Environmental advocacy and News: How strategic messaging influenced government policy on Mabira...

This paper is part of a research thesis submitted to University of Leicester, United Kingdom in October 2012 in

partial fulfilment for the Award of a Master of Arts in Mass Communication.

1

Environmental advocacy and News: How strategic messaging influenced government policy

on Mabira Forest in Uganda.

By:

Godwin Bonge Muhwezi,

University of Leicester, United Kingdom

October, 2012

Abstract

In August 2006, the Ugandan Cabinet Ministers approved a proposal to give away 7,100

hectares of Mabira Forest, one of the country’s few remaining natural forests, to a businessman

for sugarcane growing. While the government the Cabinet’s decision was loaded with economic

justifications, civil Society organisations began organising the public to resist the government’s

decision. The organisations worked with the media to raise public awareness on issues

surrounding the give away of the forest in what turned out to be the most successful

environmental advocacy campaigns in Uganda to date. The study examines how the civil society

and environmental advocacy groups worked with the media to ensure that the government

reversed its decision to give away part of Mabira Forest.

Key words: environmental advocacy, environmental communication, environmental journalism,

civil society

Introduction

On his trip to Africa, in 1907, Sir Winston Churchill famously referred to Uganda as the “Pearl of

Africa” owing to its good climate, green vegetation, diverse wildlife, and beautiful landscape.

While a lot may have changed since Churchill’s first visit to Africa, the Convention for

Biological Diversity (CBD), in 2010, ranked Uganda among the top ten countries in the world

with unique biological diversity. “Uganda is a country of exceptional diversity because of its

position in the zone of overlap between the East African savannah and the West African rain

forests” (CBD, 2010) 1.

However, increasing encroachment on protected areas and the government’s laxity in enforcing

environmental protection measures have threatened to turn the “Pearl of Africa” tag into an

ancient joke. “The country’s forests are disappearing at twice the rate of sub-Saharan Africa as a

1 http://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/default.shtml?country=ug#status

http://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/default.shtml?country=ug#status



2

whole and nine times faster than those of the rest of the world. Water bodies have been polluted

and swamps and wetlands drained,” (SAIIA, 2011)2 . The problem is further compounded by the

high population growth estimated at 3.2 per cent per year which makes Uganda “one of the

countries with the highest population growth in the world, adding a net 1 million people each

year and doubling every 20 years” 3(SAIIA, 2011)

In contrast, Uganda has ratified a number of international environmental treaties and conventions

which form a bedrock of the country’s environmental policy. The country has several bodies

responsible for environmental protection including the National Environmental Management

Authority (NEMA), The National Forestry Authority (NFA), operating as autonomous bodies

under the Ministry of Water and Environment, The Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) under the

Ministry of Tourism.

The apparent disconnect between environmental policies and actual environmental protection has

given rise to a number of environmental advocacy organisations and civil society groups, each

seeking to hold the government accountable in its stewardship of the national environmental

policy. The Civil Society Organisations have often criticised the government for lack of

commitment to perform its constitutional duty of protecting the environment while the

government insists that the apportioning idle land (especially in wetlands and forest reserves) is

part of its duty to promote economic development and create more jobs.

The tense relationship between the government and the civil society erupted in April 2007

following a decision by the Cabinet Ministers to the give away part of Mabira Forest, in what

turned out to be the biggest civil opposition to the government’s plan to mutilate one of Uganda’s

last remaining natural forests.

In August 2006, the Ugandan Cabinet approved a proposal to give away 7,100 hectares of the

30,000 hectares of Mabira Forest to the Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited (SCOUL) for

sugar cane growing. The company which had been operating in the country since 1924 had

requested government for the extra hectares to grow more sugarcane to increase sugar production

at a time when Ugandans were struggling to deal with skyrocketing sugar prices as a result of low

production.

In arriving at their decision, the Cabinet Ministers were convinced that giving away part of

Mabira Forest would enable the country to have enough sugar stocks to meet the growing

demand while at the same time generating more government revenue in form of taxes. While the

decision by Cabinet Ministers was loaded with economic justifications, it offered little to

convince ordinary Ugandans that the government had their best interests at heart. The

2 http://www.saiia.org.za/opinion-analysis/uganda-neglect-of-environmental-sector-threatens-scorched-earth


http://www.saiia.org.za/opinion-analysis/uganda-neglect-of-environmental-sector-threatens-scorched-earth




3

government’s previous actions had demonstrated lack of resolve in dealing with increasing

environmental degradation.

For instance, in 1997, the government “degazetted over 1000 hectares of Namanve Forest

Reserve for the development of an industrial estate” (SAIIA, 2011)4. In 2001, Butamira Forest

was also degazetted and given to Kakira Sugar Works to grow sugar cane (Twesigye, 2008).

Therefore, when the New Vision, one of the country’s dailies, on April, 21st, 2007 first wrote the

story that the Cabinet had approved the given away of part of Mabira Forest to Sugar Corporation

of Uganda Limited (SCOUL), the civil society organisations begun mobilising the public to

oppose the government’s decision.

Leading civil society organisations and environmental advocacy groups organised themselves

into a coalition: “The Save Mabira Forest Coalition” and launched a media campaign that turned

out to be the most successful environmental advocacy campaigns in Uganda to date. As Twesigye

(2008; pp4) the campaign “was seen as a galvanising civil cause, perhaps the largest ever in the

history of independent Uganda”.

The sustained media coverage of the campaign elicited public out cry and brought into focus

some of the salient issues in the give away of one of Uganda’s remaining natural forests – Mabira

Forest – which culminated into public demonstrations that forced the government to rescind its

decision to de-gazette Mabira Forest.

This study examined how the civil society and environmental advocacy groups worked with the

media to ensure that the executive arm of government reversed its decision to give away part of

Mabira Forest land to a sugarcane investor. While research on this particular campaign has

mainly focused on the role of civil society and environmental advocacy groups in influencing

government policy, there is little or no published research on the role of the media and the

interplay between the media and civil society in guiding public debate.

A content analysis of the coverage of the Mabira Forest story in The New Vision and Daily

Monitor, the country’s two leading dailies newspapers, was carried out. It covered the period

when the story first broke up to the time when the government rescinded its decision to give way

part of Mabira Forest. Questionnaires were also distributed to six civil society groups that were

actively involved in the campaign. The purpose was to understand the strategies civil society

groups used to generate media interest in the Mabira Forest story. The study provides lessons to

environmental advocates and communicators on how to influence public policy and ensure

equitable use and protection of the environment and natural resources.

From the findings, it was established that the symbiotic relationship between the media and the

civil society organisations under the Save Mabira Coalition helped to keep the story in the public





4

domain. The involvement of SCOUL, a major sugar company, and the Cabinet also increased the

appeal of the story to the media which sustained media coverage until the government backed

down on its proposal.

Theoretical Perspectives

This study has been contextualised within four theoretical perspectives namely: Agenda Setting,

Framing, News Source theory, and the Gate keeping model. The theoretical perspectives were

chosen given that the study sought to understand the agenda-setting function of the media vis-à-

vis the ability of the civil society organisations to frame issues around the Mabira Forest debate

in an attempt generate media interest.

Agenda Setting Theory:

The core idea of the agenda-setting theory, according to McQuail (2010; pp513), is that “news

media indicate to the public what the main issues of the day are and this is reflected in what the

public perceives as the main issues”. It thus forms “an essential part of advocacy and attempts to

influence public opinion” (ibid.). However, according to him, “the theory tends to ignore the fact

that persuasive campaigns have small or no effects”. McQuail observes that, “evidence is

insufficient to show causal connection between various issue agendas” (ibid.). As such he posits

that “there is need to know the content of party programmes, evidence of public opinion change

over time in a given section of the public (preferably panel data), plus content analysis showing

media attention to different issues in the relevant period. There is also need to for some indication

of relevant media use by the public concerned” (ibid.).

A content analysis of media coverage of Mabira Forest story and subsequent public reaction

judged from letters to the editor and opinion articles reveals the trend of the coverage helped the

public understand the salient issues surrounding the Mabira Forest debate and it helped to inform

public opinion. The subsequent violent demonstrations during which the Asian community

became soft targets can be attributed to the apparent negative tone of the coverage and the

particular framing of the Asian businessman, Mehta, as a selfish and arrogant man who did not

care about the plight of many Ugandans.

Framing

According McQuail (2010; pp 380) “framing is a way of giving some overall interpretation to

isolated items of fact”. He observes that, “in journalistic contexts, stories are given meaning by

reference to some particular news value that connects one event with other similar ones” (ibid.).

Entman cited in McQuail summarises the then main aspects of framing by saying that, “frames

define problems, diagnose causes, make moral judgements and suggest remedies”. According to

him, “when news sources supply inform to news media, then it arrives with a built-in frame that

suits the purpose of the source and it is unlikely to be objective” (ibid).

Capella and Jamieson cited in McQuail posit that “news frames activate certain inferences, ideas,

judgements and contrasts concerning issues, policies and politicians” (pp511). According to him

“to get the real value of the theory a researcher needs to consider both news framing and audience

framing or interpretations of the framed news considering that the framing is often aimed at



5

influencing audience attitudes and opinion, it is therefore important to understand the audience’s

interpretation of the framed news”(ibid).

While analysis of the audience’s interpretation of framed news could not be analysed, the

subsequent public reaction was enough to make conclusions that in this case framing influenced

audience opinion. Content analysis showed that the news media portrayed the owner of SCOUL,

an Indian businessman, Mehta, as an arrogant selfish chap who did not care about the public

outcry regarding Mabira Forest. This in turn created public disdain for the rest of the Asian

community living in Uganda. The Association of Indians in Uganda failed in their attempt to

deflect such framing to just Mehta as an individual. It also reveals the complexities in the theory.

While news sources could have attempted to frame Mehta as an arrogant and selfish

businessman, the public drew ire in their own interpretations that Mehta was the true embodiment

of an average Indian.

News Source Theory

McQuail (2010; pp321) observes that, “news of all kinds depend on having a readily available

supply of source material”. According to him, “relations with news sources are essential to news

media and they often constitute a very active two-way process. The news media are always

looking for suitable content and content, not always suitable, is always looking for an outlet in

the news”.

McQuail’s assertions reveal the “love-and-hate” relationships that sometimes exist between news

journalists and news sources. It is a symbiotic relationship that once it is well cultivated, it then it

results into a lasting mutually beneficial relationship. As McQuail, (2010; pp321) observers,

“news people also have their own preferred sources and are also linked to prominent figures by

institutional means – press conferences, publicity agents, and so on”.

The theory puts into context the environmental strategies that the civil society organisations used

to cultivate a relationship with the media. Leaking supposedly confidential documents to the

media such as Cabinet memos and minutes of secret meetings, the civil society became a trusted

ally that the media did want to disappoint. This is reflected in the coverage of the Mabira Forest

story as the media took information from civil society as gospel truth without questioning the

validity of some of the claims therein. The media for instance covered the story as though the

forest was to be cut down the next day yet the process of de-gazetting a protected area would first

require approval from parliament. As McQuail (2010; pp322) observes, “the practice of

validating news reports by reference to dependable sources generally gives most weight to

established authority and conventional wisdom however it is an almost inevitable form of

unintended bias in mainstream news media, it can end up as consistent ideological bias concealed

behind the mask of objectivity”.

Gate keeping Theory

According McQuail (2010; pp 558) “gate keeping refers to the initial selection of news and later

editorial processing of event reports in news organisations. News media have to decide what

events to admit through the gates of the media on grounds of their newsworthiness and other



6

criteria.” He asserts that, “weak points are its implications of there being one initial gate area and

one main set of selection criteria, its simple view of the supply of news, and its tendency to

individualise decision making” (McQuail, 2010; pp309).

In an attempt to deal with some theories shortfalls, Shoemaker, according to McQuail “draws

attention to the role of advertisers, public relations, pressure groups, plus varied sources and news

managers in influencing decisions”. According to her, gate keeping “usually involves multiple

and successive acts of selection over the period of news production” (ibid).

While the study did not fully investigate how the media carried out its gate-keeping function, it

provided a context to understand why certain messages received more prominence in the media

than others. The amplification of issues related to the plight of Mabira at the expense of the

government’s justifications for giving away part of Mabira Forest relates to the gate-keeping role

of the media. The presence of kickers such as “land bonanza” especially in Daily Monitor was an

attempt by the media through their Gate keeping role to enhance the significance of the Mabira

Forest story.

Importance of Mabira Forest

Mabira Forest is one the few remaining natural forests in Uganda. “It is habitat to about 312

species of trees and shrubs, 287 bird species, 199 species of butterfly and 97 large moth species”

(Twesigye, 2008; pp4). Mabira Forest is revered for its position in the Lake Victoria catchment

area. Mabira Forest is “a carbon sink for the Kampala-Jinja industrial area and a climate modifier

for the central region” (Twesigye, 2008; pp4).

The Forest is a cherished “cultural and spiritual centre for the Baganda and Basoga ethnic groups.

School curricula feature it as the most expansive forest resource in central Uganda”(ibid). Local

communities derive livelihood from the natural forest in form of “food, energy, medicine and

climate modification for agriculture” (Twesigye, 2008; pp4). He observes that therefore the local

communities are most “particularly affected by the destruction of forests and other natural

resources”.

Environmental Policy in Uganda

As earlier observed, Uganda has some of the most progressive environmental policies in Africa.

The National Environment Management Policy is one of the central pillars on which

environmental legislation is built. As Akello (2007; pp22) observes, “the policy provides a

framework under which several sectoral policies were developed which the 1995 Water Policy,

the 1996 National Wetlands Management Policy, the 1996 Wildlife Policy, the 2000 Fisheries

Policy, the 2001 Forestry Policy as well as “several district environment management policies”. It

has also informed subsequent development policies as the 2004/5-2007/8 Poverty Eradication

Action Plan (PEAP) and the Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA) (ibid).



7

Article 237 of the 1995 Constitution commits the government to “…hold in trust for the people

and protect, inter alia, natural lakes, rivers, wetlands, forest reserves ….for ecological and

touristic purposes for the common good of all citizens” (NFA, 2005; pp3).

Media landscape in Uganda

The media landscape in the country, at the moment, “is one was of the most vibrant and diverse

in Uganda’s history following the government’s decision to liberalise in early 1990s Sewanyana”

(2007; pp 9).

Although the government still maintains ownership in some broadcast and print media, the

liberalisation policy allowed many private enterprises to thrive, making the country’s media

landscape one of the most vibrant in East Africa. As Sewanyana (2007; pp9) observes,

“liberalization and adoption of the free market policy, the number of media outlets; print,

broadcast, and new media – exploded.” He observes that, in early1990s, “Uganda had one radio

station and one TV station which were state-owned”. But by April 2007, “the number of

privately-owned radio and television stations had increased to 145 radio stations and 12 TV

stations, in addition to pay-to-view satellite television channels” (ibid.).

He observes that “the print media in Uganda, which had suffered under previous regimes was

revived and flourished under the new, liberal media policy, topping seventy new registered

publications by the late 1990s”(ibid.). However, the government appears to be uncomfortable

with the vibrant media. The government has enacted or is in the process of enacting retrogressive

legislations all aimed at controlling the “errant” media. As Sewanyana (2007; pp9) observes that

“the government is introducing a diverse media regulatory framework to check such liberalized

media industry.”

As such, according to him, Uganda’s rankings in media freedom have been falling since 2005.

Reporters without Borders, a global watchdog for the media, “in 2006 in its Annual Press

Freedom Index, ranked Uganda 116 out of 168 dropping from 80th

the previous year”. Freedom

House, “in its 2007 Annual report on Press freedom ranked Uganda 116th out of 169 countries, a

drop from 111th in 2006” (Sewanyana, 2007; pp9). The fall in rankings reveal a government that

is increasingly becoming disillusioned with the media and is therefore attempting exert more

control.

Environmental advocacy and the Media

Rauschmayer, et al. (2009) posit that both the cause of environmental problems and possibilities

for addressing them depend on human perceptions, attitudes and behaviour, which are linked to

values, preferences and beliefs about the world. According to them, the media is a “central arena

for amplifying environmental issues and can influence the course of policy”5.

5 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/17si.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/17si.pdf



8

Media advocacy refers to the “strategic use of news media coverage to influence opinions on

social or public policy questions” (O’Keefe, 2009; pp79). In Uganda, environmental advocates

used the media to generate debate around potential loss emphasising the uniqueness and the

appeal of Mabira Forest to citizens to generate public response. According to Twesigye (2008;

pp6), “the special place that Mabira enjoyed among Ugandans” helped to fuel the campaign. He

observes that putting it at the centre of a campaign about governance won people’s hearts.

Methodology

The study used triangulation of case study and content analysis.

Content Analysis

The content analysis for this study was held within the theoretical context of the agenda-setting

theory. It sought to show how well-crafted media campaigns can actually shape public opinion.

A content analysis of media coverage of the Save Mabira Forest campaign showed that the media

sustained media coverage of the campaign increased the public’s awareness of issues involved in

the give away of Mabira Forest, resulting into public demonstrations against the government’s

decisions. The media particular framing of the issue as though it was an Asian against ordinary

Ugandans, increased public disdain for the rest of the Asian community that they became

particular targets during the public demonstration resulting in the death of one of their own.

By using content analysis, according to Wimmer and Dominick (2010), “a researcher can identify

developments over time and study societal change”. Hansen (1998) observes that “Content

analysis can help provide some indication of relative prominences and absences of key

characteristics in media texts, but the inferences that can be drawn from such indications depend

entirely on the context and framework of interpretation by which texts are analysed and

circumscribed”. However Wimmer and Dominick (2010) observe that “content analysis can be

time consuming and expensive. The task of examining and categorising large volumes of content

is often laborious and tedious.”

This study examines media texts against communication campaign strategies used by civil

society organisations to establish whether the strategies had a relationship with the frequency of

stories and their interpretations by the media as it related to the debate on Mabira Forest give

away. Content analysis was used to assess the tone and quality of news coverage of the

campaign. However, the large volumes of both print and electronic coverage of the Mabira story

meant that the study could not exhaustively analyse all media archives. Electronic archives from

radio and television stations were difficult to find since such data had already been destroyed to

free up valuable electronic space. Archives from electronic media were also not readily available

in public libraries and other information management centres outside the media houses.

The study, therefore, focussed on the two newspapers as a representation of how the media

covered the Mabira Forest campaign. According to Audit Bureau of Circulation New Vision is

the highest selling English Daily followed by Daily Monitor. Patterns of media coverage in print

and electronic media in Uganda appeared to be similar. Therefore analysis one form of media-

newspapers- was considered to be representative enough.



9

This study examined media coverage of Mabira Forest debate in Uganda’s two leading English

dailies. The period of coverage was from March, 21st 2007 to April 4

th, 2007 and from April 10

th,

2007 to April 30th

, 2007. According to McQuail (2010; pp382) “significance is mainly indicated

by the sequencing of content and by the relative amount of space or time allocated”.

The most important news items are covered in the first three pages and also those that get more

space are considered important as well. For instance if a story appeared on page one, it was

considered to be more significant than that appeared on the middle pages. This was based on the

assumption that news vendors often display the front and the back of the newspaper. Issues in the

inside pages of a newspaper that require a readers’ attention are often promoted on the first page.

Most newspapers in Uganda reserve the last page which is also considered prominent for sports

news. The assumption is that the reader is often attracted to the first things that are noticed by the

eye. The front page of a newspaper is designed to attract the attention of a reader and influence

them to buy and read the newspaper. Therefore, a story that appears on the front page of a

newspaper is likely to be more read than one that appears in the middle pages.

The number of times the Mabira Story appeared in newspapers was also considered an important

factor in giving prominence to the story. This was based on the assumption that the number of

times a story is read is likely to have an influence on the perception and opinion a reader assigns

to a particular issue or event. If a story appeared most times in a newspaper, it is likely to be best

understood and appreciated by readers.

Related to this is when two factors of prominence are combined to give the story even greater

prominence. For instance the number of times the story appeared on page one. If a story appeared

in the newspaper most times it was considered to be more prominent than that which appeared

one or twice. Prominence was also determined by the amount of space given to a particular story.

The study assumed that a story on a full page will not only attract the attention of the reader but

will as well be more analytical and put into perspective some of the issues under discussion.

However, this assumption ignored the fact that readers may be most interest in short and punchy

stories and that they will ignore lengthy stories.

Case Study

Yin cited in Wimmer and Dominick (2010) defines a case study as “an empirical inquiry that

uses multiple sources of evidence to investigate a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life

context in which the boundaries between the phenomenon and its context are not clearly evident”.

Eisenhardt (1989) defines a case study as “a research strategy which focuses on understanding

the dynamics present within single settings”.

This study used a case study of the Save Mabira Forest campaign to investigate strategies used by

environmental advocacy groups, and politicians and to compel the government change its

position to apportion part of the Mabira Forest to a private investor to grow sugar cane. Focussing

on particular event, in this case the Save Mabira Forest Campaign, the study critically examined



10

how strategic environment advocacy and news coverage of the campaign influenced the

government to rescind its position.

Questionnaires

The study carried out interviews with key personnel in civil society organisations that were

involved in the Save Mabira Forest campaign. Questionnaires were distributed among 6

executives of Civil Society Organisations and sought to find out the strategies that they used to

generate media interest in the Mabira Forest story. A sample of six was used considering that the

study was specific to the strategies used by civil society organisations that were part of the Save

Mabira Forest Coalition.

Considering that the coalition was composed of eight civil society organisation, the sample of six

represents 75 per cent of the civil society organisations that were involved in the coalition. Given

the small number of organisations involved in the coalition, it was would have been desirable to

sample all the organisations involved. However, some respondents could not return

questionnaires in time. Six civil society organisations were therefore considered for the study.

Research Questions

The study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What role did the media play in reversal of government policy on de-gazetting Mabira

Forest?

2. What strategy did environmental pressure groups use to draw media attention on Mabira

Forest?

3. To what extent did the media amplify the consequences of de-gazetting Mabira Forest?

Did the media remain objective as the Mabira Forest environmental campaign gathered

momentum or did it play the advocacy role?

4. Did the media’s interpretations and evaluations remain constant as the political

controversy developed?

Research findings

The research analysed media coverage of the stories on Mabira Forest from March 21st, 2007,

when the story was first published by the New Vision, to April 12th

, 2007 when violent

demonstrations broke out. The study assessed the coverage by the two leading Newspapers that is

the government-owned The New Vision and the leading independent newspaper Daily Monitor.

Significance of the Mabira Forest story

The study used content analysis to examine the significance of Mabira forest using a number of

indicators such as the number of times the story appeared, the position of the story, and the length

of the story.

The number of times the Mabira Story appeared in newspapers was considered an important

factor in giving prominence to the story based on the assumption that the number of times a story

is read is likely to have an influence on the perception and opinion a reader assigns to a particular



11

issue or event. If a story appeared on page one, it was considered to be more significant than one

that appeared on the middle pages.

Between, March 21st, 2007 when the New Vision first wrote the story on cabinet’s decision to

give a way part of Mabira Forest up to April 12th

, 2007 when violent demonstrations first broke

out, the news paper had carried a total of 32 stories on Mabira Forest. Of these, 22 stories

criticised government decision to give away part of Mabira Forest, 3 were neutral in that they

focussed on events in what McQuail refers to as factual reporting, while 7 supported government

decision to give way part of Mabira forest.

The study found that the New Vision published 7 stories appeared on the front page, 7 appeared

on the 2nd

and 3rd

pages while the rest appeared in the inside pages. six stories appeared on full

page, 8 on half page, 6 quarter page, while the rest were briefs.

After new Vision first published the story, the Daily Monitor consequently picked it up on March

25th

, 2007. While the first story was a two-page highlighting the economic value of Mabira Forest

quoting facts from National Forestry Authority, in the subsequent days the newspaper took the

story with much gusto giving it more prominence under the “land bonanza” tag. By on April

12th

, 2012, the newspaper had published 25 stories on Mabira forest before the riots. Seven were

on the front page, while 10 were in the inside pages. Five were full page articles, 6 half page and

the rest were either quarter page stories or briefs.

All stories on Mabira Forest that appeared on the first page of Daily Monitor were placed under

the kicker “land bonanza”. Oxford English Dictionary online defines bonanza as “a situation

which creates a sudden increase in wealth, good fortune, or profits”. Prior to a proposal to give

away part of Mabira Forest, the Daily Monitor, had a run series of articles on a deliberate attempt

by the government to give away public to a few wealthy individuals. This portrayed the

government that was bent on mutilating public natural resources to satisfy the selfish demands of

a few wealthy individuals.

The prominence that the media gave generated a lot of public interest as the story became part of

public debate whether on radio talk shows or public broadcast forums popularly known as

“ebimeeza”. The resulting violent clashes between security personnel and the public and public

attack on Asians and their properties which resulted in the death on one Indian, forced the

government to restore calm.

The Cabinet revised the previous white paper to deal with some of the increasing bitterness

among ordinary citizens. Some of the issues that the cabinet raised in the new white paper was

that the Mabira Forest debate had damaged the government’s image not just locally but also

internationally. While the content analysis limited its scope to coverage of the Mabira Forest

story in the local media, interviews with civil society organisation confirmed that the Mabira

Forest story featured in the international media. As Betty Obbo, the Information and publications

Officer of National Association of Professional Environmentalists observes, “the media



12

highlighted the Mabira issues nationally and internationally and it was picked by BBC, CNN and

Aljazeera, and drew enormous global interest in conservation the forest”.

He views are supported by Twesigye (2008) who observes that using international partners such

as the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), the Save Mabira

Coalition managed to generate interest of leading international media houses such as the BBC

and Voice of America. This coming at a time when the country was preparing to host the

Commonwealth Heads of Government (CHOGM) in Kampala, felt the negative publicity might

affect its success.

The Cabinet’s new white paper also highlighted the ecological importance, and the relevance of

the forest to the surrounding as well as the public outcry as some of the reasons they reconsidered

their decision to give away part of Mabira Forest. This was a triumph in the civil society media

strategies considering that most of the issues the Cabinet highlighted in the White Paper were

mostly what the media had highlighted during the campaign. After the demonstrations as some of

the opposition MPs were facing murder charges the tone of media coverage changed from

inflammatory to one that focussed on the plight of the Asian in the country before the story died

out.

How the media explained the Mabira Forest Story to the public

Initial coverage from both newspapers centred on the ecological value of Mabira Forest.

However, as the government public relations machinery swung in action with economic

justification for giving away part of Mabira Forest, the Civil society upped its game and begun

feeding the media with the economic importance of Mabira Forest.

Economical value. The economic value of Mabira Forest was one of the under reported stories.

Previous stories attached the importance of Mabira forest to ecotourism and cultural values of the

forest to the surrounding community. At a time when the issue of carbon credits was prominent

on the international, the media did not cover the story within the context of Uganda’s major

natural resources. Most times such stories were limited to the inside pages of the newspaper

especially in the features section. Even then, some of the stories were loaded international policy

jargon becoming a nightmare to the average reader. Lack of information in dealing with complex

of the environment is one of the reasons cited to why environmental stories are not popular with

the media. This could be attributed to lack of information and expertise in covering

environmental stories.

“The media was a source of information as it presented a chronology of events and the patterns

that government was taking which informed decisions by the public to resist the give-away

asserting that the forest was of national importance,” Harriet Babingambah from Green Watch.

Joshua Zaake, a former Programme Officer at Environmental Alert observed that the civil society

organisations “commissioned studies to generate information (in terms of facts about Mabira

forest and implication of proposed change of land use for sugarcane growing) and related

repackaging and sharing this information with the media”



13

The political angle to the Mabira story increased its appeal. This coupled with information form

the civil society gave the media an opportunity to put into context the value of the forest using

carbon credits and how it could contribute to economic development. The media focused on the

amount of money Uganda would reap out of Mabira Forest in terms of carbon credits. It was one

of the few well contextualised stories on environment. While stories on economic value of natural

resources had been covered in the past, they were never give prominence and simplicity the

Mabira story got. This was an advocacy master stroke considering that the government’s decision

to give away part of Mabira forest was loaded with economic justification. In covering the story

the media effectively highlighted the fact that the government stood a chance to reap long term

economic benefits from Mabira Forest as opposed to short-term quick fixes it was pursuing in

partnership with SCOUL.

Ecological value. Various studies have documented the ecological functions of Mabira forest and

its unique biodiversity. The media highlighted some of the herbs that the local community uses to

treat diseases. In doing so, the media brought into focus how the forest is part and parcel of the

community livelihood in the area. By choosing to ignore such facts, the government was

portrayed as being insensitive and only bent on satisfying the wishes of one individual at the

expense of its citizens who derive livelihood from the forest.

The stories also captured the importance of the forest as a catchment area for Lake Victoria and

River Nile, two of Uganda’s most important water bodies. The country which was facing

reducing water levels in Lake Victoria and the resulting negative costs such as reducing power

generation capacity of dams situated on River Nile and the subsequent domestic power cuts

resonated with the average Ugandan.

Tourism value. The media also highlighted the importance of tourism both to the government

and to the communities around Mabira Forest. This highlighted the importance of maintaining the

forest as an alternative source of income for communities around the forest. Such coverage was

aimed at eliciting public support for a worthy cause.

Role of the media as public watchdog

The media treated the story as one of its obligation to serve the public interest. In this regard it

appears the media was willing to play an advocacy role not so much because of the civil society

but borne out of its own conviction to serve the public interest. As Twesigye (2008; pp7)

observers, “most media houses included environmental conservation in their ‘social

responsibility’ programmes, and environmental journalists worked closely with environmental

NGOs to feed information to the public”. This explains the enthusiasm with which the media

covered the story.

How the media framed the SCOUL/Mehta

Although the study did not investigate this as an independent variable I was able to make

conclusions judging from the negative media coverage aimed at the company. The media



14

portrayed Mehta as an insensitive Asian businessman who did not care about the interests of

ordinary Ugandans. It served reinforce public opinion regarding Asian businessmen as selfish and

arrogant which served to increase public disdain for the entire Asian business community. So

much that at the height of public demonstrations Asians uncontrolled demonstrators vented the

anger on businesses belonging to the Asian community as soft targets. The civil society’s call for

boycott of SCOUL’s sugar products further galvanised the public dislike of the company’s

products.

"Agreed strategies included investigating the corporate character of the proposed developer,

Mehta’s Lugazi Sugar Works Ltd..."(Twesigye 2008; pp7). By deliberately targeting the

corporate character of the investor in effort to win public support, the civil society ignited a

potentially explosive knob given Uganda’s history with Asians. In 1972, Iddi Amin, the Ugandan

President at that time expelled all Asians from the country in what he claimed as an attempt to

economically empower indigenous Ugandan by handing over to them properties and businesses

of departed Asians. While the current government invited Asians to return and handed back to

them their properties and preached reconciliation, the fault lines had already been created.

Most notable was SCOUL’s failure to use its public relations machinery to counter this

information and engage with the public which turned out to be detrimental not just to the

company’s corporate image but the entire Asian community living in Uganda. The Association of

Indians in Uganda tried to deflate media portrayal of Mehta’s arrogance as a case of

Indian/Asians against Ugandans by churning out counter information condemning Mehta’s

behaviour and asking him to reconsider his decision.

While the civil society organisations used Mehta’s arrogance to rally public support, they perhaps

underestimated the potential backlash against the entire Asian community. At the height of public

protests against the government decision, a young Indian ran into a crowd of protestors on a

motorcycle they removed and beat him up to death. Asian businesses also became soft targets in

an apparent demonstration of public disdain against Mehta and the government. A number of

Asians caught in the “cross fire” were attacked and badly bruised that it took heavy police

deployment to deal with the situation that was quickly getting out of hand.

Following the unfortunate death of the young Asian who was reportedly working in Ugandan for

another businessman, the media changed the tone of coverage to one that empathised with the

Asian community as under threat. The Save Mabira Forest Coalition issued a statement

condemning in strongest terms the killing of the young which were carried by the media as well.

The media carried stories of how the dead young man had come all the way from India as the sole

family bread winner only to die at the hands of irate mob venting their anger onto someone who

totally had nothing to do with the Mabira impasse. As McQuail (2010; pp382) observes, “framing

also undergoes changes that reflect the goals of sources as well as changing realities”.

The story appeared to resonate with most Ugandan families that struggle to put bread on the

table. Perhaps it was also a tactical manevour by the Asian community in Uganda since in its



15

reporting it was clear that no journalist travelled to India to meet the family of the deceased. It yet

again demonstrated the power of sources in influencing media coverage. Into also put into focus

the failure by the opposing forces (the government, SCOUL, the Indian Community in Uganda)

to counter a barrage of information from the civil society.

While the call for boycotts may not have been effective owing to limited supply of sugar stocks

from other suppliers, the company finds itself with unenviable task to repair its bruised image.

The break-down in the company’s public relations machinery turned the Mabira Forest story into

one-sided affair with the civil society driving the media agenda.

Political significance of the Mabira Forest story

The involvement of the government and a big sugar corporation – SCOUL – in the Mbaira Forest

increased its appeal to the media. The cabinet took a decision to giveaway part of Mabira Forest.

Assuming that the due process to de-gazette a protected area was to be followed, the actual give

away of Mabira Forest was yet to take place. This is an assumption especially considering the

government’s proclivity to unilaterally make decision without following due process. However,

the media covered the story as though the government had already given away 7,100 Hectares of

Mabira Forest to SCOUL.

According to the National Environmental Management Act,… a protected area can be de-

gazetted once parliament passes a resolution. In essence by agreeing to give away part of Mabira

Forest, the Cabinet had passed the first step towards de-gazetting the forest. It needed approval

for the National Parliament before it could proceed. Two things can explain why the media

covered the story as though part of the forest had already been given away. Firstly, the ruling

party, the National Resistance Movement (NRM) enjoys an overwhelming majority in parliament

so it appeared as though it was already a done deal. The sitting parliament at that time had shown

a penchant for approving cabinet decisions without much ado. The Shadow Minister of

Environment Ms Beatrice Anywar made it a personal mission to mobilise other members of

parliament to oppose the proposal.

Secondly, it would have been difficult to reverse the decision of parliament if it had been passed.

What does the law say? The only way to stop the government from giving away part of Mabira

Forest was to pre-empt its action before the proposal reached the floor of parliament. This was a

tactical masterstroke from the civil society organisation as public out cry would pre-empt the

Cabinet from introducing the proposal on the floor of parliament where it was bound to sail

through with perhaps members of opposition walking out in protest.

“The civil society wrote together with Members of Parliament on the campaign, the Save the

Mabira crusade met with the Speaker of Parliament petitioning Parliament to halt the proposed

degazettment of the forest,” Harriet Babingambah of Green Watch.

Her views were confirmed by Twesigye (2008) who observed that, “petitions and memoranda

were submitted to parliament to pre-empt government’s own submission. Although the



16

degazettement proposal had not yet been tabled, these documents initiated discussion and helped

inform Members of Parliament”

While the civil society could be lauded for pulling off a master stroke in their advocacy, it begs

the question: Was the media aware that the Cabinet decision was only the first step towards de-

gazetting Mabira Forest or did the media fall to advocacy machinations of the civil society?

Examining the media coverage of the Mabira Forest Story, it is clearly evident that perhaps the

media was over zealous in covering the debate without pausing to ask critical questions. While

the law is clear on the process of de-gazetting a protected area, the media either inadvertently or

deliberately did not provide this information.

The resignation of the entire board of the National Forest Authority (NFA), a body charged with

managing Uganda’s Forest, due to the way the government handled the issue helped throw a spot

light and portrayed the Cabinet penchant for taking unilateral decision without involving all

actors. This incensed the public and helped sustain the coverage the story. However, NFAs

mundane participation in whole debate once again put into spotlight apparent failure of

government semi-autonomous bodies in managing the country’s environmental resources. It also

demonstrated the reasons why the civil society had become disillusioned with the manner in

which government agencies were managing environmental resources.

From the discussions it is apparent that it is easier to illicit media interest in an environmental

story once big players are involved. Some of the environmental causes which civil society

organisations identified as being most successful are those involving big corporations and

prominent political players. However, some researchers such as Akelo (2007) have noted that

environmental degradation takes place in urban centres as much as it does in rural areas. The

National Forestry Authority estimates that more than 140,000 people have encroached on Central

Forest Reserves.

The challenge to environmental advocacy groups is how to generate media interest even when

big players are not involved. How do you generate media interest on the need to conserve a rare

specie of a frog in a wetland where setting up a factory would provide hundreds of people with

employment and better lives in a way the frog wouldn’t?

Media objectivity in covering the Mabira Forest story

From the proceeding discussions, it emerges media that the media took on the Mabira Forest

Story with so much gusto and in the process threw its objectivity by the wayside. Civil society

organisation surveyed maintain that the media was objective. Oftentimes the environmental

journalists have been that in covering the environment they have taken on the advocacy role.

The problem appears to lie in the way environmental issues/tragedies occur. It becomes difficult

for a reporter to disentangle themselves from the story itself. Covering an environmental story is

not like covering a news event where a reporter answers the basic questions of: What? When?

Where? Who? Why? and How? Reporting on a complex environmental issues calls for a reporter

to be full engaged in the story to full understand the issues and what is at stake. It requires



17

elaborate explanations that sometimes portray reporters as if they have become advocates instead.

As one of the interviewees, who felt that the media played an advocacy role, put it, “there is a

thin line between advocacy and public awareness”. McQuail (2010) observes that “objectivity is

a relatively complex notion when one goes beyond the simple idea that news should reliably, and

therefore honestly, report what is really going on in the world”

Although there are parameters that could be used to measure objectivity, including accuracy,

completeness, impartiality, neutrality, McQuail observes that “it is never simple that simple since

bias is as much, if not more, a matter of perception as of measurable dimension of content”.

Majority of the members of the civil society who participated in the study felt that the media

remained objective with

Conclusion

The study investigated how civil society and environmental advocacy groups, groups worked

with the media to ensure that the executive arm of government reversed its decision to give away

part of Mabira Forest land to a sugar cane investor. The story attracted a lot of media attention

because of the type of players that were involved. Firstly, a government that was increasingly

losing its credibility with the public. The Mabira Forest give away came after the government had

given away a number of public land to private individuals without following due process.

Secondly, the involvement of a big corporation created a feeling of yet again another big

company trying to reap where it did not sow at the expense the communities surrounding the

forest. The media portrayed Mehta, an Indian born Ugandan businessman and the majority

shareholder in SCOUL, as an arrogant and selfish businessman who did not care about the plight

and opinions ordinary Ugandans as long as had the backing of the government. Mehta’s

insensitivity to issues within the public debate created hatred which extended to other Ugandan

businessmen of Asian origin. The failure by SCOUL to effectively use its public relations

machinery to effectively engage with the citizens created an atmosphere of anarchy that resulted

into the death of a young Indian at the height of public demonstrations against the government’s

plans to give away part of Mabira forest.

The involvement of politicians increased the media interest in the story that helped to generate

public interest. While the Save Mabira Forest campaign remains the most successful in Uganda

to-date, it would be important to note that this story involved the government and a big

corporation on one hand and the civil society and the general public on the other hand. This

leaves us with questions: Would have the media gained interest in the story if the government

were not t involved? How would have the media covered the story the was evicting landless

Ugandans from encroaching on a Mabira forest? Would the media have covered the story the way

they did?

Although the focus of this study could not answer such, it would be important to study how both

the media and civil society deal with environmental stories where the wretched of the earth are

involved.



18

How can environmental advocates work with the media to influence public policy? The civil

society organisations presented well-researched information to put into perspective some of the

salient issues with the mabira forest debate. Faces with economic justifications from the

government, the civil society succeded in out punching the government in this debate. This serves

was a masterstroke considering that it is often difficult to attach economic value to environmental

resources. It shows that environmental issues can gain prominence if they are presented in a

given context. The media feeds off facts and if the civil society can carry out deeper research to

come up with important facts about the importance of a given resources then the media will gain

interest in covering the story. Given the number of competing stories especially politics and

lifestyle, it is important the facts are relevant in a given locality. The media is most likely to

accept well-researched facts than the activism approach from civil society.

Framing issues is also an important strategy in generating media attention to a given issue. As the

Mabira story demonstrated attaching issues to a particular office [Cabinet of Ministers] or

personality [Mehta], the civil society made a compelling case for media interest in the story.

Media love personalities and framing environmental issues around a particular personality/office

rather than an abstract calamity or event would generate more interest. The political controversy

of the Mabira story also made it an easy for the media to cover the story. When controversy is

involved, it is important that civil society frames the story around such controversy.

The Mabira Forest story demonstrated the need for a symbiotic relationship between the media

and the civil society. While the civil society played its role in raising public awareness on Mabira

Forest by providing well packaged information to the media, the media also played its public

interest role by amplifying the information received form civil society. The civil society should

be played its part in disseminating well-research information, the media, perhaps aware of its role

as a public watch dog, focused on giving the story more prominence and presenting it in a

manner that the ordinary person understood the intricate issues in the Mabira Forest debate.

References: 1. Twesigye B. (2008). Lessons from Citizen Activism in Uganda: Saving Mabira Forest.

SIAA Occasional Paper Series. South African Institute of International Affairs.

Johannesburg, South Africa.

2. Eisenhardt. K. M. (1989) Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4. pp. 532-550.

3. Wimmer R. D. and Domminick, J. R. (2010). Mass Media Research: An introduction. (9th

edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.

4. Dotson M. D., Jacobson K. S., Kaid L. L. & Carlton S. J (2012). Media Coverage of

Climate Change in Chile: A content analysis of Conservative and Liberal Newspapers.

Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture. Vol 6, No 1, pp. 64-81

5. Myton G. (1999). Handbook on Radio and Television Audience Research (2nd

edition).

New York, Paris, and London: UNICEF, UNESCO and the BBC.

6. Harnesen A., Cottle S., Negrine R., Newbold C. (1998). Mass Communication Research

Methods. Palgrave. MacMillan. London



19

7. Rwakakamba M. T. (2009). How Effective are Uganda’s Environmental Policies? A Case

Study of Water Resources in 4 Districts, With Recommendations on How to Do Better.

Mountain Research and Development Vol 29 No 2. Pp 121-127. International Mountain

Society.

http://www.mtnforum.org/sites/default/files/pub/5529.pdf

8. Rauschmayer, F., van den Hove, and Koetz, S., T. (2009). Rauschmayer, F., van den

Hove, S., Koetz, T. (2009). Participation in EU biodiversity governance: how far beyond

rhetoric? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy. 27:42-58.


9. McQuail D. (2010). McQuail’s Mass communication Theory. Sage Publications, London.

10. Helland K. (2007). Methodological Approaches in the Study of Media Organisation and

Production. Module 5: Unit 26 (b). Leicester University.

11. Hansen A. (2005). Content Analysis. Module 5: Unit 28. Leicester University.

12. O’Keefe D. J. (2009). Normatively responsible advocacy: Some provocations from

persuasion effects research. In F. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Pondering on

problems of argumentation. Twenty essays on theoretical issues (pp. 79-90). Berlin,

Germany: Springer.

13. O’Keefe D. J. (2008). Elaboration Likelihood Model. Blackwell Publishing. MA. Oxford.

Caltton, Victoria.

14. Zygmunt J.B. Plater (2006). Law, Media, & Environmental Policy: A Fundamental

Linkage in Sustainable Democratic Governance. Boston College Law School Faculty

Papers. Boston College Law School.

15. Akello C. E. (2007). Environmental Regulation in Uganda: Successes and Challenges.

Law, Environment and Development Journal. www.lead-journal.org/content/07020.pdf

16. Sewanyana (2007). Freedom Of Expression: In Defence Of Media Freedom In Uganda.

17. CBD (2010). Uganda Country Profile. http://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/?country=ug

18. Curtin A. P and Rhodenbaugh E. (2001). Building the news media agenda on the

environment: a comparison of public relations and journalistic sources. School of

Journalism and Mass Communication, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.

19. NFA (2005). Uganda Forests, Functions, and Classification. National Forestry Authority.

Kampala. Uganda.

http://www.mtnforum.org/sites/default/files/pub/5529.pdf


http://www.lead-journal.org/content/07020.pdf

http://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/?country=ug

Environmental advocacy and News: How strategic messaging influenced government policy on Mabira...

Documents

Transcript of Environmental advocacy and News: How strategic messaging influenced government policy on Mabira...