Table 1. Summary of the arguments used to support and oppose the removal of four dams in Sweden in media coverage of the conflict, categorized by the frame type invoked.

Alby Hallstahammar Tallåsen Orsa
Frame Support Oppose Support Oppose Support Oppose Support Oppose
Provisioning
 
Fish migration routes†
 
Loss of pedestrian access; too little water for fish
 
Increase biological diversity; fish migration†
 
Loss of pedestrian access
 
Fish migration†; improve biotope
 
Negative effects of plants/animals in riparian zone
 
Nationally important species
 
Loss of productive river bottom and shallow bays
 
Regulating
 
Risk of dam failure at high flow
 
High flow without dam unsafe for children
 
-
 
Dams are a damage protection measure
 
Less problems with property flooding
 
-
 
-
 
Creeks and small streams will dry up
 
Cultural: recreation
 
-
 
Loss of bathing place
 
Possible to introduce trout; stone pillars remain for fishing
 
-
 
Increase in angling and tourism
 
Loss of fish farmed for stream stocking; less recreation
 
Sport fishing; outdoor recreation
 
Salmon and grayling can migrate with current structure
 
Cultural: aesthetics
 
-
 
Loss of reflecting pond; views changed
 
Running water
 
Loss of reflecting pond and views
 
Free flowing water
 
“Naked muddy” stream banks; loss of reflecting pond
 
-
 
-
 
Cultural: heritage
 
-
 
Existed > 100 yr; village built around pond
 
Stones remain to mark dam locations
 
Cultural heritage of industrial area
 
-
 
Cultural heritage of mill, dam, power station
 
-
 
Save “old culture”
 
Restoration
 
Restore “natural state”
 
Earlier judgments about water level should not be changed
 
Restore “natural stream environment”
 
-
 
Restore “natural stream”
 
-
 
-
 
-
 
Economics
 
No maintenance cost
 
-
 
Reduced cost
 
-
 
Repair too expensive; increased tourism
 
Loss of salmon hatchery
 
Tourism money
 
Support fish farming
 
†In the media coverage, fish migration routes are directly stated as the goal, which is considered a provisioning service resulting in increased fish populations. Note, however, that specific fish (e.g., brown trout) are mentioned as desirable, meaning that recreational fishing is the underlying goal, so the service could be considered cultural-recreation, even though the media does not present it as such.