Global – Just Transition Initiative

What is "Just Transition"?

Podcast/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Jun 2021

Just Transitions: A Just Green Recovery from Covid-19

This podcast explores how governments can promote economic spending packages that promote an inclusive and fair green recovery.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: COVID-19; Government intervention > Public finance
By: Ben Cahill, Brian O’Callaghan, Jesse Burton
Publishing Organization: Climate Investment Funds (CIF), Center for Strategic and International Studies
Academic/research institution or journal, Development finance institution
Summary: Ben Cahill (CSIS) is joined by Brian O’Callaghan and Jesse Burton to discuss how Covid-19 recovery can be more just, equitable and green. Brian is Lead Researcher and Project Manager of the Oxford University Economic Recovery Project, and Jesse is with the University of Cape Town and a Senior Associate with E3G, where she provides analysis and policy advice on coal transitions in South Africa and globally. Together, they look at how governments can ensure that their economic spending packages can accelerate a green recovery while also being inclusive and fair for all communities.

Academic paper/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Mar 2019

Just transitions/Design for transitions: Preliminary Notes on a Design Politics for a Green New deal

This article argues that the field of design for transitions should be brought into dialogues pushing for just transitions to best meet the technical, cultural, political, and economic needs of a low-carbon future.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General; Land-use
Focus Areas: Social and/or cultural impacts > Other
Keywords: Green New Deal; creative labor; redirective practice; capitalism; neoliberalism; political economy; design; design for transitions
By: Damian White
Publishing Organization: Capitalism Nature Socialism
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: This article makes a case for incorporating design politics into just transitions. The author argues that the discourses and movements for just transitions and design for transition have low levels of overlap at present; however, they would greatly benefit from increased collaboration to better meet the needs of a low-carbon economy.

The article first explores the transformation of just transition discourses, as well as the diverse, and sometimes, conflicting visions of what a just transition looks like, and how it should be implemented. The author also traces the dialogues surrounding the contribution of design and modes of design futuring in the shift to sustainability. The author argues that applying design to just transitions approaches can expand the scope of the possible visions for a low-carbon, high-quality future by incorporating elements of prototyping, prefiguring, speculative thinking, and scenario building.

The author concludes with several examples of how design approaches could contribute to just transitions. One such example is in the case of intensified land displacement due to expanding renewable energy technologies. Participatory design and social planning for the energy transition could help prevent green grabbing and better address the social and environmental challenges of the renewable energy transition. The author argues that these approaches and other modes of design politics will make low-carbon transitions more just.

Commentary/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Aug 2021

Climate finance shaped by the people, for the people: Why the next wave of climate funding needs a human touch

Concessional finance could prove critical for just transitions in developing countries. Multilateral climate funds, with their range of tried and tested financial tools, could help drive a new wave of investments that put people at the center of a net-zero economy.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: Government intervention > Public finance; Investment > Other
Keywords: EU's Just Transition Fund; concessional finance; TA facility; just transition pilots
By: Hugh Searight, Mike Ward, Neha Sharma
Publishing Organization: Climate Investment Funds (CIF)
Development finance institution

Report/Case Study; Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Jul 2021

From the grand to the granular: translating just transition ambitions into investor action

The report describes the current state of the just transition discourse amongst businesses and highlights, with the help of case studies, a just transition “Expectations framework” that can be used by businesses and investors to help with investment assessments and due diligence, shareholder engagement, as well as capital allocation decisions.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: Government intervention > Other, Regulation; Investment > ESG and corporate engagement, Other, Private finance
Keywords: supply chain; CSR; co-creation; reporting; Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD); investors; private sector; OECD’s Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises; EU taxonomy; benchmarks; Climate Action 100+ (CA100+)
By: Nick Robins, Sabrina Muller, Katarzyna Szwarc
Publishing Organization: Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: The report describes the current state of the just transition discourse amongst businesses and proposes a path forward for businesses and investors to integrate just transition considerations into business decisions. The authors identify the just transition as a critical enabling factor in reaching net zero, noting how governments are increasingly recognizing that climate policies that do not take into account the effects on employment, communities, and consumers run the risk of failure. According to the authors, as the strategic case for just transitions has deepened, leading companies in the energy system have begun to formalize their responses as part of wider climate change strategies., Investors can also play a significant role by making sure that the social dimension is fully integrated into their assessment, stewardship, capital allocation, and policy activities.

The report presents a seven-point framework that combines the governance dimension for businesses (in terms of strategy, policy dialogue, and transparency) with a stakeholder component (including workers, communities, supply chains, and consumers). The intention is for this framework to be used in investment assessments and due diligence, shareholder engagement and stewardship, as well as the capital allocation decisions for portfolio companies. The framework is applied to analyze the work accomplished to date by five European international power utility firms.

The report identifies key lessons, including that businesses acknowledge some of the core foundations of just transitions, though the strategic approach is still emerging, with and that transparency and disclosure on just transitions is still lagging. It also points out how it is likely that investors will increasingly expect an active interest from companies to promote just transitions through public policy advocacy. Furthermore, supply chain realities loom large, in terms of generating quality green jobs for local people and also making sure that sustainability and human rights due diligence are intensified in international sourcing from developing countries. The authors highlight the need for community engagement to move from traditional corporate social responsibility activities to a more transformational model that is built upon co-creation. The report concludes with some critical next steps needed, including: promoting convergence around common approaches; modeling to help identify priority areas for investors; understanding better the role of participation and investor dialogues in just transition plans; along with clarifying the investor role in just transitions in emerging and developing economies.

Report/Case Study; Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Dec 2018

Climate change and the just transition: A guide for investor action

This report applies a just transition lens to investor approaches, using illustrative examples to propose a framework that helps investors to place just transition principles at the center of their climate strategies.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: Government intervention > Other, Regulation; Investment > ESG and corporate engagement, Other, Private finance
Keywords: investors; framework; fiduciary responsibility; financial risk management; private sector; capital allocation; Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI); Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)
By: Nick Robins, Vonda Brunsting, David Wood
Publishing Organization: Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: This report contends that investing in a just transition is set to be the best way to manage the strategic risks and opportunities flowing from the shift to a prosperous, low-carbon, resilient, and inclusive global economy. It highlights the influential role played by investors as the fiduciaries of assets and allocators of capital. The report also suggests how strategies for tackling the growing threat of climate change need to incorporate the full range of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) dimensions of responsible investment. This guide draws from an international review of investor approaches and dialogues with investors to provide a framework that can be applied both by individual institutions and through collaborative initiatives to help investors place just transition principles at the center of their climate strategies.

The article, using several examples of investor actions from around the world, highlights some strategic motivations for investors to pursue this work, including: broadening the understanding of systemic risks from climate change; updating the fiduciary responsibility to capture interrelated environmental and social drivers of long-term performance; recognizing the material drivers of long-term value; and identifying new growth opportunities in areas that combine climate and social goals. Based on these motivations, the article suggests five core areas of action for investors, including investment strategy, corporate engagement, capital allocation, and policy advocacy. The article also provides initial questions for investor engagements with companies on the just transition and highlights the need to build in a process to learn from the emerging experience and the lessons of practice, in terms of corporate engagement, capital allocation, and policy advocacy.

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

Nov 2018

Managing Coal Mine Closure: Achieving a just transition for all

This paper narrates the lessons and key considerations for planning and implementing a coal mine closure program, as derived from a review of global experiences and over two decades of World Bank assistance in coal mine closures to governments, enterprises, workers, and their communities.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: Mining
Focus Areas: Economic diversification/restructuring > Economic development plans; Employment > Job creation and/or equality, Skills, Social protections; Environment and/or pollution > Nature; Government intervention > Public finance, Regulation; Inequality and/or poverty > Gender inequality; Investment > Private finance; Social and/or cultural impacts > Non-financial loss
Keywords: mine mechanization; coal mine community characteristics; narrow economic base; political economy; labor mobility; mobility assistance; financial assurance mechanisms; Canada’s Industrial Adjustment Services; China’s urban Dibao social assistance program; transition funds
By: Michael C.Stanley, John E. Strongman, Rachel Bernice Perks, Helen Ba Thanh Nguyen, Wendy Cunningham, Achim Daniel Schmillen, Michael Stephen Mccormick
Publishing Organization: World Bank Group (WBG)
Development finance institution
Summary: The paper, using a review of global experiences and the World Bank’s decades of assisting governments to close mines, provides recommendations to policymakers on how to plan and implement a coal mine closure and mitigate the impacts on the people, communities, and livelihoods. The article highlights the typical characteristics of coal mining communities, which influence the potential for regional recovery after a closure. Many coal-dependent regions continue to lag behind other regions socially and economically, decades after a mine has been shut down. It further highlights how there are few if any instances of fully satisfactory economic rejuvenation outcomes in mono-industry coal mining towns, thereby emphasizing the acute need for early and careful planning to deal with the impacts of a closure.

The paper identifies nine lessons learned from managing coal mine closures, which are organized under three themes—namely policy and strategy development; people and communities; and land and environmental remediation. The policy and strategy development theme emphasizes that coal mine closures require clear policy direction, large budget outlays, and significant stakeholder consultations. The section on people and communities underlines the importance of a Just Transition for All to meet the needs of workers, families, and the wider community. The land and environmental remediation strategies advance the importance of financial planning for environmental remediation and land reclamation and summarizes a range of possible financial assurance mechanisms available. Some of these mechanisms are mobility assistance, employment services and small business support services, social assistance payments, and various financial assurance mechanisms for mine closures.

Brief/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

May 2021

A Just Green Recovery from COVID-19

This paper highlights how the Covid-19 recovery window offers a rare opportunity for accelerating the green transition and examines recovery measures through the lens of a just transition.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: COVID-19; Employment > Job creation and/or equality, Skills, Social protections; Government intervention > Other
Keywords: informal sector; just transition framework; covid recovery packages; health and unemployment insurance; pipeline projects; labor rights
By: Ben Cahill, Hugh Searight, Mary Margaret Allen, Rahul Madhusudanan
Publishing Organization: Climate Investment Funds (CIF), Center for Strategic and International Studies
Academic/research institution or journal, Development finance institution
Summary: This paper highlights how the Covid-19 recovery window offers a rare opportunity for transforming economies and accelerating the green transition. There is renewed openness to large-scale public investments, as governments seek to restore their economic health, boost long-term growth potential, and accelerate decarbonization. But the inequality, exposed by the Covid-19 crisis, also demonstrates the need for policies that can advance equity and justice.

The paper examines green recovery measures through the lens of a just transition. The authors use three key dimensions of a just transition—distributional impacts, social inclusion, and transformative intent—to assess green recovery interventions around the world. They highlight promising examples of just and green recovery measures in various countries and suggest policy insights, with principles and best practices for future action.

Academic paper/Guidelines, Strategies and Recommendations

Oct 2018

Job Losses and Political Acceptability of Climate Policies: Why the ‘Job-Killing’ Argument is So Persistent and How to Overturn It

The author examines how real or perceived job losses from climate policies impact the willingness of workers to support these policies and identifies countervailing policies for decisionmakers to consider.

Geographic Scope
Sectors: General
Focus Areas: Economic diversification/restructuring > Industry and/or sector assistance or plans; Employment > Job creation and/or equality, Other
Keywords: climate policy; employment impacts; collective action problem; distributional impacts
By: Francesco Vona
Publishing Organization: Climate Policy
Academic/research institution or journal
Summary: This paper examines the political acceptability of climate policies and the prevalence of the argument that these policies kill jobs. The author argues that the aggregate losses from climate policies are significantly smaller than the benefits, in terms of health and labor market outcomes. Using case studies and empirical evidence, the author maintains that the “job-killing” argument is exacerbated by a collective action problem. Individuals who are modestly “winning” have little motivation to organize to support climate policies, while those most negatively impacted are more likely to rally against these policies. Concerns for jobs tend to outweigh climate change concerns, especially in the face of extreme negative economic shocks.

The author identifies several factors that amplify the prominence of the “job-killing” argument in affected communities. In addition to the financial crisis and the increase of international competition from China, the geographic concentration of affected workers in the same area is also a key factor. The author also highlights political factors, such as the weakening of unions, which has led to job quantity being prioritized over job quality.

The author suggests that decisionmakers should consider implementing countervailing policies that minimize the collective action problem resulting from negative economic shocks. The author uses examples to suggest some possible policies. These include using lump-sum transfers to affected workers and their communities as a means to increase the political acceptability of climate policies and revenues from a carbon tax being either used to finance workers’ retraining programs or recycled to reduce labor taxation.

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.