Abstract

This study reviews how the issue of ash dieback has been placed on the political agenda in the UK, a country where the disease has affected one of the largest national extents, thus representing a particularly severe case. Comparisons are made between how the scientific community framed the ash dieback threat and the resulting response strategy and how both the media and the British government framed the problem. Representing one example of media framing, the study analyses one British newspaper’s coverage of the disease and the response strategies (the Daily Telegraph). The analysis highlights a gap between the biologically rooted perspective and the perspective of policymakers, where policy must manoeuvre between disparate viewpoints and needs. Crucially, none of Pautasso et al.’s (Biol Conserv 158:37–49, 2013) five plant-science-based solutions were explicitly adopted by the British Government in their response strategy to ash dieback disease. The same is true of the biological control recommendations offered by Kirisits et al. (J Agric Ext Rural Dev 4(9):230–235, 2012). Instead, the government adopted a broader, more comprehensive approach than that recommended by plant scientists. The present analysis thus provides an example of a holistic perspective on the multiple competing factors that policymakers must navigate in their attempts to delineate action. It highlights instances in which proposed biological responses were rendered less applicable by a failure to understand the agenda-setting process and the policy-making arena. The present findings suggest that an improved understanding of the factors influencing agenda setting and policy action is essential to arriving at a more effective and integrated understanding of responses to biological threats.

Highlights

  • Introduction and aimThere is acknowledgement that regulations on plant trade need to be reformed (e.g., Santini et al 2013)

  • The ash dieback fungal disease, known as C. fraxinea, was first found in February 2012 during a routine inspection of a nursery in Buckinghamshire, England (Daily Telegraph 2012a; Rowley 2012). ‘‘Officials say the disease is a ‘‘serious concern’’ in Britain after symptoms were found in a consignment of 2000 young trees imported from Holland by a nursery’’ (Daily Telegraph 2012a)

  • The nursery had imported the trees in November 2011 and had already sold some of its stock ‘‘by mail order to 90 different gardeners and firms nationwide’’ (Daily Telegraph 2012a)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Introduction and aimThere is acknowledgement that regulations on plant trade need to be reformed (e.g., Santini et al 2013). The urgent need for action has been expressed by a large number of plant health scientists, for example in the Montesclaros Declaration. This is a joint declaration made by a group of international scientists who proposed ‘‘a phasing out of all trade in plants and plant products determined to be of high risk to forested ecosystems but low overall economic benefit’’. ‘‘The gradual expansion and high intensity of the ash dieback epidemic in Europe may suggest that H. pseudoalbidus is an invasive alien organism’’ (Timmermann et al 2011: 14; cf Bakys et al 2009) Concurrent developments, such as climate change and increasing globalization, will likely result in similar invasive species occurrences becoming more common, both as natural conditions change and as trade increases (Pautasso et al 2013)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call