This paper explores whether and how frames used within different sectors in Sweden concerned with bioenergy from forest products are driven by environmental objectives. It complements existing research on environmental policy integration (EPI) in bioenergy policies of political-administrative Swedish sectors by conducting a frame analysis of articles published in three journals in Sweden that represent the energy, agricultural and forestry sectors. Ten frames that were used consistently across the three sectors in the time period from 2001 to 2010 were identified. Environmental rhetoric, one of the prerequisites for EPI, was identified; however, it plays only a secondary role given that bioenergy frames focus mainly on economic objectives, presenting bioenergy as a means of increasing profitability.
AsplundT (2011) “Metaphors in climate discourse: an analysis of Swedish farm magazines”. Journal of Science Communication10: 1–8
2.
AsplundTHjerpeMWibeckV (2013) “Framings and coverage of climate change in Swedish specialized farming magazines”. Climatic Change117: 197–209
3.
BengtssonS (2002) “Partiklar och biobranslen, forskning pagar”. Energimagasinet7: 18
4.
BengtssonS (2003) “Fornybar energi pa trettio ar”. Energimagasinet6: 18
5.
BengtssonS (2006) “2005—Genombrott for pellets”. Energimagasinet1: 28
6.
BengtssonS (2009) “Svensk bioenergi snart storre an olja”. Energimagasinet1: 28
7.
ChristiansenC (2006) “Stort sug efter pellets fran Europa”. Land Skogsland22: 6
8.
Energimagasinet (2002) “Emissionskrav bor sattas som timmedelvarden”. Energimagasinet2: 32
9.
European Commission (2009) “Commisssion Decision of 30 June 2009 establishing a template for National Renewable Energy Action Plans under Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council”. Official Journal of the European UnionL182: 33–62
10.
European Commission (2009) “Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (Text with EEA relevance)”. Official Journal of the European UnionL140: 16–62
11.
FinonDPerezY (2007) “The social efficiency of instruments of promotion of renewable energies: a transaction-cost perspective”. Ecological Economics62: 77–92
12.
GabrielssonL (2004) “Marknaden for skogsbransle positiv aven for massaindustrin”. Land Skogsland17/04: 2
13.
Hallgren L, Ljunggren H, Ahnstrom J, Källström H N, 2010, “From conservation heroes to climate villains—how changes in social recognition may contribute to changed identities of farmers”, 9th European IFSA symposium, Vienna, Austria, 4–7 July, pp 1538–1547
14.
HertinJBerkhoutF (2003) “Analysing institutional strategies for environmental policy integration: the case of EU enterprise policy”. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning5: 39–56
15.
JensenT KJohnsenT J (2000) Sundhedsfremme i teori och praksis. En laere-, debat og brugsbok pci grundlag av teori och praksisbeskrivelser, Ringkobing Amt, Ringkobing: Sundhetsfremmeafdelningen
16.
JordanALenschowA (2010) “Environmental policy integration: a state of the art review”. Environmental Policy and Governance20: 147–158
17.
KleinschmitDSjostedtV (2014) “Between science and politics: Swedish newspaper reporting on forests in a changing climate”. Environmental Science & Policy35: 117–127
18.
Lafferty W, 2002, “Adapting government practice to the goals of sustainable development. Improving governance for sustainable development” OECD seminar, 22–23 November 2001; OECD, Paris, France.
19.
LaffertyWHovdenE (2003) “Environmental policy integration: towards an analytical framework”. Environmental Politics12: 1–22
20.
LindahlK BWestholmE (2012) “Future forests: perceptions and strategies of key actors”. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research27: 154–163
21.
MoserS C (2010) “Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions”. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change1: 31–53
22.
NilssonM (2005) “Learning, frames, and environmental policy integration: the case of Swedish energy policy”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy23: 207–226
NykvistA-C (2006) “Nykvist: Socialdemokraterna ar det nya landsbygdspartiet”. ATL15.09: 2
25.
PaulrajALadiAChenL (2008) “Inter-organizational communication as a relational competency: antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer-supplier relationships”. Journal of Operations Management26: 45–64
26.
PerssonA (2004) “Environmental policy integration: an introduction”. PINTS, Policy Integration for Sustainability, Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute, pp. 1–49
27.
PerssonM (2008) “Okad tillvaxt - ja tack”. Land Skogsland36: 2
28.
SchonD AReinM (1994) Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies, New York: Basic Books
29.
SegerstedtR (2006) “Mycket flis men lite ull”. Land Skogsland37: 2
30.
SjolandK (2006) “Dyr olja baddar for kol”. Land Skogsland28/292: 12
31.
SjolandK (2008) “Folkpartiet vill avskaffa subventioner pa biobranslen”. Land Skogsland28/29: 9
32.
Swedish Forest Agency, 2011, “Gender analysis of Swedish forest media report” Dnr 2011/2017, Swedish Forest Agency, Jonkoping, Sweden
SöderbergC (2008) “‘Much ado about nothing?’—energy forest cultivation in Sweden: how intersectoral policy coordination affects outcomes from EPI in multisectoral issues in Sweden: how intersectoral policy coordination affects charlotta so”. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning10: 381–403
35.
SöderbergC (2011a) Environmental Policy Integration in Bioenergy—Policy Learning Across Sectors and Levels?, Umea: Umea Universitet
36.
SöderbergC (2011b) “Institutional conditions for multi-sector environmental policy integration in Swedish bioenergy policy”. Environmental Politics20: 528–546
37.
SöderbergCEckerbergK (2013) “Rising policy conflicts in Europe over bioenergy and forestry”. Forest Policy and Economics33: 112–119
38.
The Swedish Government (2006) Pa vag mot ett oljefritt Sverige, Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Oil Commission
39.
The Swedish Government (2007) Rural Development Programme for Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Rural Affairs
40.
The Swedish Government (2009) An Integrated Climate and Energy Policy—Energy 2008/09:163, Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communications
41.
The Swedish Government (2010) The Swedish National Action Plan for the Promotion of the Use of Renewable Energy in Accordance with Directive 2009/28/EC and the Commission Decision of 30.06.2009, Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communications
42.
Vickers SirG (1983) The Art of Judgment: A study of Policy Making, London: Harper and Row
43.
WhitmarshLLorenzoniI (2010) “Perceptions, behavior and communication of climate change”. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change1: 158–161
