Exploring frame conflicts in the development of a new mineral resource policy in Austria using Q-methodology

Abstract

Mineral resource policy deals not only with industrial and trade aspects but is nowadays also increasingly concerned with topics such as environmental protection and social development. The tensions associated with strongly divergent opinions among various stakeholder groups cast it as a ‘wicked problem’. The process of redeveloping the ‘Austrian Mineral Resources Strategy’ allows for examination of the different frames and identification of potential frame conflicts in consultation processes at the national level. Using Q-methodology, this paper reveals four frames represented in the Austrian policy design process and unravels conflicts between economy-focused and integrated policy framings. The predominance of the first frame indicates a narrow sectoral approach favouring domestic mineral extraction and economic growth over other means (e.g. international distributional conflicts of benefits and burdens). The article also demonstrates the suitability of Q-methodology as a tool to investigate frames and to improve their understanding in policy design processes.

Perspectives on Closure and Revitalisation of Extraction Sites and Sustainability: A Q-Methodology Study

“…Studies using Q-methodology (also Q-study or Q-analysis) are popular in the social and natural sciences, but are increasingly conducted to analyse issues related to mineral resources. These include analysis of the socio-economic impacts of mineral extraction [85], policy development and frame conflicts in mineral extraction [86,87], community perceptions [44,88], perceptions of the impacts of resource development [89], and politics around extraction projects [90]. This study, using Q-methodology, aimed to capture different perspectives on the closure and revitalisation of an extraction site, involving actors from several Eastern and Southern European countries.…”

Responsible sourcing for energy transitions: Discussing academic narratives of responsible sourcing through the lens of natural resources justice

“…To ensure not only just access to natural resources including mineral resources, but also that their benefits and associated risks are shared in a just manner, requires thoughtful and anticipatory management and governance. Despite the detrimental impacts as well as environmental and social challenges of intensified mineral resource extraction for low-carbon technologies, 'justice' is largely overlooked or even ignored in the debates on mineral resource extraction and the extractive sector (Heffron, 2020;Kügerl et al, 2022). As a response, Heffron (2020) suggested the 'JUST framework': it includes three different elements of Justice (distributive, procedural, recognition), two forms of Universal justice (cosmopolitanism and restorative), Space considerations (the location of extraction projects and national and international links and influences), and the Time, i.e., the speed of transitions or timelines for goals such as the Paris Agreement.…”