Definitions of frames and framing differ according to discipline

For example, it seems that also in other countries, especially in combination with other factors, markets play a vital role particularly in some regions, dairy farming is connected to some organic concentrations, and subsidies can effectively increase organic farming in certain areas. Therefore, same political approach to increase organic farming does not necessarily work for every region. Our research contains several limitations that should be addressed in future research. The first limitation was that we were unable to analyse all of the possible factors that may affect the share of organic cultivated land. The literature suggests that the concentration of organic farming is affected by more factors than the five included in our analysis . In addition, the data from Pirkanmaa and Southeast Finland indicate that there may be other relevant factors outside the selected conditions. Therefore, the results cannot be regarded as completely comprehensive in terms of explaining the regional differences in the proportion of organic farming. One additional condition could be the role of wholesalers. However, according to our survey, wholesale seems to have a fairly small role in the Finnish organic market, at least from a farming point of view. Data limitations and the appropriate number of conditions for a QCA method influenced the number of selected conditions in this study. The conditions were also carefully selected based on previous studies and the authors’ knowledge of regional features.

The second limitation relates to the changing situation in the spatial share of organic farming, whereby the selected reference year may influence the results. However, changes in the share of organic farming occur relatively slowly, vertical grow and regions with the highest organic shares have held that status for some time. Only regions with close to average values have witnessed more notable changes in recent years. In addition, the conditions were formed to include data that related to different periods: the period preceding 1990 , a wide range of years during which farmers converted to organic farming , and the most recent period . On a wet, cold day in November 2019, farmers from all over Ireland travelled to Dublin, the capital city, to blockade the main roads with their tractors, immobilising traffic. This protest was not organised through the main representative body – The Irish Farmer’s Association . Indeed, it appeared to take both Government and the IFA by surprise. The farmers carried placards reading: “No carbon tax” and “It takes twice the amount of carbon to produce a vegan burger than a beef burger.” Clearly, there was a strong shared sentiment that environmental policies were a threat. With the government pledging to reduce agricultural emissions by 30% by 2030 , plans to transition the sector to sustainable pathways are emerging, yet there are strong indicators that the sector is already experiencing unplanned change, disruption, and conflict. This paper explores this discontent and how climate change policies can aggravate or respond to it through the application of a conception of just transition understood as an integrated justice-based framework for governing the transition to sustainable practices .

Just transition emerged as a grass-roots labour movement in the 1970s to mobilise workers and communities directly affected by environmental policies in the energy sector which resulted in the loss of livelihoods and employment opportunities . Traditionally employed as a labour-oriented concept, trade unions and labour movements constructed this concept to argue that the benefits and burdens of the transition to enhanced environmental governance and protection policies should be fairly distributed . As Rosemberg notes, the just transition concept captures the social and economic complexities of transitioning economies to sustainability. This concept now forms a key component of the global policy architecture on transitions, marked by the International Labour Organisations’ adoption of the Guidelines for just transition towards environmentally sustainable economies and societies for all and its inclusion in the Paris Agreement in 2015. Recent scholarship has emerged to explore the linkages of this concept with established theories of climate, environmental, and energy justice . Theories of environmental and climate justice examine the normative implications of climate change and develop accounts of the moral principles necessary to guide the distribution of benefits and burdens of climate change and actions . Less examined, although of significant importance, are procedural elements of justice related to representation, participation, and recognition. Communities affected by planned climate adaptation and mitigation actions experience not only changes to economic landscapes and opportunities, but also to ‘culture, community identity, and sense of place’ . Thus, multidimensional accounts of justice that recognise the interconnections between distribution, participation, and recognition have emerged in concept ualisations of just transition as a wider, more holistic integrated governance framework . As high income countries with established political constituencies, embedded vested interests, and dominant actors transition from unsustainable to sustainable economic systems, the just transition concept has emerged as a critical tool for building the social legitimacy necessary to implement climate adaptation and mitigation policies.

In the Irish and European contexts, the language of just transition features heavily in climate action plans and economic policy materials;and in deliberations and negotiations with workers and communities concerning the energy transition from peat extraction to bog restoration in the indigenous energy sector. In 2021 it emerged as a dominant feature in Ireland’s Climate Action Plan which outlines pathways for transitioning all sectors across the economy. It notes ‘the development of plans to manage the sustainable environmental footprint of the beef and dairy sectors will be central to the achievement of [Ireland’s] climate targets’. However, it provides little insight into how the idea of just transition will be operationalised in the Irish beef farming sector. There are an estimated 78,300 specialist beef farms in Ireland, accounting for over half of all Irish farms . Ireland exports 90% of the beef it produces and in 2018 exported 579,000 tonnes at a total value of €2.5 billion, accounting for over 30% of total food and drink exports . Beef farming is not only an important economic activity in rural Ireland, it is also embedded in the social and cultural fabric of rural communities, identities, and social structures.Irish mythology, music and poetry, such as the epic T´ ain B´ o Cúailnge centring around the theft of a prized bull , provides some insight into the centrality of this sector to the collective cultural imaginary and identity of rural Ireland.The agricultural landscape of Ireland is synonymous with its ‘green’ identity, and images of cows grazing on pastures are regularly used in tourism advertisements.However, beef farming in Ireland is facing challenging times, with a range of pressures acting upon it within the social, political, economic, and environmental spheres. Beef farmers are struggling economically, relying on direct payments from the European Union Common Agricultural Policy , which on average doubles their farm income.

Most beef farms are classed as economically vulnerable, meaning that farm income alone does not remunerate family labour at the minimum wage of €20,129 per annum, thus requiring farmers to engage in off-farm work to supplement their income . Multiple factors are putting pressure on the present system of conventional beef farming, including shifting seasons and extreme weather events , competitive and declining markets, automation and technological innovation , and COVID-19. Public opinion is also changing with some pointing to the harmful environmental and health effects of meat consumption , reducing consumer demand , and problematising the collective imaginary of beef farming communities. Government policy to reduce emissions in order to meet international commitments means that funding and support for the beef industry has been declining for some time, and new policies focus on re-purposing agricultural land for forestry. Surprisingly, although beef farmers are experiencing a shifting physical and economic landscape, the concept of just transition has scarcely been applied to this context by policy makers or by researchers.Ireland’s Programme for Government policy document references ‘just transition’ 19 times in relation to the energy sector , but has little to say on how this concept may be relevant to the beef sector. These factors have all contributed to rising discontent within the beef farming community which erupted into street protests in 2019. These were sparked due to a perceived lack of transparency over how processors determine beef prices, which declined by 12.5% between the beginning of 2018 and mid-2019.Processors are organisations, usually factories, that purchase cattle to process for human consumption. Thus, it is clear the sector is under pressure,indoor growers and this is likely to continue in the coming decades.With the emergence of protests, this paper examines the drivers of beef farmers’ discontentment and how they, and other key actors, are perceiving the situation. Key actors are public and private, formal and informal organisations related to beef farming that have power to influence changes within the sector.

We investigate how the sector is responding, and how key actors are framing the future of beef farming. In doing so, we contribute to theorising just transition processes through a novel model of just transition frames and functions that operationalises and illustrates how just transition frames of different key actors can be aligned, or not, and unpacking how misalignment leads to conflict. Frames and framing approaches are widely used in the study of social movements, but not commonly applied to just transition research . Our model makes an original contribution to the study of transitions in the agricultural and beef farming sectors and can be used to support the design of policies and governance systems to guide in future sustainable climate action planning and implementation.Here, frames refer to strategic communication devices used by key actors to steer solutions in their favour in deliberate framing processes.Drawing upon a conception of just transition as an integrated governance framework for justice, we explore the different experiences and perspectives of key actors across the domains of distribution, participation, and recognition. We apply the concept of frames, which are both interpretations of social and political issues and strategic communication devices for achieving a particular outcome, to analyse the qualitative data . Thus, we investigated the range of perspectives held by different actors, the key points of consensus and conflict between the actors , and how these serve different functions: diagnostic, prognostic, or having an action-imperative . Framing gives insight into how key actors construct meaning around an emerging issue, and into challenges and possible futures being considered . Understanding how key actors are framing the future of beef farming will indicate how the sector could evolve, where resources are likely to be allocated, and who will be involved in shaping its future. Indeed, understanding how key actors are planning for the future is an essential concern for the possibility of a just transition for this sector. There is abundant literature on the application of environmental and climate justice theoretical frameworks when adapting agricultural systems to climate change, and in particular, in lower income less developed locations with heavy dependencies on rainfed agriculture and subsistence farming . Within these accounts, principles of justice are considered in relation to both procedural dimensions, concerning decision-making participants, processes and structures, and distributional dimensions, concerning how responsibilities, benefits, and burdens of mitigation and adaptation ought to be allocated . Schlosberg’s account of climate justice pushes beyond material distributional and formal procedural matters, to consider non-material, situated socio-spatial and cultural factors that influence understandings and perceptions of justice. Embedded in a feminist constructivist epistemology, Schlosberg and Collins identify three interconnected dimensions of justice that require consideration. Firstly, the dimension of recognition is identified as a precondition for distributive justice that involves social respect for the identities and values of populations. Changes in economic activities affect not only income levels, but also social status, influence, and structures within communities. They can affect one’s sense of belonging and purpose and are intimately linked to collective and self-identities . Secondly, the dimension of participation is identified as a key factor in developing relevant policies and practices that can build trust and ownership within communities-in-transition. Participation is closely linked to representation, as representation from organisations and elected individuals in policy-making processes allows citizens to participate in and be recognised by wider society .