respondents said the most common reasons for trying sustainable agricultural practices were for economic and agronomic reasons. The farming press tended to use more positive rather than negative tones when covering sustainable agricultural practices. Respondents used the farming press as a source of information, though many did not fully trust these outlets as they believed the farming press were mouthpieces for agribusinesses. Whilst a minority of farmers stated they were motivated to try a new sustainable agricultural practice after learning about it in the farming press, this was rare. Instead, the farming press was used by respondents to raise their awareness about wider agricultural topics. We reflect on the role and power given to agribusinesses by the farming press and what this means for agricultural sustainability. Keywords Agribusinesses · Content analysis · Farming press · Framing · Salience · Sustainable agriculture Introduction be highlighted (Kellstedt 2000), determine how issues are framed (Greenberg and Hier 2009), shape political agen- Politicians, communication scholars and lobbyists are often das (Soroka 2002), influence attitudes of the general public acutely aware of the power the media hold in shaping pub- (Ahchong and Dodds 2012), and promote certain ideologies lic opinion. By curating and sharing specific information over others (Lowe and Morrison 1984). Understanding how widely across society, the media can decide what content media outlets cover topical issues can therefore be useful in their audiences should read (Entman 2007; Scheufele and studying social phenomena (Farr 1993) to help us under- Tewksbury 2007), indicate what societal values should stand how media institutions reflect, debate and define social reality (Gurevitch and Levy 1985). Press coverage of agricultural topics can affect policy * Niki A. Rust decisions and public attitudes towards subjects, such as niki_rust@hotmail.co.uk genetically modified foods (Shaw 2002), antibiotic use in livestock (Steede et al. 2019) and biofuels (Delshad and Centre for Rural Economy, School of Natural Raymond 2013). Farmers regularly use the farming press and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Agriculture Building, Kings Road, Newcastle NE1 7RU, UK to collect new information on relevant agricultural topics (Shimoda et al. 1992; Defra 2019). The way in which the School of Science, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland 1010, New Zealand media cover farming issues can affect agricultural policy support and farmer decision making (Ehlers and Sutherland Thriving Natural Capital Challenge Centre, Department of Rural Economies, Environment & Society, Scotland’s 2016). For instance, news articles on precision farming can Rural College (SRUC), Peter Wilson Building, Kings influence farmers’ decisions to adopt this technology (Kutter Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 754 N. A. Rust et al. et al. 2011). Whilst often not the main motivator, the media with farmer interview respondents to determine whether can help shape farmer behaviour through framing of risks or farming press does encourage adoption of new agricultural costs and benefits or opportunities (Pezzullo and Cox 2017) practices. This is critical because if the media can influence or by favouring specific sources that promote or oppose farmers to try new practices, the media could assist the tran- certain technologies and ideologies (Lyytimäki 2018). It sition to more sustainable forms of farming. We therefore is therefore clear that the farming press has the potential sought to address this knowledge gap using a case-study to change how farmers perceive and use more sustainable approach focusing on UK farming. agricultural practices though, to date, no study has combined We draw upon two theories to situate our study. Rogers’ interviews with farmers with a media content analysis of (2003) diffusion of innovation theory suggests that infor - the agricultural press to determine why farmers decide to mation shared in a network can lead to innovation uptake; change their practices and if the farming press influenced this happens once the information received is converted this decision. into knowledge and action through the process of interest, The intensification of agricultural methods over the last evaluation, trial and ultimately uptake (Beal et al. 1956). As half of the twentieth century led to a dramatic increase in the agricultural press are a common source of information yields, lower food prices, increased caloric intake and gains for farmers (Defra 2019) it is possible that, by spreading in health and life expectancy (Evenson and Gollin 2003). awareness about sustainable agricultural technologies and However, this intensification has also destabilised the practices widely within the farming community, the farming Earth’s system and contributed to transgression of planetary press could influence uptake of these measures. boundaries for biosphere integrity and biogeochemical flows We also consider framing theory (Shaw 1979). The media (Campbell et al. 2017). There is now a drive to meet pro- can manipulate discourse to set agendas (Adams et al. 2014) jected increases in global food demands by increasing yields by changing how an issue is framed. Frames are “persistent per hectare, while at the same time minimising environmen- patterns of cognition, interpretation, and presentation, of tal damage: this is the new agricultural paradigm of ‘sustain- selection, emphasis and exclusion by which symbol-handlers able intensification’ (Tilman et al. 2011). Dicks et al. (2019) routinely organize discourse” (Gitlin 1980, p. 7). Frame- conducted a survey of UK farmers and identified a range of setting is the interaction between how the media frames agricultural practices that could deliver sustainable intensi- an issue and the audience’s knowledge and predispositions fication including the use of stress-tolerant or improved crop towards that issue (de Vreese 2005). Frames can alter how varieties, precision agriculture technologies, reduced tillage someone learns about, understands and evaluates a phenom- or no-till methods, and rotations with legumes. Microbial enon, which can alter their attitudes and behaviours, as well inoculants for plant growth promotion (Berg 2009) and new as societal and political decisions (Entman 2007). Frames fertiliser technologies that reduce losses to the environment manipulate people by emphasising some aspects of a topic (e.g. polymer-coated urea (Soon et al. 2011)) also show whilst ignoring others. This can be done via repeating spe- promise as sustainable agricultural products. cific words, phrases or images, which can increase the mem- Uptake of more sustainable agricultural practices has, orability and salience of particular views and ultimately can however, often been limited (Lahmar 2010; Merante et al. change the acceptance of specific knowledge claims (Marks 2017; Alskaf et al. 2020). For instance, one study found et al. 2007; Naylor et al. 2017). For instance, merely altering only a third of English arable farmers used reduced tillage synonyms for “genetic modification” into “genetic engineer - (Townsend et al. 2016). This lack of uptake is due to a range ing” or “agbiotech” can result in higher perceived benefits of reasons, such as agronomic, economic, biophysical, infor- and support by readers (Zahry and Besley 2019). The pres- mational, technical, policy and socio-psychological factors ence or absence of certain frames in news articles has the influencing behaviour (Prager and Posthumus 2010; Baum- power to shape rural perceptions of agricultural topics (Selfa gart-Getz et al. 2012; Ulrich-Schad et al. 2017). Each fac- et al. 2015). Frames can also alter perceptions of topics by tor can enable or constrain adoption, but a key overarching manipulating tones, which can alter public support of poli- aspect is knowing about the product or practice, including cies (Thomson and Dininni 2005; Rust 2015). Understand- the benefits and risks (Rogers 2003; Feliciano et al. 2014; ing the tones of how sustainable agricultural products and Carlisle 2016). practices are framed in the farming press would therefore One way to raise awareness of sustainable agricultural provide insight into how these tones could affect readership practices is via the media. The farming press is an important perceptions of these methods. source of information for farmers to learn about agricultural The ability of the media to alter audience’s perceptions news (Defra 2019). Despite the abovementioned manifold and behaviour can also be influenced by how it changes the ways in which the media can change our values, attitudes, salience of topics. Salience is the prominence of certain behaviour, and ultimately our society, there has been no aspects of topics (Roberts et al. 2002), which can affect the known study to date that combines a media content analysis public’s perceived priority over and opinion on the issue 1 3 Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption 755 (McCombs and Ghanem 2001; Marks et al. 2007). Salience which resulted in the final dataset for the frame analysis is related to issue attention, whereby the public’s attention (amounting to a total of 300 articles). on particular issues gains and loses prominence over time, The frame analysis followed a similar qualitative process often in predictable ways (Downs 1972). The key themes set out in Delshad and Raymond (2013) with themes and that are focused on and repeated by the media over time are sub-themes of each frame devised inductively as articles more likely to be the most salient in the audience’s minds were read and analysed. The unit of analysis was the sen- (Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007). It is therefore possible that tence rather than the article, as numerous frames and tones by making specific agricultural practices more (or less) sali- could be found within a single article. Sentences within the ent to the reader, the farming press could influence farmers’ articles were then coded for the frames and (where present) awareness and use of these practices. Using a case study set the tones, which could be positive (related to benefits) or in the UK, we sought to understand how the farming press negative (related to risks). Salience of the frames was indi- framed sustainable agricultural practices and to what extent cated by the frequency each frame was used in the 300 sam- the farming press influenced farmers to use these practices. pled articles. To check intercoder reliability, a random selec- tion of 50 articles were recoded by a second coder who had been trained in the coding protocols (Supplementary materi- Method als), which resulted in an overall average of 83% reliability for all codes; an intercoder reliability percentage of 80% Content analysis or more is considered reliable (Poindexter and McCombs 2000). TheNexis News™ online database was used to search for articles published in Farmers Weekly and Farmers Guard- Interviews ian, which are the two most frequently read farming maga- zines in the UK. As of 2019, Farmers Weekly had a weekly We undertook semi-structured interviews, conducted circulation of 41,000 (ABC 2020a) and Farmers Guardian throughout 2019, with UK farmers and those who advised had a weekly circulation of 28,000 (ABC 2020b). For the farmers on agricultural matters. An interview guide (Sup- content analysis, we focused on six sustainable arable prac- plementary Materials) was trialled on a subset of the target tices and products, selected as showing the most potential population to check for wording clarity. Questions posed to improve nutrient and water use efficiency by scientists related to what prompted farmers to try a more sustainable and partners from the agricultural sector in the EU Horizon agricultural practice, which sources respondents used to find 2020 project SolACE (upon which this research is partly information on sustainable agriculture, which of these they based): precision agriculture, reduced/no tillage, improved trusted and why, and their perceptions of the farming press crop breeding, fertiliser technologies, grain legumes in rota- as a source of information. A purposeful sampling strategy tion and microbial inoculants/biostimulants. The Boolean (Emmel 2013) was used to source respondents in the fol- queries that were used in the Nexis News search are shown lowing ways: in Table 1; this search sourced all indexed articles available online in the two outlets from 1 January 1998 (when articles 1. Targeting UK agricultural advisers through online agri- were first archived online) until the date of the search on 14 cultural databases, February 2020. 2. Contacting UK regional farming groups nationwide, In line with a similar study (Batel 2020), duplicate and 3. Snowball sampling where respondents recommended irrelevant articles were excluded from the analysis, which further individuals to interview. resulted in 12,883 articles, the corpus to be analysed (i.e. the structured set of texts), and included news reports, letters to We chose a purposeful sampling strategy to obtain a the editor and op-eds. Similar to Liu et al. (2008), this cor- range of farmers from across the UK representing different pus was used to track issue salience (i.e. volume of articles) geographic regions (England: 17, Scotland: 12, Wales: 3), over time of the six sustainable agricultural practices. For farming types (arable: 18, mixed: 12, horticulture: 2) and the frame analysis, we selected a sample from the corpus to farming systems (conventional: 20, organic: 12). Because allow for more manageable qualitative analysis by choosing of the diverse and fragmented farm advisory landscape a random sample of 50 articles from each of the six searches, (Klerkx and Proctor 2013) we also targeted a range of dif- ferent types of advisers (Table 2). All respondents were offered prior informed consent to take part in the research and accepted verbally. New respondents were sourced until 1 no new themes emerged from the data, which suggested Details of how these practices were chosen are on the project web- that theoretical saturation had been reached. A total of site https ://www.solac e-eu.net/ 1 3 756 N. A. Rust et al. Table 1 Search terms used in Nexis News ™ to source articles on sustainable agricultural practices published online in Farmers Weekly or Farmers Guardian 1998–2020, plus the number of articles retrieved from these searches and sampled for analysis Sustainable agricultural practice Search term used Number Number of articles Percentage of articles of articles randomly sampled sampled from the corpus retrieved (%) Fertiliser technologies "Organic fertiliser" OR "organic fertilizer" OR 1499 50 3.33 "compost fertiliser" OR "manure fertiliser" OR (fertiliser AND (manure OR slurry OR compost OR digestate OR biosolids OR “poultry litter” OR “green waste” OR "fertiliser additive" OR "slow release" OR sludge) Improved crop varieties Crop AND (variety OR varieties OR cultivar 9231 50 0.5 OR cultivars OR breeding OR hybrid OR hybrids OR genotype OR genotypes OR breeding OR populations) Microbial inoculants ((Inoculant OR inoculants OR inoculum OR 380 50 13.16 soil) AND (Pseudomonas OR Bacillus OR Arbuscular OR Mycorrhizal OR Fungi OR AMF OR Trichoderma OR microbial OR microbe OR microbes OR rhizobia)) OR (rhizobacteria OR PGPR OR biofertiliser OR biostimulant) Precision agriculture ((Nitrogen OR phosphorus OR "nutrient 1692 50 2.96 management" OR "nutrient efficiency" OR "water efficiency" OR "water use efficiency" OR irrigation OR irrigate) AND (tool OR software OR "decision support" OR app OR drone OR gps OR technology OR UAV OR optimisation OR precision OR satellite OR "digital agriculture")) OR ((variable-rate OR (irrigation AND efficient) or (irrigate AND efficient) OR (irrigation AND app) OR (irrigate AND app)) Reduced/no tillage No-till OR notill OR "no tillage" OR "zero 1247 50 4.01 tillage" OR "conservation tillage" OR "reduced tillage" OR "minimum tillage" OR mintill OR "direct drill" OR "direct drilling" Rotations with grain legumes ((Rotation OR rotational OR rotations) AND 1552 50 3.22 (alfalfa OR clover OR beans OR peas OR chickpeas OR lentils OR lupins OR mes- quite OR carob OR soybeans OR peanuts OR tamarind OR precrop)) OR ((rotation OR rotations OR rotational OR precrop) AND (lucerne OR pulses OR legumes)) Total – 15,601 300 Mean 4.53 32 farmers and 28 advisers were interviewed (Table 2) first author retrospectively using thematic analysis by first with the majority (45/60) of these interviews taking place reading the transcripts to get an overview of the inter- over the phone and the remainder (n = 15) in person. The views and then coding each one based on common themes respondents were predominantly male, which is reflective emerging from the data. Themes were developed a poste- of the wider farming industry in the UK (Defra 2018). riori during the course of the coding as described in Braun Interviews were recorded with consent from the respond- et al. (2015). Anonymised quotes are used in the Results ents and lasted an average of 48 min (range: 24–106 min). where this provides an example of the themes. The study Recordings were transcribed in Word and imported into obtained ethical approval from the Newcastle University NVivo (version 12) for coding. Coding was done by the Ethics Committee. 1 3 Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption 757 Table 2 Characteristics of increase in volume of articles published since 2010). Most Profession Gender semi-structured interview of the six practices had an increasing salience since 2009, respondents Adviser: (28) F (13) despite a decline in the total number of articles published Farming association M (15) in the two outlets since 2014. This suggests an increase in (2) salience of these sustainable agricultural practices com- University/college (5) Environmental NGO pared with other topics published in these outlets. In 2001 (3) and 2009, there were two instances where coverage of all Government (2) articles on the six practices (as well as total number of Independent (7) articles published) were low, which coincided with two Agribusiness (6) Agricultural levy economic downturns in the country. board (5) Farmer: (32) F (5) How are sustainable agricultural practices framed Arable (13) M (27) Mixed (19) by the farming press and what are their tones? Coding of the 300 randomly sampled articles resulted in seven broad frames of sustainable agricultural practices Results (Table 3). Overwhelmingly, the two most common frames used by the two farming press outlets related to economic How has the volume of reporting on sustainable and agronomic aspects of the sustainable agricultural prac- agricultural practices changed over time? tices. There was, conversely, limited discussion of the envi- ronmental benefits of using these practices, suggesting eco- There were no notable differences in how the two outlets nomic sustainability was deemed more important to cover covered the topics, hence these are discussed collectively than environmental sustainability. (Supplementary materials). To indicate issue salience, Within the economics frame, the main sub-theme used the number of articles published in the two farming press by the press related to profits and expenditures, includ- outlets between 1998 and 2020 for each of the six sustain- ing discussions around yields, agricultural markets and able agricultural practices was plotted against time and policies to increase farm profits. There was frequently compared with the total number of articles published for an implied association between increased yields and each outlet (Fig. 1). Substantially more articles were pub- increased profits. As an example, an article focusing on lished on crop breeding than the other practices analysed, a precision agricultural tool stated “most of the financial with the lowest number of articles published on micro- gain comes from additional yield. By reducing canopy bial inoculants (though noting this topic saw a more rapid over-development, yields have increased”. This article’s Fig. 1 Number of articles pub- Crop breeding Ferliser lished on each of the six sus- Inoculants Precision agriculture tainable agricultural practices Rotaons Tillage analysed (log. 10 y-axis) plotted Total arcles published alongside the total number of articles published in Farmers Weekly and Farmers Guardian 1998–2020 1998 2000 200 22 004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 201 8 1 3 758 N. A. Rust et al. 1 3 Table 3 List of frames that emerged from the 300 sampled articles and representative quotes of how these were framed in a positive (beneficial) or negative (risky) tone Frame (% used in 300 articles) Representative quotes of the frame highlighting benefits/positives Representative quote of the frame highlighting risks/negatives Agronomic (30%) “Our trials have shown hybrids consistently produce 15% more root mass than “I want to start direct drilling, but I’m worried about being swamped by grass- conventional varieties” (hybrids) weeds without ploughing” (no till) Economic (35%) “Last year, he took an average field of Marston wheat and trialled an amino “I know there are all sorts of good reasons for maintaining a rotation with acid product… He saw an 0.4t/ha uplift in yield oilseeds, pulses and even grass leys, but if they are not contributing to overall …This yield increase led to a £40/ha uplift in margin, which for me is a lot of farm profitability can one afford to continue growing them?” (rotations) money” (biostimulants) Environmental (9%) “It will … improve overall farmland biodiversity” (rotations) “It does put you more at the mercy of the weather” (no till) Policy (6%) “One of the great advantages of growing pulses is that they qualify as ecologi- “Digestate is currently classified as a waste which makes supermarkets suspi- cal focus areas under the CAP greening regulations, as well as helping grow- cious of buying food from farms applying it to their crops” (fertilisers) ers to meet the three-cropping rule” (rotations) Resilience (2%) “With its vigorous growth, including root systems up to 70% greater than con- [none coded] ventional varieties, hybrid barley also shows built-in resilience to different growing conditions” (hybrids) Social (8%) “The two full-time farm employees are heavily involved with the planning “Growers wanting to apply sewage sludge to land frequently face a number of and management of operations. Both also like new technologies and push hurdles not least, opposition from local residents” (fertilisers) Andrew forward” (precision agriculture) Technical (10%) “It doesn’t need any mobile signal to work, making it ideal for those more “Fulcrum was relatively expensive and hard to justify, he says. Neither was it remote fields” (precision agriculture) the easiest of products to apply. ‘It is a bit treacly and tends to block nozzles.’" (microbial inoculants) The practice that the quote relates to is shown in parentheses after the quote. Unit of analysis is the sentence rather than article Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption 759 50% Posive Negave 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% AG EC EV TE PO RE SO AG EC EV TE PO RE SO AG EC EV TE PO RE SO AG EC EV TE PO RE SO AG EC EV TE PO RE SO AG EC EV TE PO RE SO Ferliser technologies Improved variees Microbial inoculants Precision Agriculture Reduced/no-llageRotaons with legumes Fig. 2 Percentage of times positive and negative tones were used to frame the six sustainable intensification technologies (AG = agronomic, EC = economic, EV = environmental, TE = technological, PO = political, RE = resilience, SO = social; n = 300). Unit of analysis was the sentence title (“Being precise helps raise profit; Want to add money Fertiliser technologies whilst this technology was covered to the bottom line?”) implied that the use of precision agri- primarily in a more positive tone (67%), especially related to culture technologies would increase yields and profits, yet agronomic (22%) and economic benefits (21%), it was also did not disclose the actual profits, making it hard for farm- covered negatively (33%). This technology had the highest ers to understand the net benefits of these technologies. proportion of negative policy tones (19%) of all the six sus- Whilst increased yields can increase profits, the cost of tainable agricultural practice analysed, particularly related some of the expensive precision agricultural technologies to concerns around current and potential policy changes that was often not discussed but can be prohibitively expensive, could limit organic and inorganic fertiliser use. particularly for small-scale farmers, meaning profits may Improved varieties this sustainable agricultural practice remain the same or indeed may decrease. This suggest that was frequently discussed positively, having the highest pro- the outlets were often focusing on the productionist narra- portion of positive tones (91%) versus negative tones (9%) of tive that “yield is king”. the six practices analysed. The small instances that negative For the agronomic aspects, articles often focused on how tones were used related to agronomic aspects of increased the sustainable practice affected crop growth. These articles disease risk (4%) and economic aspects related to costs of highlighted both the risks and benefits of the technology, the hybrids and varieties versus conventional options (5%). with benefits focused on how yields would increase, whilst Microbial inoculants this technology had a high propor- risks were primarily linked to increased challenges with tion of positive tones (66%) related to agronomic aspects pests and diseases. For the sustainable agricultural practices (41%), such as plant growth, health and disease resistance. studied that related to a commercial product (e.g. microbial However, inoculants also had a higher proportion of agro- inoculants, improved varieties, fertiliser additives and pre- nomic negative tones (21%) than other sustainable agricul- cision agriculture), interviews by the press were often con- tural practices, often related to insufficient evidence showing ducted with the company selling the product, who professed beneficial crop effects. Whilst there were bold claims from the benefits of the technology. There was, however, limited product suppliers that had been interviewed by the press on attention paid to independent sources to verify these claims. the apparent effectiveness of the technologies, these effica- We next analysed how the farming press covered each of cies were disputed by other people interviewed by journalists the six sustainable agricultural practices that we focused on (notably farmers and independent scientists) due to insuf- in our study, including how these practices were framed and ficient on-farm trials. the tone of these frames (Fig. 2). Precision agriculture often, the benefits of these technol - ogies were conveyed primarily around improved efficiency 1 3 Percentage of posive or negave tones used in arcles 760 N. A. Rust et al. (and therefore economic benefits; 37%) rather than for envi- to use a single source of information. Instead, they tended ronmental benefits (10%) of lower inputs. When environ- to go on a journey of information gathering after they first mental aspects were discussed, this was usually in relation learnt something: if they were interested in converting this to the technology allowing the farmer to comply with envi- information to knowledge and practice, they would then look ronmental regulations. The most common negatively framed for additional sources to determine whether this information tone related to technical issues (12%), particularly around was supported elsewhere. Many farmers interviewed used learning how to use the new technology, as well as whether the farming press as a source of information about sustain- it would be compatible with existing technology, concerns able agriculture and was frequently named the first place over unreliability and lack of widespread testing. they learnt about a new agricultural technology. There was Reduced/no-till the tones here were primarily framed concern, however, that outlets and articles were part-funded around agronomic and economic positives and negatives. by agribusiness via adverts and advertorials, so the farming Whilst reduced tillage has previously been purported in press was deemed to be biased and untrustworthy, as exem- the academic literature to be beneficial for the environment plified by an arable farmer respondent interviewed: “some (Krauss et al. 2017), this practice was rarely framed as such of the articles you can kind of see influenced by advertisers in the farming press (10%). As one farmer said in a press and machinery suppliers”. Farmers interviewed were also article interview: "I’m not here to keep bugs and worms aware that the farming press often painted a more positive in the soil for the sake of it, I want something back for it”. story about agricultural technologies than in reality, as a Reduced tillage also exhibited negative tones related to agro- mixed farmer explained: nomic aspects (11%), particularly around the increased chal- I think when you open up the Farmers Weekly or any lenges with dealing with crop pests and being able to direct other farming magazine it is always full of wonderful drill in wet weather, and economic risks (8%) such as the success stories where people have said how wonderful cost of the machinery needed for direct drilling. something is and I am always a little bit suspicious of Rotations with grain legumes this practice was frequently such fantastic success stories. discussed in an agronomic frame, especially with negative tones (19%) related to pests and diseases arising from this Advisers interviewed were more critical than farmer practice, and agronomic positive tones (27%) related to respondents of using the farming press as a main source of nitrogen fixation properties of the legumes to reduce ferti- sustainable agricultural information, primarily due to the liser inputs. Rotations with grain legumes had the highest perception of biased reporting in favour of agribusiness and proportion of negative tones overall (41%), again related to wanting to maintain the status quo, as summarised in this agronomic and economic aspects. Peas, for instance, were quote from an agronomist: regularly cited as having agronomic challenges due to dis- One example would be in the farming press and some- ease and difficulties with growing in unfavourable weather. times they have pieces on a particular way of doing Economic concerns focused on the markets for grain leg- things, but it is actually just a press release that has umes being volatile and the premium market for human con- been turned into an article. The press release may have sumption being difficult to access due to the high-quality come from a company that is trying to sell something. requirements that can be hard to obtain in British weather conditions. Whilst respondents were aware of the lack of credibil- ity that the farming press suffered from, some advisors said Do farmers and advisers use the farming press they still read the farming press to keep up-to-date with the to gain information about sustainable agricultural information that farmers had been exposed to, so they could practices and does this lead to uptake? better understand their clients. However, they were clear that they did not use the farming press to provide advice to Of the 32 farmers interviewed for this study, the major- clients on sustainable agriculture but rather turned to what ity (n = 22) said that they tried a new sustainable farming they deemed more credible sources, such as peer-reviewed practice due to economic reasons, followed by agronomic scientific journal articles and in-house research produced (n = 10), technical (n = 9) and environmental (n = 8) reasons. from their own advisory companies. Social, political, and resilience reasons were not mentioned. When it came to understanding what prompted farmers to Respondents used a range of sources to gather information try a new sustainable agricultural practice, many said they about sustainable agriculture. It was rare for respondents were primarily influenced by another farmer or an advi - sor that they knew, trusted and had a long-term relation- ship with. Often, the decision to try a new practice was due 2 to numerous factors related to economics, a willingness to Respondents could mention more than one reason why they tried a try something new, coupled with knowing someone who more sustainable approach. 1 3 Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption 761 had already tried it and seen financial success with using it. agricultural practices were due to economic reasons fol- However, rarely it was indeed sufficient for a farmer to read lowed by agronomic reasons. Conversely, environmental about a new sustainable agricultural innovation in the farm- motivations to become more sustainable were rarely men- ing press to convince them to change, as one arable farmer tioned in our interviews, and when they were, the reasons explained when talking about trying a new type of fertiliser: tended to be associated with agronomic or economic ben- efits, such as improved crop growth or reduced fertiliser I think I read about it from a farming magazine. I have bills. This suggests that sustainable agricultural practices checked other farming publications also… I thought being framed primarily in economic and agronomic ways by why not. I was trying it to see if the crop would the farming press aligns with farmer respondents’ reasons improve. for changing their practices and thus suggests these frames Often, though, the farming press was primarily used as an are salient. A recent nationwide UK study found the main awareness raising tool, as summarised by a mixed farmer: reasons why farmers decided to innovate was for economic reasons (Defra 2019); when combined with our study’s find- You would read it and think it is interesting and it ings, this suggests that British farmers in general were not would maybe give you another layer of knowledge but as interested in reducing their farm’s environmental impact you wouldn’t necessarily rush out and do it. as they were about supporting their bottom line. It is not The farming press was therefore reported to be used as clear whether the farming press is influencing farmers’ focus only one layer of information gathering but was not usually on economic and agronomic aspects above environmental reported to be the main factor in motivating farmers to adopt benefits or whether the farming press is reflecting its read- sustainable agricultural practices. ers’ sentiments and behaviours (Walter 1995) thus the farm- ing press’s role in setting agendas on this topic is unclear. Similar to a review on how the Canadian press covered the Discussion topic of GM alfalfa (Tourangeau 2018), our findings also suggest the neoliberal discourse of the farming press could This research sought to understand how the UK farming overpower other narratives such as social, environmental or press framed sustainable agricultural practices and if the political aspects. farming press influenced farmers to try these practices. We The British farming press tended to frame sustainable found that, since 2009, the UK farming press has increased agricultural practices in more positive tones than negative reporting of the six sustainable agricultural practices ana- in the articles analysed. The reasons for this are unclear but lysed in this study, despite a decline in the total number of could be linked with the income received from agribusi- articles published in the two outlets studied. This finding nesses who advertise in their magazines (Thomas 2011) contrasts with earlier research that noted the farming press where editors may be swayed by advertising income to exhibited limited attention towards more sustainable farm- ensure advertised products are shown in a favourable light. ing (Walter 1995), suggesting increased salience of these six Previous studies have noted the power that agricultural sustainable agricultural practices in the UK farming press advertisers have in influencing farming press content (Hays since 2009. One of the reasons for this could be due to more and Reisner 1990, 1991). Coupled with declining sales of awareness on the environmental impacts of farming along- farming magazines (ABC 2020a, b), this could result in out- side the need to improve the sustainability and resilience of lets being more tempted to align their content with the values agriculture (Poore and Nemecek 2018; Nyström et al. 2019; of their main advertisers (Walter 1996). The distrust many Rust et al. 2020a). Given the rise in regulatory mechanisms respondents in our study exhibited towards the credibility of to reduce agricultural impacts on the environment, associ- information shared in the farming press was reported to be ated with national pressure to meet the United Nations Sus- associated with this close relationship between the farming tainable Development Goals, the farming press may also be press and the advertisers, as respondents thought the content increasingly focusing on sustainable agricultural topics to of the outlets was swayed by advertisers. Agritech compa- help prepare readers for future regulatory changes. Equally, nies interviewed by the farming press professed the benefits farmers themselves may be using more sustainable agricul- of their products, though reporters rarely included independ- tural practices now more than in the past, therefore the farm- ent sources to verify claims, such as from farmers who had ing press could be reflecting this change in farmer behaviour. tried the products in the field. Conversely, for the sustain- The farming press most frequently framed sustainable able agricultural practices such as reduced tillage and using agricultural practices around agronomic and economic legumes in rotation, reporters were more likely to interview aspects, such as increased yields and productivity, with little farmers, who reported both positive and negative aspects of focus on environmental benefits. The farmers that we inter - the practice. This could indicate that, where money is to be viewed mentioned their main reasons for trying sustainable made by agribusiness for promoting specific products, like 1 3 762 N. A. Rust et al. precision agricultural technology, the farming press covers its readers. The Diffusion of Innovations theory suggests these products in a more favourable light than with prac- that, in order for a new behaviour to be adopted, the first tices that are more focused on changes in management. In steps in the process are to gather knowledge and be per- 1989, Reisner and Hays undertook a survey of agricultural suaded (Rogers 2003). The farming press could therefore journalists to determine how advertising pressure affected act as an enabler of increased knowledge transfer around reporting. They found that reporters were concerned with sustainable agricultural practices, where we propose that the pressures that the advertising industry had on agricul- interested farmers then seek additional information from tural journalism and concluded that “advertising abuses are a the farming press in order to be persuaded whether to try clear and present danger” to farming press objectivity (Reis- the new practice. Farmers, in general, place most trust in ner and Hays 1989). Lodgson (1992, p. 54) noted “collusion the farming advice from other farmers and are more likely between advertisers and editors is a clear and present dan- to act on advice from farmers than non-farmers (Rust et al. ger, particularly in times when publications are struggling 2020b). Therefore, it could be useful for journalists and economically”, suggesting it is not the media per se who editors to consider sourcing more balanced interviewees, decide how to frame sustainable agriculture but rather the particularly from other farmers, with less reliance on agri- advertisers who coerce the farming press into altering cov- business sources. erage of these topics. Future studies could repeat a similar methodology to Reisner and Hays (1989) to interview farm- ing journalists and editors to understand how they choose Conclusion topics to cover and the extent to which advertisers influence this choice and the framing they use. The media have the power to set public and political agendas When it came to understanding what prompted farmers to (Wanta et al. 2004). The farming press can shape farmer try sustainable agricultural practices, a few farmers that we agendas too so they could be an important influencer in interviewed reported they innovated based on reading about farmer decision making and may influence uptake of sus- the new practice or technology in the farming press, though tainable agricultural practices. However, in our study, whilst this was rare. Most farmers interviewed required additional the salience of sustainable agricultural topics has risen since verification from trusted sources such as farmers they knew 2009, and most farmers interviewed in our study used the and respected to triangulate the information, as shown else- farming press as a source of agricultural information, many where with how the general public corroborates news arti- farmers said they were not motivated to try more sustain- cles (Zaryan 2017). To many of the farmers we interviewed, able practices solely by reading the farming press alone. the farming press was an important source of information Instead, the farmers we interviewed relied more heavily on to learn about new agricultural topics, suggesting the farm- other sources, such as trusted and empathetic farmers, to ing press does play a role in awareness raising, but most influence their decision to innovate. It is therefore not clear respondents treated the articles with suspicion, especially the extent to which the farming press has influenced farm- if they felt articles were written primarily to promote com- ers in using more sustainable agricultural practices. It could panies or products. Trust in the generalised media by the be that farmers, as customers of the farming press, influ- public is at a low (Newman et al. 2020), which could mean ence the agenda of the agricultural media (Delshad 2012), that the ability for the media to set agendas could also have or that farmers and the media influence each other. Whilst diminished. However, given that individuals are indirectly the farming press may not frequently directly change farmer influenced by their environment in ways they may perhaps behaviour, we have found its importance in raising aware- not directly be cognisant of, it is possible that the farming ness of sustainable agricultural issues, which is one step in press could subtly change attitudes and behaviour of farm- the process of adopting an innovation. This awareness rais- ers in ways that farmers may not be immediately aware of. ing process can direct farmers to further explore new ideas More research is needed on this to determine the extent to and practices in their journey of knowledge generation on which the farming press indirectly influences farmer behav - sustainable agriculture. iour and future studies would benefit from larger, random Supplementary information The online version of this article (https: // sample sizes. doi.org/10.1007/s1046 0-020-10186 -7) contains supplementary mate- That the farming press has been shown in this study to rial, which is available to authorized users. be a common source of information for farmers indicatesits potential for setting agendas on sustainable agricultural top- ics and, as salience of articles on sustainable agriculture have risen, it is possible that this has had a knock-on effect to raise awareness of sustainable agricultural practices amongst 3 Though, as mentioned above, could also reflect farmer behaviour rather than be influencing it. 1 3 Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption 763 Acknowledgements This research was funded by the European Union Defra. 2018. Farm structure survey 2013: focus on agricultural labour Horizon 2020 project grants SolACE (727247) and SoilCare (677407). in England and the United Kingdom. London, UK: Defra. Defra. 2019. Farm practices survey 2018—England. London, UK: Defra. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- Delshad, A.B. 2012. Revisiting “Who influences whom?” Agenda set- bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- ting on biofuels. Congress and the Presidency 39: 177–198. tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long Delshad, A.B., and L. Raymond. 2013. Media framing and public atti- as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, tudes toward biofuels. Review of Policy Research 30: 190–210. provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes Dicks, L.V., D.C. Rose, F. Ang, S. Aston, A.N.E. Birch, N. Boatman, were made. The images or other third party material in this article are E.L. Bowles, et al. 2019. What agricultural practices are most included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated likely to deliver “sustainable intensification” in the UK? Food and otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in Energy Security 8: e00148. the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not Downs, A. 1972. Up and down with ecology—the “issue-attention permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will cycle.” The Public Interest 28: 38–50. need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a Ehlers, M.H., and L.A. Sutherland. 2016. Patterns of attention to copy of this licence, visit http://creativ ecommons .or g/licenses/b y/4.0/. renewable energy in the British farming press from 1980 to 2013. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54: 959–973. Emmel, N. 2013. Purposeful sampling. In Sampling and choosing References cases in qualitative research: a realist approach, ed. Nick Emmel, 33–45. London, UK: Sage Publications. Entman, R.M. 2007. Framing bias: media in the distribution of power. ABC. 2020a. Farmers weekly. ABC. https ://www.abc.org.uk/produ Journal of Communication 57: 163–173. ct/2513. Accessed 19 Jan 2020. Evenson, R.E., and D. Gollin. 2003. Assessing the impact of the green ABC. 2020b. Farmers guardian. ABC. https ://www.abc.org.uk/produ revolution, 1960 to 2000’. Science 300: 758. ct/3076. Accessed 19 Jan 2020. Farr, R.M. 1993. Theory and method in the study of social representa- Adams, A., A. Harf, and R. Ford. 2014. Agenda setting theory: a cri- tions. In Empirical approaches to social representations, ed. G.M. tique of maxwell McCombs & Donald Shaw’s theory in Em Grif- Breakwell and D.V. Canter, 15–38. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. fin’s a first look at communication theory. Meta Communicate Feliciano, D., C. Hunter, B. Slee, and P. Smith. 2014. Climate change 4: 1–15. mitigation options in the rural land use sector: Stakeholders’ per- Ahchong, K., and R. Dodds. 2012. Anthropogenic climate change spectives on barriers, enablers and the role of policy in North East coverage in two Canadian newspapers, the Toronto Star and the Scotland. Environmental Science and Policy 44: 26–38. Globe and Mail, from 1988 to 2007. Environmental Science and Gitlin, T. 1980. The whole world is watching. Berkeley, CA: University Policy 15: 48–59. of California Press. Alskaf, K., D.L. Sparkes, S.J. Mooney, S. Sjögersten, and P. Wilson. Greenberg, J., and S. Hier. 2009. CCTV surveillance and the poverty of 2020. The uptake of different tillage practices in England. Soil Use media discourse: a content analysis of canadian newspaper cover- and Management 36: 27–44. age. Canadian Journal of Communication 34: 461–486. Batel, S. 2020. Re-presenting the rural in the UK press: an exploration Gurevitch, M., and M. Levy. 1985. Mass communication review year- of the construction, contestation and negotiation of media dis- book, vol. 2. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Publications. courses on the rural within post-carbon energy transitions. Energy Hays, R.G., and A.E. Reisner. 1990. Feeling the heat from advertisers: Policy 138: 111286. farm magazine writers and ethical pressures. Journalism Quar- Baumgart-Getz, A., L.S. Prokopy, and K. Floress. 2012. Why farm- terly 67: 936–942. ers adopt best management practice in the United States: a meta- Hays, R.G., and A.E. Reisner. 1991. Farm journalists and advertiser analysis of the adoption literature. Journal of Environmental influence: pressures on ethical standards. Journalism Quarterly Management 96: 17–25. 68: 172–178. Beal, G.M., J.M. Bohlen, L. Coleman, H.G. Lionberger, E.A. Wilk- Kellstedt, P.M. 2000. Media framing and the dynamics of racial policy ening, R.M. Dimit, N. Gross, and B. Ryan. 1956. The diffusion preferences. American Journal of Political Science 44: 245. process: special report N 18, agricultural experiment station 18, Klerkx, L., and A. Proctor. 2013. Beyond fragmentation and discon- agricultural experiment station. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State College. nect: networks for knowledge exchange in the english land man- Berg, G. 2009. Plant-microbe interactions promoting plant growth agement advisory system. Land Use Policy 30: 13–24. and health: perspectives for controlled use of microorganisms in Krauss, M., R. Ruser, T. Müller, S. Hansen, P. Mäder, and A. Gattinger. agriculture. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 84: 11–18. 2017. Impact of reduced tillage on greenhouse gas emissions and Braun, V., V. Clarke, and N. Hayfield. 2015. Thematic analysis. In soil carbon stocks in an organic grass-clover ley—winter wheat Qualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods, cropping sequence. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment ed. Jonathan A. Smith, 222–248. London, UK: Sage Publications. 239: 324–333. Campbell, B.M., D.J. Beare, E.M. Bennett, J.M. Hall-Spencer, J.S.I. Kutter, T., S. Tiemann, R. Siebert, and S. Fountas. 2011. The role Ingram, F. Jaramillo, R. Ortiz, N. Ramankutty, J.A. Sayer, and of communication and co-operation in the adoption of precision D. Shindell. 2017. Agriculture production as a major driver of farming. Precision Agriculture 12: 2–17. the earth system exceeding planetary boundaries. Ecology and Lahmar, R. 2010. Adoption of conservation agriculture in Europe. Les- Society 22: 4. sons of the KASSA project. Land Use Policy 27: 4–10. Carlisle, L. 2016. Factors influencing farmer adoption of soil health Liu, X., A. Vedlitz, and L. Alston. 2008. Regional news portrayals of practices in the United States: a narrative review. Agroecology and global warming and climate change. Environmental Science and Sustainable Food Systems 40: 583–613. Policy 11: 379–393. de Vreese, C.H. 2005. News framing: theory and typology. Information Logsdon, G. 1992. Filling the white space between the ads. Agriculture Design Journal & Document Design 13 (1): 51. and Human Values 9: 54–59. 1 3 764 N. A. Rust et al. Lowe, P., and D. Morrison. 1984. Bad news or good news: environ- Selfa, T., A. Iaroi, and M. Burnham. 2015. Promoting ethanol in rural mental politics and the mass media. The Sociological Review 32: Kansas: local framings and cultural politics. Journal of Rural 75–90. Studies 39: 63–73. Lyytimäki, J. 2018. Renewable energy in the news: environmental, Shaw, E.F. 1979. Agenda-setting and mass communication theory. economic, policy and technology discussion of biogas. Sustain- Gazette 25: 96–105. able Production and Consumption 15: 65–73. Shaw, A. 2002. “It just goes against the grain”. Public understandings Marks, L.A., N. Kalaitzandonakes, L. Wilkins, and L. Zakharova. 2007. of genetically modified (GM) food in the UK. Public Understand - Mass media framing of biotechnology news. Public Understand- ing of Science 11: 273–291. ing of Science 16: 183–203. Shimoda, T., M.H. Heine, R.C. Woodhouse, and P. Rowlinson. 1992. McCombs, M.E., and S.I. Ghanem. 2001. The convergence of agenda From where do dairy farmers get their information? Proceedings setting and framing. In Framing public life: perspectives on media of the British Society of Animal Production 1972: 124–124. and our understanding of the social world, ed. S.D. Reese, O.H. Soon, Y.K., S.S. Malhi, R.L. Lemke, N.Z. Lupwayi, and C.A. Grant. Gandy, and A.E. Grant, 67–81. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum 2011. Effect of polymer-coated urea and tillage on the dynamics Associates. of available N and nitrous oxide emission from Gray Luvisols’. Merante, P., C. Dibari, R. Ferrise, B. Sánchez, A. Iglesias, J. Peter Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 90: 267–279. Lesschen, P. Kuikman, J. Yeluripati, P. Smith, and M. Bindi. 2017. Soroka, S.N. 2002. Issue attributes and agenda-setting by media, the Adopting soil organic carbon management practices in soils of public, and policymakers in Canada. International Journal of varying quality: implications and perspectives in Europe. Soil and Public Opinion Research 14: 264–285. Tillage Research 165: 95–106. Steede, G.M., C. Meyers, N. Li, E. Irlbeck, and S. Gearhart. 2019. A Naylor, R., W. Manley, D. Maye, G. Enticott, B. Ilbery, and A. Hamil- content analysis of antibiotic use in livestock in National U.S. ton-Webb. 2017. The framing of public knowledge controversies newspapers. Journal of Applied Communications 103 (1): 2237. in the media: a comparative analysis of the portrayal of badger Thomas, R.Z. 2011. Tilling new soil: coverage of organic agriculture vaccination in the english national, regional and farming press. in farm journal, successful farming, and progressive farmer from Sociologia Ruralis 57: 3–22. 1985 to 2005. Ohio, USA: Ohio University. Newman, N., R. Fletcher, A. Schulz, S. Andı, and R. Kleis Nielsen. Thomson, J., and L. Dininni. 2005. What the print media tell us about 2020. Reuters institute digital news report 2020. Oxford, UK: agricultural biotechnology: will we remember? choices: the maga- Reuters Institute and University of Oxford. zine of food. Farm & Resource Issues 20: 247. Nyström, M., J.B. Jouffray, A.V. Norström, B. Crona, P. Søgaard Jør - Tilman, D., C. Balzer, J. Hill, and B.L. Befort. 2011. Global food gensen, S.R. Carpenter, V. Galaz. Bodin, and C. Folke. 2019. demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Pro - Anatomy and resilience of the global production ecosystem. ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108: 20260–20264. Nature 575 (7781): 98–108. Tourangeau, W. 2018. Power, discourse, and news media: examining Pezzullo, P.C., and R. Cox. 2017. Environmental communication and Canada’s GM alfalfa protests. Geoforum 91: 117–126. the public sphere, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Townsend, T.J., S.J. Ramsden, and P. Wilson. 2016. How do we cul- Poindexter, P., and M. McCombs. 2000. Research in mass communica- tivate in England? Tillage practices in crop production systems. tion: a practical guide. Boston: St Martins. Soil Use and Management 32: 106–117. Poore, J., and T. Nemecek. 2018. Reducing food’s environmental Ulrich-Schad, J.D., S. Garciá De Jalón, N. Babin, A. Pape, and L.S. impacts through producers and consumers. Science 360: 987–992. Prokopy. 2017. Measuring and understanding agricultural produc- Prager, K., and H. Posthumus. 2010. Socio-economic factors influenc- ers’ adoption of nutrient best management practices. Journal of ing farmers’ adoption of soil conservation practices in Europe. In Soil and Water Conservation 72: 506–518. Human dimensions of soil and water conservation. Napier, TL: Walter, G. 1995. A “curious blend”: the successful farmer in American Nova Science Publishers. farm magazines, 1984–1991. Agriculture and Human Values 12: Reisner, A.E., and R.G. Hays. 1989. Media ethics and agriculture: 55–68. advertiser demands challenge farm press’s ethical practices. Agri- Walter, G. 1996. The ideology of success in major American farm culture and Human Values 6: 40–46. magazines, 1934–1991. Journalism and Mass Communication Roberts, M., W. Wanta, and T. Horng Dzwo. 2002. Agenda setting and Quaterly 73: 594–608. issue salience online. Communication Research 29 (4): 452–465. Wanta, W., G. Golan, and C. Lee. 2004. Agenda setting and inter- Rogers, E.M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations, 5th ed. New York: Free national news: media influence on public perceptions of foreign Press. nations. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 8: Rust, N.A. 2015. Media framing of financial mechanisms for resolv - 364–377. ing human–predator conflict in Namibia. Human Dimensions of Zahry, N.R., and J.C. Besley. 2019. Genetic engineering, genetic Wildlife 20: 440–453. modification, or agricultural biotechnology: does the term mat- Rust, N.A., P. Stankovics, R. Jarvis, J. de Vries, J. Ingram, J. Mills, ter? Journal of Risk Research 22: 16–31. J. Glikman, J. Parkinson, Z. Toth, and M.S. Reed. 2020. Have Zaryan, S. 2017. Truth and trust: how audiences are making sense of farmers had enough of experts? 3005. Newcastle, UK: Newcastle fake news. Lund, Sweden: Lund University. University. Rust, N.A., L. Ridding, C. Ward, B. Clark, L. Kehoe, M. Dora, M.J. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to Whittingham, et al. 2020. How to transition to reduced-meat diets jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. that benefit people and the planet. Science of the Total Environ- ment 718: 137208. Scheufele, D.A., and D. Tewksbury. 2007. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: the evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication 57: 9–20. 1 3 Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption 765 Niki Rust, PhD, is the Tees-Swale: naturally connected Programme Mark Reed, PhD, is a Professor based at the Thriving Natural Capital Manager. She is also the Founding Director of Be in the Change, a Challenge Centre, Department of Rural Economies, Environment & global non-profit www.beinthechange.club Society, Scotland′s Rural College (SRUC). Rebecca Jarvis, PhD, is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Auckland Julia Cooper, PhD, is based at the Institute for Agri-Food Innovation at University of Technology and an Honorary Research Fellow at the Newcastle University, where she is a Senior Lecturer in Soil Science. Sydney Institute of Marine Science 1 3
Agriculture and Human Values – Springer Journals
Published: Sep 1, 2021
Keywords: Agribusinesses; Content analysis; Farming press; Framing; Salience; Sustainable agriculture
You can share this free article with as many people as you like with the url below! We hope you enjoy this feature!
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.