| dc.description.abstract | To fulfill the rising global food demand, agricultural robotization is seen as a way to increase productivity, decrease pesticide use, and address labor shortages. Specifically, the Netherlands views automation and robotization as a possible solution. Namely, harvesting, weeding, and pruning are labor-intensive tasks that can be substituted with robots. However, the transition towards robotization brings socioethical implications for decent work, society, and fairness. Stakeholders each have their own perceptions of what a just transition means, which causes tensions. Therefore, this study investigates the following research question: How do stakeholders perceive a just transition towards agricultural robotization in the Netherlands? From 26 semi-structured interviews across various stakeholder types, this study uses the Just Transitions framework in practice along with four justice tenets to analyze their perceptions. The first contribution is that stakeholders perceive justice in two coherent ways: the economic-liberal and social-democratic approaches. These terms are used because they show strong conceptual “family resemblances,” rather than fulfilling every aspect of their related ideologies. The economic-liberal approach is more aligned with a “market value” justice principle by focusing on a market logic and barriers that hinder innovation. They aim to incorporate sustainability goals while maintaining the status quo. The social-democratic approach is more aligned with a “prioritarian” justice principle by focusing on supporting the most vulnerable groups first. They aim to implement reforms by improving labor conditions and providing financial compensation, such as safety nets. The second contribution is the comparison between Just Transitions theory and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). Namely, RRI appears more aligned with economic-liberal justice implications and may overlook concerns from the social-democratic approach. This is especially the case for recognitive and restorative justice implications. The findings in this study highlight the need for researchers to complement RRI approaches with Just Transitions theory to address its shortcomings. In doing so, RRI can ensure both economic-liberal and social-democratic concerns are equally considered, instead of favoring one over the other. Most importantly, policymakers and decision-makers can incorporate multiple perceptions and make their own justice approach explicit. This allows them to show which approach was selected, based on certain arguments, while taking into account the concerns of other justice perceptions. This enables them to anticipate any trade-offs towards a just transition and intentionally incorporate multiple justice perceptions. | |
