Consumption of meat – red and processed meat in particular – exceeds recommended levels in most high-income countries. Higher taxes on meat have been proposed as a response but have proven difficult to implement due to political controversy. We examined the role of framing in the media debate on taxing meat and other animal-based foods in Germany.

We conducted a framing analysis to identify themes characterising the debate, and key actors and their narrative and argumentative strategies.

Germany.

A total of 381 articles from eighteen German-language newspapers published between 2019 and 2023.

Frames in favour of higher meat taxes most commonly referred to potential animal welfare and environmental gains, with health playing a smaller role. Anti-tax frames most commonly concerned the amplification of inequalities, the alleged inefficacy of taxes and the superiority of regulation. Support for higher taxes came from across the political spectrum and from various stakeholders, including producers, researchers and environmental organisations. Conservative actors and producers often expressed support, conditional upon earmarking of revenue for animal welfare measures.

Using framing strategies and policy designs that appeal to broadly shared values may help to reduce polarisation in debates on meat taxation. In countries where concerns for animal welfare are salient, earmarking revenue for animal welfare improvements may increase support. Anticipating and addressing concerns around equity and efficacy may help to defuse criticism. In the German context, legal obstacles to earmarking and rising inflation may have hindered policy adoption.