Mismatch between media coverage and research on invasive species: The case of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Argentina

BALLARI, SEBASTIÁN A.; BARRIOS-GARCÍA, M. NOELIA

PLOS ONE

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE

Año: 2022 vol. 17

1932-6203

Invasive species are a pervasive driver of global change with increasing media coverage. Media coverage and framing can influence both invasive species management and policies, as well as shed light on research needs. Using the wild boar (Sus scrofa) invasion in Argentina as a case study, we conducted a content analysis of media coverage and scientific articles. Specifically, we compared news and scientific articles based on their emphasis: ecological, economic, and health impacts and the overall perception portrayed in the news: “positive” when the articles emphasized benefits from wild boar and “negative” when focused on damage and/or loss. A literature search using Google news, Web of Science, Scielo, and Google Scholar yielded a total of 194 news articles and 37 research papers on wild boar in Argentina. More than half of the news articles focused on economic impacts of wild boar (56%) such as sport hunting, illegal hunting, and road accidents; while 27% focused on ecological impacts, and 10% on health impacts. In contrast, the majority of the scientific articles (65%) focused on ecological impacts of wild boar on native species and ecosystems; while 21% were related to health impacts and only 8.3% of scientific articles were related to economic impacts. This mismatch between media and science reveals a disconnection between social and scientific interests in wild boar and their management in Argentina, and it provides insights to research needs and prevention of management conflicts. Additionally, we found that 66.8% of news articles focused on “negative” aspects of wild boar, while 33.2% of news articles portrayed “positive” perceptions. This finding is very important because the management of invasive species such as wild boar usually requires lethal techniques, and the success of the programs depend on favorable social and political support. Good science communication is therefore key to helping scientists and managers perform more effective management actions.