IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i6p2637-d1613854.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Protein Transitions or Transformations: Contested Agrifood Frames Across “No Cow” and “Clean Cow” Futures

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Carolan

    (Department of Sociology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

Abstract

The pursuit of sustainable protein is underway. This debate is often framed as a choice between two competing agrifood futures: the “no cow” and “clean cow” perspectives. The former comes from alternative protein advocates, while the latter aims to support practices, discourses, and livelihoods associated with regenerative ranching. The findings presented reveal greater nuance than what this simplistic dichotomy suggests. This paper utilizes data collected from fifty-eight individuals in California and Colorado (USA). Participants in the sample were identified by their attendance at various events focused on sustainability in protein production and includes a subsample of regenerative farmers who self-identified as persons of color, disabled or differently abled, and/or part of the LGBTQIA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, Intersex, Asexual) community. The sample features a range of viewpoints associated with regenerative livestock and non-livestock protein production. The data support arguments aligned with “clean cow” framings, as determined by the anticipated scope of sustainable protein transformations. However, the paper cautions against solely relying on this frame without further interrogating its contours. It particularly notes that the values of specific “clean cow” actors and networks mirror key aspects of “no cow” perspectives. These similarities are especially evident among upstream actors like investors, corporate interests, and government sponsors. For these individuals and networks, the “no” versus “clean” distinction—despite suggesting radically different agrifood futures—overshadows underlying shared concerns that align with core elements of the status quo. A case is also made for greater reflexivity and, thus, inclusivity as we think about who is included in these debates, as the data tell us that this shapes how we frame what is at stake.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Carolan, 2025. "Sustainable Protein Transitions or Transformations: Contested Agrifood Frames Across “No Cow” and “Clean Cow” Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-22, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:6:p:2637-:d:1613854
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2637/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2637/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. Hinrichs, 2014. "Transitions to sustainability: a change in thinking about food systems change?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(1), pages 143-155, March.
    2. McCauley, Darren & Heffron, Raphael, 2018. "Just transition: Integrating climate, energy and environmental justice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-7.
    3. Niki A. Rust & Rebecca M. Jarvis & Mark S. Reed & Julia Cooper, 2021. "Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 753-765, September.
    4. Sally A Weller, 2019. "Just transition? Strategic framing and the challenges facing coal dependent communities," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 37(2), pages 298-316, March.
    5. Sadeeka L. Jayasinghe & Dean T. Thomas & Jonathan P. Anderson & Chao Chen & Ben C. T. Macdonald, 2023. "Global Application of Regenerative Agriculture: A Review of Definitions and Assessment Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-49, November.
    6. Mark Davidson, 2010. "Sustainability as ideological praxis: The acting out of planning’s master‐signifier," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 390-405, August.
    7. Gibson, Clark C. & Ostrom, Elinor & Ahn, T. K., 2000. "The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 217-239, February.
    8. Julie Guthman & Madeleine Fairbairn, 2024. "Speculating on collapse: Unrealized socioecological fixes of agri-food tech," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 56(8), pages 2055-2069, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lo, Kevin, 2021. "Authoritarian environmentalism, just transition, and the tension between environmental protection and social justice in China's forestry reform," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Guillaume Ollivier & Pierre Gasselin & Véronique Batifol, 2024. "The framings of the coexistence of agrifood models: a computational analysis of French media," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 1103-1127, September.
    3. Tatjana Neuhuber, 2025. "One and the Same or Worlds Apart? Linking Transformative Regional Resilience and Just Transitions Through Welfare State Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-25, January.
    4. Jacqueline M. Vadjunec & Todd D. Fagin & Lanah M. Hinsdale & Georgina Belem Carrasco Galvan & Kristen A. Baum, 2024. "Deeper Engagement with Material and Non-Material Aspects of Water in Land System Science: An Introduction to the Special Issue," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Samantha A. Sharpe & Cristina M. Martinez-Fernandez, 2021. "The Implications of Green Employment: Making a Just Transition in ASEAN," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, July.
    6. Robert Costanza & Shuang Liu, 2014. "Ecosystem Services and Environmental Governance: Comparing China and the U.S," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 160-170, January.
    7. McCauley, Darren & Pettigrew, Kerry, 2023. "Building a just transition in asia-pacific: Four strategies for reducing fossil fuel dependence and investing in clean energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    8. Grillitsch, Markus & Asheim, Björn & Fünfschilling, Lea & Kelmenson, Sophie & Lowe, Nichola & Lundquist, Karl Johan & Mahmoud, Yahia & Martynovich, Mikhail & Mattson, Pauline & Miörner, Johan & Nilsso, 2023. "Rescaling: An Analytical Lense to Study Economic and Industrial Shifts," Papers in Innovation Studies 2023/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    9. Ana Filipa Fonseca & Fabíola Polita & Lívia Madureira, 2024. "How Agroecological Transition Frameworks Are Reshaping Agroecology: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, November.
    10. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    11. Van Uffelen, N. & Taebi, B. & Pesch, Udo, 2024. "Revisiting the energy justice framework: Doing justice to normative uncertainties," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    12. Olga Stepanova & Magdalena Romanov, 2021. "Urban Planning as a Strategy to Implement Social Sustainability Policy Goals? The Case of Temporary Housing for Immigrants in Gothenburg, Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    13. Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2018. "Beyond agricultural innovation systems? Exploring an agricultural innovation ecosystems approach for niche design and development in sustainability transitions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 116-121.
    14. Merrie, Andrew & Olsson, Per, 2014. "An innovation and agency perspective on the emergence and spread of Marine Spatial Planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 366-374.
    15. Steven M Manson, 2007. "Challenges in Evaluating Models of Geographic Complexity," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(2), pages 245-260, April.
    16. Monyei, Chukwuka G. & Akpeji, Kingsley O. & Oladeji, Olamide & Babatunde, Olubayo M. & Aholu, Okechukwu C. & Adegoke, Damilola & Imafidon, Justus O., 2022. "Regional cooperation for mitigating energy poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa: A context-based approach through the tripartite lenses of access, sufficiency, and mobility," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    17. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Bazilian, Morgan & Griffiths, Steve & Kim, Jinsoo & Foley, Aoife & Rooney, David, 2021. "Decarbonizing the food and beverages industry: A critical and systematic review of developments, sociotechnical systems and policy options," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    18. Ren, Simiao & Hu, Wayne & Bradbury, Kyle & Harrison-Atlas, Dylan & Malaguzzi Valeri, Laura & Murray, Brian & Malof, Jordan M., 2022. "Automated Extraction of Energy Systems Information from Remotely Sensed Data: A Review and Analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    19. Sauvée, Loïc, 2021. "Editorial: Special track: European agrifood business in transition towards social responsibility," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(2), March.
    20. Guo, Shuocheng & Kontou, Eleftheria, 2021. "Disparities and equity issues in electric vehicles rebate allocation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:6:p:2637-:d:1613854. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.