The meat tax that never was: A case of blame avoidance?

Sammanfattning

Demand-side policy instruments to curb agricultural emissions are increasingly gaining traction. Dietary changes, in particular a reduction in meat consumption, contribute to realizing a more comprehensive transition towards sustainable agriculture. As an effective policy instrument, a tax on meat is widely discussed. Despite its multiple benefits for public health, greenhouse gas reduction, and support for livestock farmers in achieving higher animal welfare standards, no meat tax has been adopted in Germany yet. This thesis, therefore, aims to explain how and why no majority emerged among elected policymakers in the German Bundestag to pass a higher tax on meat. To this end, this thesis compares the main barriers perceived by policymakers during two policy windows in summer 2020 and May 2023. Within an intra-comparative, qualitative case study design, document analysis covering statements from 38 political actors and 16 semi-structured interviews are conducted. To analyze the data, theory-structured content analysis and theory-testing process tracing are utilized. By integrating the Multiple Streams Framework and Blame Avoidance Theory, this thesis identifies a lack of political courage as a key barrier. Combined with the Covid pandemic, the Borchert Commission’s recommendations were not able to capitalize on the positive societal sentiment during the first policy window. Similarly, the second policy window was overshadowed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Polarized disputes within the governing coalition, a sentiment against the Green Party, and affordability concerns further stalled the debate. Due to fears of public backlash, policymakers refrain from bearing the political costs of the meat tax, particularly in the run-up to elections. Policymakers are advised to endure natural criticisms at the outset of an environmentally effective but controversial policy proposal. With the help of previously organized majorities for a socially balanced policy proposal, trade-offs could be communicated transparently and embedded in a clear vision for a sustainable future.