Suchergebnisse

Farmers have an important role in problematizing and politicizing drought. Following the argumentative turn in policy analysis, the paper analyzes the process of problem definition by means of a framing analysis, zooming in on four major drought events covered in German farming sector journals that are published by farmers' associations. The article compares the framing of the four most-cited drought events—1947, 1975–76, 2003, and 2011–12—in order to better understand how problematization has changed over time, and how farmers justify and rationalize calls for political action. Three research questions are answered: What problems are named by farmers journals when describing drought events, and what solutions are proposed? Who is considered responsible for problems and solutions? How has framing of drought changed over time? The paper shows that farmers frame drought as a matter of justice and assert their perceived right to subsidies, compensation, farmer-friendly tax policies, and market regulations by the state. From 2003, drought has been framed in association with climate change. The data findings suggest that there is no post-productivist, post-exceptionalist paradigm shift connected to proposed drought policy solutions. Drought framings appear to be persistent, giving priority to assured farmers' incomes, not water distribution. Considering the lobby power of farmers' associations in Germany, this finding helps to understand why state interventions remain the same over time.

Since 2003, droughts have been problematized within a climate change frame in Germany. Scholars describe this framing process as climatization. In our research, we conduct a qualitative content analysis of sector journal articles to investigate the climatization of drought within the three most affected policy fields in Germany: agriculture, water management, and forestry. The research objectives are to investigate how climatization processes evolve and take place within a specific policy field, and what different modes of climatization can be identified. The results are based on a framing analysis of 267 articles from journals published by political associations of farmers, water managers, and foresters at both the national and a state level, covering drought problematization relating to two major drought events in 2003 and 2011–2012. The article shows that four modes of climatization can be distinguished: scientification, securitization, technocratization, and transformation. With this empirically based heuristic, we contribute to advancing the concept of climatization by operationalizing it into a more profound, empirically grounded analytical concept that can be applied to critically investigate policymaking processes related to reducing disaster risks and achieving climate adaptation.