Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKeenan, C
dc.contributor.authorSaunders, C
dc.contributor.authorPrice, S
dc.contributor.authorSteve, H
dc.contributor.authorMcDonald, R
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-25T09:52:27Z
dc.date.issued2019-11-26
dc.description.abstractControl of bovine tuberculosis in cattle (bTB) in England and Wales is characterised by conversational and policy impasses, particularly in relation to badger culling. We created four online discussion groups comprising of badger cull supporters, cull-opponents, aligned antagonists (mixing supporters and opponents affiliated with farming or an environmental/conservation group) and non-aligned antagonists (mixing supporters and opponents who were not affiliated with a particular group). We held five different discussions with each grouping over the course of a week. We aimed to identify frames held by the opposing groupings within the bTB control controversy, which could either contribute to conflict and impasse, or alternatively could provide a potential conversational bridge between those who differed. Our analysis identified elements of the framings of the bTB control problem, which, particularly in the mixed groupings, lead to deadlock. We also identified some aspects of the framings which allowed those who differed to communicate together more effectively. We argue that these more transformative frames can be used to bridge conflict.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEconomic and Social Research Council (ESRC)en_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 26 November 2019en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/soru.12290
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/39762
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWiley / European Society for Rural Sociologyen_GB
dc.rights© 2019 The Authors. Sociologia Ruralis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society for Rural Sociology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
dc.subjectbadgers
dc.subjectbovine tuberculosis
dc.subjectconflict frames
dc.subjectconflict transformation
dc.subjectpolarisation
dc.subjectenvironmental conflict
dc.titleFrom Conflict to Bridges: Towards Constructive use of Conflict Frames in the Control of Bovine Tuberculosisen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2019-11-25T09:52:27Z
dc.identifier.issn0038-0199
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Wiley via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.journalSociologia Ruralisen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-11-17
exeter.funder::Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)en_GB
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-11-17
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2019-11-22T17:37:42Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2020-01-20T11:41:22Z
refterms.panelCen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2019 The Authors. Sociologia Ruralis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society for Rural Sociology.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2019 The Authors. Sociologia Ruralis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society for Rural Sociology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.