Damned If You Do, Dammed If You Don't: Debates on Dam Removal in the Swedish Media

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Dam removal is an increasingly common practice. Dams are removed for various reasons, with safety, economics, and ecosystem restoration being the most common. However, dam removals often cause controversy. Riparian land owners and local communities often have a negative view of removal, and their reasons vary. It may be the loss of recreational benefits such as swimming and boating, loss of cultural and historical context tied to the dam, or fear that removal may have a negative effect on aesthetic values. Because controversies are often picked up by local media, and media in itself is an important channel to build support around a cause, the way in which dam removals are reported and discussed in the media is likely to influence the debate. Here, we examine the ways in which proponents and opponents of dam removal frame the services provided by two contrasting ecosystems, i.e., an existing dam and the potential stream without a dam, by performing a media discourse analysis of the reasons given for removal and the reasons presented for the dam to remain in place. Our source material includes Internetbased newspaper articles and their associated public comments in four dam removal controversies in Sweden. Our analysis indicates that public opposition is not based on knowledge deficiency, where more information will lead to better ecological decision-making, as is sometimes argued in dam removal science; it is instead a case of different understandings and valuation of the environment and the functions it provides.

Manager perspectives on communication and public engagement in ecological restoration project success

“…Interviews were 41 to 138 minutes long (mean of 79 minutes). We followed a predetermined interview script built from local knowledge and related research (Gobster 1998, Lindlof and Taylor 2011, Druschke 2013), but we welcomed The authors took a content analysis approach (Montello and Sutton 2013) to the interview data, attending to the significant impacts of language and communication on natural resource management in participants' descriptions (Arnold et al 2012, Jørgensen andRenöfält 2012). As Arnold et al (2012) suggested, "Discourse is powerful; it is used to both understand and influence social-ecological systems."…”

Ecological and Social Dimensions of Ecosystem Restoration in the Nordic Countries

“…This can be associated with decreased profitability of former land use in an area, which provides an opportunity for restoration to a more natural state (Bossuyt et al 2001) or creation of new habitat types (Milgrom 2008). Hydropower production has considerable economic importance, and rivers used for this purpose are usually not available for ecological restoration unless power stations are in need of renovation or if permissions are terminated; in the latter cases, even dam removal can be possible (Lejon et al 2009, Jørgensen andRenöfält 2013). Similarly, large peatland Ecology and Society 18(4): 34 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss4/art34/ areas were drained in Finland in order to produce timber, but unsatisfactory results have generated discussions about peatland restoration also outside of protected areas (Ministry of Agriculture 2011).…”

Ecological and Social Aspects of Ecological Restoration: New Challenges and Opportunities for Northern Regions

“…Tolvanen et al (2012) concluded that better understanding of various preferences and trade-offs can enhance planning of sustainable land use in peatlands. Jørgensen and Renöfält (2012) used a similar approach by analyzing the controversies related to dam removal in Sweden as expressed in the media. They also found opposing views among stakeholders that were rooted in different framing of the valuation of streams with and without dams.…”