Energy justice from the bottom up: A capability approach to community acceptance of wind energy in Mexico

Energy Islands: Metaphors of Power, Extractivism, and Justice in Puerto Rico

“They are grinding us into the ground” – The lived experience of (in)energy justice amongst low-income older households

In pursuit of energy justice

Gendered energy poverty and energy justice in rural Bangladesh

This paper explores how the Capability Approach (CA) can enrich the concept of energy justice by assessing the impact of two cases of digitalisation in the energy sector. Digitalisation promises technical solutions to pressing challenges in the energy sector such as climate change and fossil fuel scarcity. Current academic and popular discussions of these solutions are dominated by a techno-utopian ideal, which sometimes obscures complex ethical and social challenges. Furthermore, technology assessment in the energy sector often focuses on environmental and economic aspects of sustainability, while issues of energy justice or broader ethical concerns are often a low priority. In this paper, we explore whether Nussbaum’s version of the CA can be used as a systematic approach to the assessment of technological options that helps bring energy justice into the spotlight. Drawing on examples from two different areas of the energy system, namely, smart grids for the electricity sector and autonomous vehicles for the mobility sector, we demonstrate that the CA provides a normative framework that allows for aspects of individual deliberation and as such is well suited as a normative metric for the conception of energy justice in social science.

Framing energy justice: perspectives from activism and advocacy

The purpose of the paper is to expand the concept of energy justice by considering the struggles over coloniality and cultural identity in the Global South and their interactions with the spatial and historical development of energy systems and the ongoing forms of energy transitions. The article argues that the current conceptualizations of energy justice cannot be separated from the politics of incumbency as, without a decolonial critique, they tend to reproduce rather than transform hegemonic power relations. To be transformative, energy justice must be articulated from the politics of actually existing unsustainability. In other words, the starting position for energy justice must be that energy injustices are already embedded in existing energy systems and energy policies. Drawing on Latin-American decolonial thought, and the work of political ecologists around energy, this article advocates looking beyond a universalized conception of justice towards an approach where justice is based on a sense of place and is informed by the community’s relationship with the land. Using the concept of energy landscapes, the article puts forth an alternative way of understanding energy systems and conceptualizations of justice in decolonial settings.

Since the concept of energy justice emerged, studies have conceptually, but rarely empirically, explored energy justice. In addition, studies on energy justice have mainly focused on anthropocentric values toward energy justice. This study aims to categorize Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries’ energy justice using synthetic energy justice via two aspects: eco-centrism and anthropocentrism. Each aspect of energy justice is sub-divided into distributive, substantive, and procedural justices. Using a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis methodology via a statistical program, we suggest typologies of 35 OECD countries for each aspect. Eight types of energy justice for each aspect are extracted, and four types of synthetic energy justice groups are identified among OECD countries. Austria, Iceland, and Luxembourg show the best performance in synthetic energy justice, but do not reach a complete contestable status from an eco-centric perspective. This study provides practical policy implications for OECD countries to self-evaluate each country's macroscopic policy direction in the energy sector, and to ultimately pursue synthetic energy justice with a balanced perspective for our environment and us.

In the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in southern Mexico, utility-scale wind power developments are hotly contested. Steady local resistance is presented by indigenous and peasant “anti” wind power groups, whilst “pro” wind local stakeholders, including many landowners, are perceived as antagonistic to the arrival of wind power. Engaging the energy justice literature and in applying a novel intersectionality approach, this paper presents an exploration of the diverse voices involved, problematising seemingly “rival” discourses in the indigenous town of Union Hidalgo. The research explores how issues of energy justice are intertwined with elements including ethnicity, class, gender, age, power, and the treatment of more-than-humans. Using a mixed methods approach that draws on concept mapping and semi-structured interviews, this paper aims to understand to what extent the lens of intersectionality serves to blur the boundaries between ‘pro’ and ‘anti’ voices. It does so by illustrating and discussing how Propietarios (“pros”) and Comuneros (“antis”) articulate different constructs of energy justice according to varying intersectional positionalities both as groups, and as individuals. Empirically, the paper enriches the literature on local opposition to utility-scale wind power from a non-Western perspective and deepens the exploration of the case study of utility wind power in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Conceptually, it advances the use of intersectional approaches in energy justice, advocating for their role in connecting energy justice theory with deeper understandings of individual and collective stances in renewable energy development contestations. This, in turn, offers opportunities to further conceptualise how to achieve energy justice for these communities.

The concept of energy justice across the disciplines

Recent European policy efforts stimulate the emergence of community energy initiatives, and the European Commission explicitly aims to enable a just transition towards a low-carbon energy system. One of the prevalent assumptions is that fostering community energy will bring about energy justice. Intrigued by this assumption, we conduct an extending systematic literature review to explore how the notion of energy justice is discussed within scholarly work on community energy initiatives in Europe. We detected a tendency of community energy scholars to not (yet) fully employ the inherent scope the concept of energy justice entails. Therefore, we propose that community energy justice should be analyzed through three different lenses: energy justice occurring within community energy initiatives, between initiatives and related actors, and beyond initiatives. Extending the energy justice lens to address these different levels helps to better bring out the encompassing premise that the notion of energy justice entails, both analytically and in practice. Through our analysis different energy justice impacts come to the fore, for example related to social inequality: not all societal groups are equally positioned to benefit from policies focused on community initiatives. Considering the policy efforts to stimulate community energy development, we argue that these impacts can be amplified, due to cumulative power of many community energy initiatives together. Our contribution highlights that for making energy transitions just, a broader and more connected understanding of energy justice in the context of community energy initiatives is central.

Differences between women and men in their access to and use of energy services constitutes the core of gender-energy nexus research. In early 2010s, the concept of energy justice has emerged as a response to the need to address justice issues in energy access, use and policy making. However, the gender-energy nexus research lacks the conceptual basis to analyse energy policies from a justice perspective. This paper aims to bridge this scientific and policy knowledge gap by developing and applying a conceptual framework by juxtaposing the three tenets of energy justice (distributive, recognitional and procedural justice) and the three engendering policy discourses (women empowerment, gender mainstreaming and social inclusion). To develop the framework, we conducted a conceptual review of 56 scientific publications by identifying, examining and synthesising the key ideas and debates in energy justice and engendering energy policy. Then we applied the framework to the current body of scientific knowledge on gender and energy justice and identified future research directions. Given the limited scientific literature on gender and energy justice, the framework contributes to conceptualising energy justice for researchers analysing energy systems in their social, cultural, economic and political contexts. This paper makes a first attempt in doing so, and invites further elaboration and operationalisation of the framework. A comprehensive application of the framework requires further empirical evidence and the development of indicators to assess energy policies from an integrated gender and energy justice perspective.

Revisiting energy justice: Is renewable energy technology innovation a tool for realizing a just energy system?

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsTimothy C. CaboniTimothy C. Caboni is Lecturer in Public Policy and Higher Education and director of the academic program in institutional advancement in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy program at Vanderbilt University's Peabody College. John M. Braxton is Professor of Education in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy Program at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Molly Black Duesterhaus is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Meaghan E. Mundy is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Shederick A. McClendon is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.John M. BraxtonTimothy C. Caboni is Lecturer in Public Policy and Higher Education and director of the academic program in institutional advancement in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy program at Vanderbilt University's Peabody College. John M. Braxton is Professor of Education in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy Program at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Molly Black Duesterhaus is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Meaghan E. Mundy is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Shederick A. McClendon is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Molly Black DeusterhausTimothy C. Caboni is Lecturer in Public Policy and Higher Education and director of the academic program in institutional advancement in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy program at Vanderbilt University's Peabody College. John M. Braxton is Professor of Education in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy Program at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Molly Black Duesterhaus is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Meaghan E. Mundy is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Shederick A. McClendon is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Meaghan E. MundyTimothy C. Caboni is Lecturer in Public Policy and Higher Education and director of the academic program in institutional advancement in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy program at Vanderbilt University's Peabody College. John M. Braxton is Professor of Education in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy Program at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Molly Black Duesterhaus is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Meaghan E. Mundy is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Shederick A. McClendon is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Shederick A. McClendonTimothy C. Caboni is Lecturer in Public Policy and Higher Education and director of the academic program in institutional advancement in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy program at Vanderbilt University's Peabody College. John M. Braxton is Professor of Education in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy Program at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Molly Black Duesterhaus is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Meaghan E. Mundy is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Shederick A. McClendon is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Stephanie D. LeeTimothy C. Caboni is Lecturer in Public Policy and Higher Education and director of the academic program in institutional advancement in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy program at Vanderbilt University's Peabody College. John M. Braxton is Professor of Education in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy Program at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Molly Black Duesterhaus is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Meaghan E. Mundy is a doctoral candidate in Leadership and Policy Studies specializing in Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Vanderbilt. Shederick A. McClendon is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

This chapter will explore the meanings of energy justice in the specific context of the low-carbon transition. I start with the dominant three-tenets theoretical framework of procedural, distributional, and recognition justice. Then I examine the relationship between energy justice and other concepts of justice such as climate, environment, mobility, and planetary justice as well as ‘just transitions’. Developing countries will account for over ⅔ of the world’s energy demand in the coming decades but scholarship continues to view the concept of energy justice largely through a Western perspective. So, I analyse the extent to which scholarship relating to the low-carbon transition in developing countries considers ‘universal’ meanings of energy justice, develops context-specific versions of the concept, or relies on other concepts such as energy ethics, energy equity, energy poverty and equity sovereignty. I then turn to the relationship between energy justice and energy injustice. The conclusion reflects on some challenges facing the quest for meanings of energy justice and identifies some areas for future research.