Justice – Just Transition Initiative

What is "Just Transition"?

Academic paper/Case Study; Definitions and Concepts

Dec 2019

Becoming fundable? Converting climate justice claims into climate finance in Mesoamerica’s forests

The article assesses the efforts of the indigenous and forest people’s groups in Mexico and Central America to promote claims to climate finance in terms of the different concepts of justice and identifies constraints to more transformative and reparative pathways to just climate outcomes.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Land-use
Focus Areas: Environment and/or pollution > Nature; Government intervention > Public finance; Inequality and/or poverty > Other; Justice
Keywords: Forest governance; REDD+; indigenous communities; Mesoamerican Alliance of Peoples and Forests,; climate finance; UNFCCC; empirical justice analysis; Free Prior and Informed Consent; full consent; reparative or transitional justice narratives; buen vivir; self-determination
By: Laura Aileen Sauls
Publishing Organization: Climate Change
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: The article draws upon the experiences of a coalition of 10 Indigenous and forest peoples’ groups in Mexico and Central America—the Mesoamerican Alliance of Peoples and Forests (AMPB)—with regards to their navigation of the discursive strategies suited for accessing climate finance, particularly through the REDD+ instrument. The author uses the history of community positions toward REDD+ to suggest that the claims underpinning their engagement reflect conceptualizations of climate justice, which deviate from those that have dominated policy and popular discussions. The author assesses the feasibility of the AMPB-proposed Mesoamerican Territorial Fund that aims to directly capture climate finance, which would bypass problematic relations with national governments and traditional donors.

The article finds that although Indigenous peoples and local communities have made significant advances in terms of representation, recognition, participation, and concrete funding, the constraints of “becoming fundable” may hinder more transformative and reparative pathways to just climate outcomes. The requirement to “become fundable”, under the terms of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and major donors, is also a demand for the Indigenous peoples and local communities to become legible . This demand presents a clear tension with the member groups’ priorities of self-determination and “buen vivir”—a term that signifies an explicit recognition of the importance of nature for well-being. The author concludes that moving toward distributive justice may be much easier than a more critical interpretation of procedural justice. As such, efforts to support forest climate initiatives in these contested landscapes may benefit from moving away from results and performance-focused discussions toward a view of climate finance as among the means of achieving distributive, procedural, and historical justice on a territorial scale.

Report/Case Study; Policy Tools or Evaluations

Apr 2021

Workers and Communities in Transition: Report of the Just Transition Listening Project

The report synthesizes lessons from more than 100 listening sessions with labor and community groups to gather their perspectives on transitions as well as identifies how coalitions have come together and what pathways exist to a just future.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Agriculture; Energy; General; Land-use; Mining
Focus Areas: Economic diversification/restructuring > Economic development plans, Industry and/or sector assistance or plans; Employment > Job creation and/or equality, Skills, Social protections; Environment and/or pollution > Human health; Government intervention > Public finance; Justice; Social and/or cultural impacts > Pride or cultural identity
Keywords: Just Transition Listening Project (JTLP); Transitional services; unjust transitions; social protection; employer-based health coverage; labor unions; collective bargaining; labor climate movement; Trade Adjustment Act; wage insurance; Washington Initiative 1631; Free Prior and Informed Consent; systemic racism; holistic transition; formal and informal education; “bargaining for the common good”; intergenerational mentorship; unionization; coalition building; facilitated dialogue; power inequities; Huntley Plant Closure Fund; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant; Lordstown Transition Center; Redwood Employee Protection Program 1978; United Steelworkers
By: J. Mijin Cha, Vivian Price, Dimitris Stevis, Todd E. Vachon, Maria Brescia-Weiler
Publishing Organization: Labor Network for Sustainability
Labor organization, Non-profit organization/civil society organization
Summary: The findings of this report are derived from more than 100 in-depth listening sessions, including qualitative interviews and focused discussion groups with workers and community members from across the United States, which were conducted in 2020. The sessions, typically lasting an hour or more, involved workers from dozens of unionized and nonunionized industries; union leaders; members of frontline communities, including environmental justice communities, communities of color, and Indigenous communities; along with leaders from labor, environmental justice, climate justice, and other community organizations.

The aim of the sessions was to capture the voices of the workers and community members who had experienced, are currently experiencing, or anticipate experiencing some form of economic transition. The report suggests how past transitions, driven by market forces, corporate entities, and shortsighted public policies, often leave workers and communities largely behind, with little to no support. As such, community trauma has gone unrecognized and unaddressed for years.

The report identifies several themes that have emerged through these sessions, including a picture of what transition entails; how coalitions have come together, particularly those including labor and environment groups; how common vision and strategies for change are built; and what pathways to a just future exist. The report also highlights how individual and collective understandings of transitions range widely, according to type of work, class, gender, race, age, political ideology, previous experiences with environmentalists or the climate justice movement, and relationships with unions and the community. The report affords insightful reading and covers recommendations for policymakers; labor and movement organizations; and future research to fill in the identified gaps in knowledge, including understanding how sectoral transitions such as automation, digitalization, hybrid working, and health care could be done in an equitable manner.

Academic paper/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Aug 2016

Exploring Power and Procedural Justice Within Climate Compatible Development Project Design: Whose Priorities Are Being Considered?

The authors explore how climate-compatible development design processes reconcile stakeholder preferences and procedural justice, using a case study analysis of two donor-funded projects in Malawi.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: Justice
Keywords: project design; procedural justice; participation; recognition; Multi-stakeholder Preferences; stated preference; true preference; power cube approach
By: Benjamin T. Wood, Andrew J. Dougill, Claire H. Quinn, Lindsay C. Stringer
Publishing Organization: Journal of Environment & Development
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: The authors explore procedural justice and power in project design through a case study analysis of two donor-funded projects in Malawi. They find that “top-down” and “expert-led” design processes and hidden power dynamics often result in the selective involvement of stakeholders, and that over time, the dependency on funding has led to the institutionalization of the donor project design preferences in the practices of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). While a considerable overlap exists between the stakeholders’ “revealed” priorities, invisible power dynamics encourage the suppression of “true” preferences. Therefore, visible, hidden, and invisible forms of power create barriers to procedural justice in climate-compatible development design in these projects.

The authors also present a theoretical framework that is meant to facilitate a holistic exploration of power and procedural justice in project design. Specifically, they used the “power cube” approach as a starting point to facilitate the understanding of participatory and procedural justice “spaces”, through which stakeholders can meaningfully engage with governance systems, along with the visible, hidden, and invisible power dynamics that delimit these spaces. The framework facilitates multilevel analyses, thereby enabling the investigation of whether and how the procedural justice spaces, open to stakeholders, differ across these dimensions.

The authors suggest that policymakers and practitioners can facilitate the patterns of procedural justice, if they put local priorities first, make participatory assessments robust and reflexive, take steps to reconcile worldviews, and harness co-production between professional stakeholders. Furthermore, to create pathways toward procedural justice, policymakers must avoid making design decisions on the basis of epistemological certainties and embrace discursive solutions.

Academic paper/Definitions and Concepts

May 2013

Climate justice and global cities: Mapping the emerging discourses

The paper draws on case studies and a database of initiatives from 100 cities to examine the emergence of the discourses on distributive and procedural justice in urban responses to climate change.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: Justice; Resilience
Keywords: intergenerational equity; entitlements; participation; urban planning; distributive and procedural justice; representation; adaptation
By: Harriet Bulkeley, JoAnn Carmin, Vanesa Casta´n Broto, Gareth A.S. Edwards, Sara Fuller
Publishing Organization: Global Environmental Change
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: The paper seeks to examine the ways in which concerns about justice are being articulated in the planning and implementation of urban climate change policy and projects, and consider the extent to which the city provides an arena within which questions of climate justice could be thought anew. The authors showcase the differences across the mitigation and adaptation domains in the ways by which the principles of climate justice have been articulated. They have also addressed some of the critical challenges in translating these principles into the urban arena. Drawing on an analysis of the projects and interventions taking place in 100 global cities in response to climate change, they have identified the explicit articulations of distributive and procedural justice across the adaptation and mitigation domains in only a small number of cities.

The authors highlight how the urban context brings to the fore the difficult questions of forms of procedure and type of participation, which could count as “just”, in the context of the widely-variegated forms of climate change response. While similar principles of distributive and procedural justice can be applied to both mitigation and adaptation, in practice, notions of justice are articulated differently across these domains. The authors also highlight specifically the differences in the ways in which justice has been articulated and what it has come to mean when it is framed at different scales, from nation states to individuals.

The authors find that there is limited explicit concern with justice at the urban level. However, where discourses of justice are evident, there are important differences emerging between urban responses to adaptation and mitigation, and between those in the north and in the south. Adaptation responses tend to stress the distribution of the “rights” to protection, although those in the South also emphasize the importance of procedural justice. Mitigation responses also stress the “rights” to the benefits of responding to climate change, with a limited concern for “responsibilities” or for procedural justice. The authors also find that while adaptation responses tend to focus on the rights of individuals, discourses of collective rights are emerging in relation to mitigation. They notice less of an emphasis on matters of procedural justice; such matters are more likely to be a concern in initiatives in the south, whereas responses in the north (often focused on the adaptation to heat) are more technocratic in their orientation.

Academic paper/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

May 2013

The Winds of Change: Environmental Justice in Energy Transitions

This article argues that renewable energy systems create procedural injustices just as much as fossil fuels and proposes a collaborative approach to renewable energy governance for a just energy transition.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Energy
Focus Areas: Environment and/or pollution > Human health; Government intervention > Regulation; Justice; Resilience
Keywords: environmental justice; health effects; participatory research; democratic decision-making; community-scale projects; procedural justice; distributive justice
By: Gwen Ottinger
Publishing Organization: Science as Culture
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: This article explores the environmental injustices created by the development of energy systems including renewable energy systems, such as the inequitable distribution of environmental hazards and the limited engagement that affected communities have in the decision-making related to the systems. It uses the example of wind energy, describing how wind farms could affect communities and the environment as well as discussing the lack of participation by frontline communities in the governance of renewable energy systems as a cause of procedural injustice. In addition, it proposes community-led energy production as a solution for a just energy transition.

Focusing on wind turbines, the author of this article argues that renewable energies create environmental injustices and health issues for local communities just as much as fossil fuels. The author further suggests that the lack of participation by frontline communities in the governance of these energy eco-systems could be an intentional approach by policymakers and corporations to avoid slowing down the scaling of technology. The author concludes by calling for a democratic approach to energy governance whereby participatory knowledge production is acknowledged as an “integral” part of the energy system. She also advocates for community-led energy production to ensure that technologies being deployed are compatible with the environment in which they live.

Academic paper/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations; Policy Tools or Evaluations

Jan 2021

Mitigating inequality with emissions? Exploring energy justice and financing transitions to low carbon energy in Indonesia

This article analyzes energy justice in Indonesia’s transition to low-carbon energy and explores how policies have exacerbated energy injustice.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Energy
Focus Areas: Inequality and/or poverty > Other; Investment > Private finance; Justice
Keywords: energy justice; energy poverty; climate finance; private finance; procedural justice; recognition
By: Abidah B. Setyowati
Publishing Organization: Energy Research & Social Science
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: This article explores Indonesia’s efforts to reduce energy poverty in its transition to low-carbon energy, with a particular focus on how distributive, procedural, and recognition justice has been included in policies aimed at increasing private investment in renewable energy electrification. Based on the analysis derived from qualitative interviews, field observation, and the review of government documents and policies, the author argues that despite Indonesia’s energy justice agenda of providing access to affordable electricity for all, the policies in place do not effectively promote energy justice.

In terms of distributive justice, the author argues that spatial injustice in electricity access is still prevalent, especially in the eastern part of Indonesia, where many communities lack reliable energy access. The author suggests that many renewable rural electrification projects may exacerbate this spatial inequality by supplying households and cities that have access to a grid network, while neglecting communities that live closest to the electricity generation sites. This is partly due to the government’s encouragement of private investment that favors large-scale projects, thereby further exacerbating geographic inequalities. The author argues that procedural injustice is also prevalent in the energy decision-making processes due to a lack of transparency in the current bidding and procurement processes and limited space for the public participation and engagement in decisions. In terms of recognition, the author asserts that marginalized communities living in areas, where electricity is not considered economically favorable, are neglected and denied electricity access.

The author also makes suggestions for better ways to incorporate energy justice principles into policies and programs. First, energy policies should include more inclusive approaches, such as encouraging public participation and increasing transparency. Second, energy policies need to incentivize diversity beyond large-scale and on-grid projects to effectively target those most affected by energy poverty. Third, contextually grounded approaches best suited to the needs of local communities should be prioritized. Finally, public finance should also be considered in addressing the needs of those most vulnerable to energy poverty.

Academic paper/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Nov 2019

Transitioning to Sustainable Agriculture Requires Growing and Sustaining an Ecologically Skilled Workforce

The authors suggest that agribusiness practices in the United States that pursue productivity as the primary goal, have been trending in an unsustainable direction and propose that place-based knowledge development, agroecological practices, and decentralized decision-making are key to sustainability in the agricultural sector.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Agriculture
Focus Areas: Employment > Skills, Social protections; Environment and/or pollution > Nature; Government intervention > Regulation; Inequality and/or poverty > Gender inequality, Other; Justice; Social and/or cultural impacts > Non-financial loss, Other
Keywords: ecologically-skilled people; biodiversity loss; agroecological farming systems; knowledge intensive management; monoculture; diversified cropping and livestock systems; social sustainability; place-based knowledge; farmer-to farmer networks; price controls; conservation measures; direct subsidies; agribusiness; decentralized governance; Green New Deal; gender and race based inequalities; skills development
By: Liz Carlisle, Maywa Montenegro de Wit, Marcia S. DeLonge, Alastair Iles, Adam Calo, Christy Getz, Joanna Ory, Katherine Munden-Dixon, Ryan Galt, Brett Melone, Reggie Knox, Daniel Press
Publishing Organization: Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: The article argues that agricultural practices in the U.S. are unsustainable and unjust to farmers, largely because of agribusiness and supporting policies. Over the past century, U.S. agriculture has been trending in an unsustainable direction, rapidly replacing knowledgeable people with non-renewable resources and eroding rural economies in the process. The authors suggest that U.S. policies, technologies, and economic pressures have tended to “deskill” rural labor—a trend that has been linked to labor under capitalism in general. They cite a national census that counted 6.5 million farms in the 1920s, with only 2.04 million left by 2017.

The authors argue that agroecological farming systems mimicking natural ecosystems that create tightly-coupled cycles of energy, water, and nutrients are already known to farmers and researchers. As such, they offer a well-studied pathway to an agricultural transition. A critical and under-appreciated feature of agroecological systems is that they replace fossil fuel- and chemical -intensive management with knowledge-intensive management. The authors argue that the biggest challenge in achieving agricultural sustainability is the replacement of non-renewable resources with ecologically-skilled people in ways that create and support desirable rural livelihoods.

The authors suggest ways in which U.S. policy could pivot to enable and support the ecologically skilled workforce needed to achieve food security and decent livelihoods. They highlight the need to: provide enabling conditions for new farmers to enter the system and sustain a decent livelihood; develop agroecological skills and supporting policy tools (or removal of policies that currently act as a barrier); decouple farmers from the trap of overproduction and low market prices; and strengthen farmer-to-farmer networks to promote knowledge exchange. The authors also briefly lay out the history of discrimination and injustice in the agricultural system in the U.S. and highlight the need for a foundational commitment to justice to guide the allocation of resources, affirm rights, and prioritize the agricultural needs of historically marginalized groups.

Academic paper/Definitions and Concepts

Feb 2014

What Kind of Governance for What Kind of Equity? Towards a Theorization of Justice in Water Governance

This article reviews the literature and concepts related to water and hydrosocial relations, water governance, and spatial scale, along with equity, justice, and human rights, with a focus on Bolivia.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Water
Focus Areas: Justice
Keywords: Hydrosocial; water governance; spatial scale; waterscape; environmental justice; water rights
By: Tom Perreault
Publishing Organization: Water International
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: The author conducts a critical review of the literature on water, in terms of its relationship to social relations and environmental justice. The author illustrates these theories through the case of water pollution in Bolivia’s Huanuni Valley resulting from mining activity, along with its social and environmental effects.

The author’s analysis of water and hydrosocial relations reveals that water and its management must be understood in the context of its social history and political character. He argues that water reflects and produces relationships of uneven social power. The author also analyzes the literature on water governance, with particular attention to spatial scale. The author argues that the decision on the scale of action for a water governance policy is not politically neutral: many policymakers choose to focus on the watershed level. To correct the scalar assumptions common in water governance policies, the author argues that the notion of the “waterscape”, or the view of water as a socio-natural entity, would better account for the relationship between water and society. In his review of the concept of equity in water governance, the author points out that the typical association of the concept with distributional impacts, such as access to water and exposure to pollution, does not account for the historical processes of social exclusion. The author also challenges the concept of the human right to water by suggesting that it has the potential to contradict the collective rights to water of some indigenous groups.

The author concludes the analysis by applying the concept of hydrosocial relations to the case of water pollution in Bolivia’s Huanuni Valley. He argues that while the formal law for water rights is progressive in Bolivia, water access favors the powerful and privileged in practice. To overcome this situation, the author suggests a greater focus on environmental justice and ecological governance that views water and society as natural, social, and political.

Academic paper/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Aug 2018

Using climate finance to advance climate justice: the politics and practice of channeling resources to the local level

The report makes a case for the targeting of adaptation finance at the local levels of government through direct access modalities to address equity concerns and describes the main obstacles local governments and local civil society groups face in accessing adaptation finance.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: Government intervention > Public finance; Justice; Resilience
Keywords: Adaptation finance; recognition; urban planning; local municipal government; civil society groups; community-based organizations; political ethnography; direct access modalities; Financial Intermediaries; financial subsidiarity; financial planning systems; municipal revenue; community savings groups
By: Sarah Colenbrander, David Dodman, Diana Mitlin
Publishing Organization: Climate Policy
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: The authors argue that some of the social, political, and economic processes that create and sustain inequalities within a country are typically the same as those that allocate climate finance. Adaptation finance may, therefore, advance climate justice between countries, while doing little to enhance climate justice within countries. The latter is viewed, in part, as a means of increasing justice through the redistribution of resources.

Using an urban lens for its analysis of low- and middle-income countries, the report outlines the ways that local governments and local civil society groups can increase the adaptive capacities of urban residents. The subsequent section identifies the barriers to disbursing adaptation finance to local organizations by illustrating how power relations favoring national and formal agencies create various economic, technical, and institutional obstacles for local organizations. This analysis informs the assessment of financial intermediaries and planning systems as entities that could be deployed to enable local organizations to access adaptation finance. The authors use some examples to illustrate how municipal authorities and organized groups of urban residents have been successful in using small amounts of resources to shift political dynamics. They suggest that there is scope for adaptation finance to have a transformational impact on procedural and distributive climate justice.

The authors acknowledge the risks involved, as channeling finance to the local level could end up: supporting patronage networks and clientelism; overburdening local actors with responsibilities beyond their existing capabilities and lead to the formalization of their processes that result in new exclusions; and/or making such organizations dependent on donors, rather than strengthening local accountabilities. However, the authors suggest that there are emerging capabilities, particularly within some local civil society agencies, that can enable the reversal of exclusionary practices and demonstrate how this may work with respect to adaptation finance.

Report/Case Study; Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations; Policy Tools or Evaluations

Sep 2016

Advancing Equity in California Climate Policy: A New Social Contract for Low-Carbon Transition

This report offers a Climate Policy Equity Framework for California’s low-carbon transition based on three principles: environmental justice, economic equity, and public accountability.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Energy
Focus Areas: Employment > Job creation and/or equality; Environment and/or pollution > Human health; Government intervention > Carbon pricing, Public finance, Regulation; Inequality and/or poverty > Other; Justice
Keywords: California; distributional impacts of regulation; California Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS); community shared solar; social contract; climate equity; policy trade-offs; performance indicators; environmental justice; energy efficiency; renewable energy; labor unions; labor standards; cap and trade programs
By: Carol Zabin, Abigail Martin, Rachel Morello-Frosch, Manuel Pastor, Jim Sadd
Publishing Organization: Center for Labor Research and Education
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: This report presents a Climate Policy Equity Framework meant to help California policymakers develop and evaluate climate policy. The framework includes specific criteria for tracking progress in meeting three main goals of environmental justice, economic equity, and public accountability. The authors use these criteria to analyze how close a particular climate policy or program has come to meeting these equity goals. They highlight indicators and corresponding data sources that can better track the impact of climate policy on equity.

The authors look at the framework through evidence available from carbon-reduction legislations in California, including the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill 32), Senate Bill 350 (2015), and Senate Bill 32 (2016). Evidence and examples from the state’s past interventions in energy efficiency and renewable energy guide their recommendations. While the low-carbon transition has not (yet) resulted in a net loss in jobs, the authors highlight the policies’ distributional impacts, the potential for increasingly ambitious greenhouse gas–reduction targets to worsen job losses, and the lower wages and career prospects associated with some of the created jobs. They recommend tangible public policy steps, including requiring labor standards for public projects, equitably distributing public incentive funds, and monitoring the equity performance of California’s climate policies.