Can Print Media Discourse Drive Forest Policy Change in Bangladesh?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest issues are widely discussed in Bangladeshi print media. Different policy actors (both central and peripheral) participate in the media discussion to express their opinions on and interests in forest issues. The media play an important role in the construction of the social, environmental and economic context of the Bangladeshi forest sector where forest policies are formulated and modified. Nevertheless, while extensive research has been carried out to explain the formation of the environmental discourse, very little research has been done on the specific relationship between the policy outcomes and media discourses. This study tries to determine the influence of media discourse on forest policy changes in Bangladesh. It analyses the media discourse from 1989 to 2009 in the “The Daily Ittefaq”, a reputed Bangladeshi print medium of Bangladesh, along with Bangladeshi forest policy documents from 1989 to 2010. A quantitative, qualitative content analysis, followed by expert interviews of forest policy decision makers was the chosen methodology. The empirical findings of the study reveal that media discourses do not drive the forest policy change in Bangladesh; rather the international concurrent forest discourses trigger symbolic forest policy changes in Bangladesh.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".