ABSTRACT The concept of woodland key habitats is well-established in northern Europe, denoting sites in the forest landscape with particularly high biodiversity. In Sweden, woodland key habitats have been inventoried on individual forest owner’s land by the Swedish Forest Agency since 1993. Recently, various actors have questioned the woodland key habitat concept and its policy implications. To investigate how framing of the concept has changed over time we conducted a media analysis based on theories of collective action frames. The analysis covered the period 1991–2018 and a total of 293 articles in daily newspapers. Our results showed that, over time, woodland key habitats have mostly been framed by government agencies, journalists and environmental organizations as suffering as a result of forestry practices and that nature conservation is the solution to this problem. Actors presenting other or conflicting frames are not as common and they occur mostly when the frequency of articles is high. However, it is noteworthy that individual forest owners sometimes framed themselves as suffering economically from the woodland key habitats, which contrasts with the dominant framing. There were no large differences between national and regional newspapers in the framing of woodland key habitats.

中文翻译：

---

瑞典媒体对林地主要栖息地的构图——构图如何随着时间的推移而发生变化？

摘要 林地关键栖息地的概念在北欧已经确立，表示森林景观中生物多样性特别高的地点。在瑞典，自 1993 年以来，瑞典森林局就对每个森林所有者的土地上的林地关键栖息地进行了清查。最近，各种行为者对林地关键栖息地的概念及其政策含义提出了质疑。为了研究概念的框架如何随时间变化，我们基于集体行动框架理论进行了媒体分析。该分析涵盖了 1991 年至 2018 年期间以及日报上的 293 篇文章。我们的结果表明，随着时间的推移，林地主要栖息地大多由政府机构制定，记者和环保组织因林业实践而遭受痛苦，而自然保护是解决这一问题的方法。Actor 呈现其他或冲突的框架并不常见，它们主要发生在文章频率较高的情况下。然而，值得注意的是，个别森林所有者有时认为自己在经济上受到林地主要栖息地的影响，这与占主导地位的框架形成鲜明对比。国家和地区报纸在林地关键栖息地的框架上没有太大差异。值得注意的是，个别森林所有者有时认为自己在经济上受到林地主要栖息地的影响，这与占主导地位的框架形成鲜明对比。国家和地区报纸在林地关键栖息地的框架上没有太大差异。值得注意的是，个别森林所有者有时认为自己在经济上受到林地主要栖息地的影响，这与占主导地位的框架形成鲜明对比。国家和地区报纸在林地关键栖息地的框架上没有太大差异。