Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This is an Open Access document downloaded from ORCA, Cardiff University's institutional
repository: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/100594/
This is the author’s version of a work that was submitted to / accepted for publication.
Citation for final published version:
Jenkins, Kirsten, McCauley, Darren and Forman, Alister 2017. Energy justice: a policy approach.
Energy Policy 105 , pp. 631-634. 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.052 file
Publishers page: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.052
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.052>
Please note:
Changes made as a result of publishing processes such as copy-editing, formatting and page
numbers may not be reflected in this version. For the definitive version of this publication, please
refer to the published source. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite
this paper.
This version is being made available in accordance with publisher policies. See
http://orca.cf.ac.uk/policies.html for usage policies. Copyright and moral rights for publications
made available in ORCA are retained by the copyright holders.
1
EnergyJustice:APolicyApproach
Citeas:
Jenkins,K.,McCauley,D.andForman,A.(2017)‘EnergyJustice:APolicyApproach’.
EnergyPolicy.105(June2017).631-634
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.052
(1) Correspondingauthor:KirstenJenkins,ResearchFellowinEnergyJusticeand
Transitions,CentreonInnovationandEnergyDemand,UniversityofSussex,
(2) DarrenMcCauley,SeniorLecturerinEnergyPolicy,SchoolofGeographyand
Geoscience,UniversityofStAndrews
(3) AlisterForman,PhDCandidate,SustainablePlacesResearchInstitute,Cardiff
University
1. Introduction
Theworldissettoinvestover$300trillioninrenewable,fossilfuelsandnuclear
energy in thenext ten to twentyyears (Sternetal.2016).Over threequartersof this
total is estimated to be renewable and, to a lesser extent, nuclear investment (BNEF
2016).Thiswill involve fuelling currentenergy systems,butaboveall the creationof
new supply chains, technologies and multiple impacts. Old injustices could be
reinforced, whilst new incarnations emerge if we continue to ignore the ethical
implicationsofourpolicyandinvestmentdecisions.Thisincludesfailurestoappreciate
the burdens of having too much energy, including waste, over-consumption and
pollution, or from not having enough, where some individuals lack access, are
challenged by under-consumption and poverty, and may face health burdens and
shortened lives as a consequence of restricted energy choices (Sovacool etal. 2016);
andemergentmoralquandariesthatquestionthecriteriaonwhichwebaseourenergy
choices. With an aim to fill this gap (at least partially), this special issue critically
2
evaluates the social justice implications of energy supply and use from a policy
perspective.Thisisthefirstspecialissueinanyleadingjournaltodoso.
Althoughnotexplicitlytermedassuch,keyaspectsofenergyjusticetheoryand
debates have been discussed, and in some cases, remedied, since around the 1980s
(Halff 2014). A development trajectory building towards contemporary interest in
energy justice can thus be identified through activities such as the 1980s group
Resources for the Future, who were actively involved in this field, the work of the
Brundtland Commission whose 1987 report was embedded with notions of social
justice,aswellasthescenariosstudyoftheWorldEnergyCouncil(1993), ‘Energyfor
Tomorrow’sWorld’, which similarly addressed issues foregrounded in contemporary
conceptions of energy justice. Such activities sit alongside mounting United Nations
material andaspirations (such as JoseGoldembergetal.’sUNDPReport: "Energy and
the challenge of sustainability", 2000), and in the case of fuel poverty, the emergent
concernsforincreasinghousingstandardstoachieveaffordablewarmthdatingbackto
theearly1970s(Boardman1991)whichfindparallelsbacktothe19thCenturyatleast.
Asacontemporary,academicmanifestationofsuchconcerns,theenergyjustice
conceptevaluates(a)whereinjusticesemerge,(b)whichaffectedsectionsofsocietyare
ignored,and(c)whichprocessesexistfortheirremediationinorderto(i)reveal,and
(ii)reducesuchinjustices(Jenkinsetal.2016a).Despitebeingarelativelynewtermin
terms of its academic recognition and use, the concept of energy justice gained early
prominenceasoneofeightcorethemesofthenew(2016)NatureEnergyjournal,and
wasrecentlynamedasanexplicitthemeoftheUKEnergyResearchCouncil(UKERC).
Thefirstacademiccontributiontobepublishedthatexplicitlyreflectsonenergyjustice
from a policy perspective was co-authored by two of the three special issue editors
(McCauleyetal.2013).Intheyearsfollowing,wehaveseenpeer-reviewedarticlesand
editedbookspublishedonenergy justicewithregardstowholesystems(Heffronand
McCauley 2014; Jenkins et al. 2014, 2016a), ethical behaviour (Hall 2013), climate
change (Bickerstaffetal. 2013;McCauleyetal. 2016),householdenergyconsumption
(Walkeretal.2016), energypolicy-making (Heffronetal.2015;Sovacooletal.2016),
energy consumption and mobility (Simcock and Mullen 2016), and theorization and
methods (Sovacool and Dworkin 2014; Sovacool 2015; Jenkins et al. 2016b). This
special issue contributesnot only to amorenuancedunderstanding of the formation
and implications of the energy justice concept, but it is hoped, the increased justice
3
literacyofacademicsandpractitioners.Across itscontributions itemphasisesthatwe
mustnotonlymitigatetheimpactsofenergyviasocio-technicalchange,butalsoseekto
dosoinanethicallydefensible,sociallyjust,way.
2. NewFrontiersinEnergyPolicyandEnergyJusticeResearch
Sofartherapiddevelopmentoftheenergyjusticeconcepthasbeendominated
bygeographicalandsociologicalapproaches,andtheconceptisonlystartingtoemerge
in legalandpolicy literature.Asan introductionto thepapers in thespecial issue,we
suggestfivechallengesthatbothacademicsandpractitionersmustreflectuponaswe:
(1)useconceptsfromethics,moralityandjusticetothinkaboutenergydilemmas,and
(2) continue to develop, and increasingly implement energy justice concepts in the
policysector.
2.1. Learningfromnationalpolicycontexts
McCauley et al. (2013: 1) identify that energy justice ‘aims to provide all
individuals, across all areas, with safe, affordable and sustainable energy’; a
cosmopolitan approach, which identifies that all ethnic groups belong to a single
communitybasedonacollectivemorality.Yettheglobalised‘energyforall’conceptis
atoddswithourpolicystructures.Thereisatendencytosplitourenergysystemsinto
small, understandable pieces, leading to ad-hoc, detrimental, policy, as some of our
‘solutions’bothcauseandfailtorecognisewidespreadexternalities(Gagnonetal.2002;
Meadows2009;Sovacooletal.2014),includingissuesofsocial justice.Thisincludesa
continuedfocusonnationalstrategiesforenergyprovisionanduse,detachedfromthe
often international, systems-wide upstream and downstream implications of these
policies.UKnuclearenergypolicyandUKassessmentsofnuclearenergy’sviabilitydo
not account for the impacts of imported uranium, for example, despite the policy’s
obviousknock-on effects (Jenkinsetal.2016a, c). The same is truewhen considering
widespread failures to acknowledge the impacts of extracting or producing the rare
metals required for wind and solar technology, which are associated with adverse
environmental and health impacts and are geo-politically divided, aswell as broader
environmental issues such as natural habitat loss due to palm oil production for
4
electricitygenerationorbiofuel,andthesurreptitiousclearingofhardwoodforests to
supplementwoodwastesandchipsforelectricitygeneration(Stegen2015;Baldietal.
2014; Saikkonen et al. 2014). We seek to not only expand the national context,
considering structures for energy justice at the international systems level, but to
increase dialogue between these national contexts as we consider how one country
might learn from another, or in contrast, how contextually-specific our strategies for
energyjusticemustbe.
2.2. Legalandregulatorycontext
Eachenergydecisionandprocessoccurswithinaregulatoryand legalcontext,
whether it is at a local, national or international level. As an illustration, the United
Nations’EconomicCommissionforEurope’s‘AarhusConvention’ensuresopportunities
foraccesstoenvironmental informationandtransparentproceduresforallcitizensof
party countries, controlling the means by which energy decisions are made and
mandatingconsultation(YennetiandDay2015;UNECE1998,2006).Theseregulations
occurthroughoutthelifecycleofanenergyformaswecontrolresourceextraction,the
designandconstructionofnewfacilities,thetransportofmaterials,andtheirsafetyand
security,aswellasissuesofcommon,internationalconcern–associatedresearchorthe
risks of proliferation, for example.Whilst these regulationsmay indirectly represent
issuesofdistributionaljustice,justiceasrecognitionandproceduraljustice,weidentify
that on the whole, not enough attention has been paid to the legal and regulatory
context in which issues of energy justice emerge. Thus, we call upon authors and
readers to reflect on, firstly, which areas of legislation and regulation are hindering
ethically-just decision-making, and secondly, hownew concepts or ideas fromenergy
justicemighthelpustoinformthishardpolicycontext.
2.3. Methodologiesforenergyjustice
A number of different approaches have emerged to exploring the social
dimensionsofenergysupplyanduse,includingactornetworktheory,assemblages,and
capabilitiesapproaches,amongstothers(seeWong2016;DayandWalker2013;Dayet
al. 2016). Heffron et al. (2015) sought to quantify energy justice, for example. Yet
5
despite this growth, two content analyses of the top energy technology and policy
journalshighlight theapparentunimportanceof energy justicebothmethodologically
andtopically(Sovacool2014a;Sovacool2014b),andthereisagrowingpredominance
oftheoreticalcontributions.Notprecludingbutbuildinguponthesemethodologies,we
develop energy justice scholarship as normative, change-driven and policy focused.
Specifically, we question which methods we need for assessing the prevalence of
injusticesinourenergysystems,andforremediatingthem.
We advocate for the exploration and proliferation of policy-oriented
methodological approaches to energy justice scholarship that utilises methods from
across the academic disciplines. These include methods incorporating modelling,
statistics, metrics, cost-benefit analysis and policy assessments alongside qualitative
approaches. Moreover, we highlight the importance of considering not only which
methodologicalapproachestouse,butwhen in thepolicycycleweseekto implement
them. Using the framework ofMiller etal.(2015),we identify three decision-making
areas where it is possible to enact socio-economic approaches that are conscious of
ethical dilemmas: (1) the practices and techniques through which potential energy
futures are envisioned, analysed, modelled where required, and evaluated, (2) the
forumsandmethodsfordeliberating,debating,andmakingenergychoices,and(3)the
institutions for fashioning, operating, and regulatingnewenergy systems.Theenergy
justiceframeworkhasextensivepotentialtocontributetoeachofthesefields.
2.4. Thinkingacrossenergytypes
Eachenergysourceisinevitablyimbuedwithitsownjusticechallenges–nuclear
power’s creation of radioactivewaste,wind energy’s needs for stronger reliability in
offsettingintermittencyanddistributionexpansion,orcoal’shighworkerdeathtolland
CO2production, forexample. Indeed,whererenewableenergysourcesareconcerned,
there is an increasinglydesperateneed for large-scale storage capacitybeyondpump
storageasameansofsecurelyprovidingenergyservicesforall.Moreover,thecostsof
subsidising renewable energy are increasingly linked to rising fuel poverty in some
industrialised countries. In this regard, differing forms of energy use also raise the
concernsofwhohasaccess,whodoesnot,andthedistributionalburdenofourdifferent
6
consumption forms.These challenges are increasinglywell documented in a seriesof
source-by-sourceaccountsofanenergysource’ssocialimpacts,includingassessments
ofenergyproduction(SimpsonandClifton2016;YennetiandDay2016;Goedkoopand
Devine-Wright2016)andenergyconsumptionwitha focusonmobilityanddomestic
life(SimcockandMullen2016;Liddelletal.2016;Walkeretal.2016;Chattertonetal.
2016;MullenandMarsden2016).Whilstclearlyvaluable,weidentifythatfewstudies
explore the comparability and contrast of different production and consumption
patterns,andwhatthejusticeimplicationsofonesourcecanmeanforanother.Doesoil
and gas extraction raise similar energy justice concerns, and therefore necessitate
similar injustice remediation procedures? Do the justice implications of household
energy use translate to behaviour in business? And through these contrasts and
comparisons,shouldwechooseonesourceofproductionoruseoveranotherbecauseit
presents the ‘lesser justice evil’? Here we ask for authors and practitioners to
contemplate thesource-specific implicationsofanenergy formoruseaswell as their
roleaspartofadiverseenergymix,consideringtheir findingsandpolicies inawider
context.
2.5. Temporalapproaches
Finally, we identify the challenge of time. The drivers of energy systems
transformation inevitably change, with different energy sources and usages being
selectedbasedontheirabilitytofulfilevolvingpoliticalpriorities.Thisincludesashift
inconcernforthecheap,plentifulsupplyofenergy,totheprovisionofsafeandsecure
electricity generation, resource efficiency, or the desire to transition to low-carbon
production.Asanoutcomeoftheseselectionprocesses,whatenergyjusticehasbeen,is,
ormightbealsoevolves.Germany’stransitionawayfromnuclearpowerinthewakeof
theFukushimadisastercanbeseentorepresentachangefromthe‘moralityofrisk’to
the‘moralityofcarbonreduction’,forexample,removingthejusticeconcernsofnuclear
power and raising the challenges of widely distributed renewables and household
affordability(RehnerandMcCauley2015).Yetdespite thesedynamics,andoutsideof
intergenerationaljusticestudies,researchistypicallydrivenbyspatialexplanationsof
change.We identify that explicit engagementwith temporality is largely neglected in
currentresearch,andthatwhereitdoesappearitdoessoinverycontrastingwaysas
7
the literature both highlights a tendency to look back in time, taking an evaluative
approach focused on the remediation of past injustices, or in contrast, focusing on
mitigationofpotential injustices inthefuture(SidortsovandSovacool2015;Sovacool
2013;Heffronetal. 2015). Consciousof these temporal dynamics,we call for greater
attention to not only the pace of our transitions, but also the different temporal
questionsof justice theycreate,consideringwhenandhowtransitions takeplaceand
resultantly,whenenergyjusticecanbeachieved.
3. Conclusion
Theprimaryobjectiveofthespecialissueistoinspireenergyjusticeapplications
to policy making. Energy justice has tended to be abstract in some of the existing
literature. It is our collective intention to demonstrate that justice is not only a
philosophicalundertaking.Inourview,thestudyofjusticemustinvolveanassessment
of how national policy actors, institutions and competing interests manage the
translation of broad universally accepted values into real life down to the household
andindividuallevel.Thestudyofpolicydemandssophisticatedframeworksofanalysis
thatcancopewithmessyrealities.The lackofdeliveryofeventhemostbasicenergy
needs throughout theworld reminds us of the urgency in building understanding of
how tomanage the transition to amoreequitable and fair global energy system.The
contributions in the special issue start the conversation on how energy justice as a
theoreticalandpracticalframeworkcouldhelpustoachieveasuccessfultransition.
The papers contained in this special issue present advancements in fivemain
ways, through offering new: (1) critical theoretical explorations of energy justice
frameworks, (2)appliedempiricalcontextsandmethodology, (3)energypolicybased
assessments from a justice perspective, (4) explorations of energy justice’s role as a
decision-support tool for policy-makers, and (5) understandings of energy justice
across multiple scales; considering the heterogeneous ways in which energy justice
might be negotiated and implemented in practice. They do so with insights from
politics, geography, anthropology, lawandsociology, thusproviding inter-disciplinary
perspectives on energy justice issues, and the policies that will either perpetuate or
abatethem. Wehopethatthesetofarticlescompiledinthisspecial issuewilltrigger
debateandfurtherresearchinthisvitalareatoassistthecreation,andwhererelevant,
perpetuation,ofjustenergypolicy.
8
Acknowledgements
Ourthanksgotoeachoftheauthorsandpeer-reviewersfortheircontributions,andto
theOverseeingEditorMichaelJeffersonandEditorialteamfortheiron-goingassistance
withthedevelopmentofthespecialissue,andtheirhandlingofthepapersitcontains.
9
References
Baldi L, Peri M and Vandone D (2014) ‘Clean energy industries and rare earth materials’,
Economicandfinancialissues’,EnergyPolicy66:53-61
Bickerstaff K, Walker G, and Bulkeley H (2013) ‘Energy justice in a changing climate: social
equityandlow-carbonenergy’,ZedBooks,London
BNEF(2016)NewEnergyOutlook2006:Poweringachangingworld,,NewYork:BloombergNew
EnergyFinance
BoardmanB(1991)‘Fuelpoverty:fromcoldhomestoaffordablewarmth’,BelhavenPress
Chatterton TJ, Anable J, Barnes J and Yeboah G (2016) ‘Mapping household direct energy
consumption in the United Kingdom to provide a new perspective on energy justice’,
EnergyResearchandSocialScience18:71-87
DayRandWalkerG(2013) ‘Householdenergyvulnerabilityas“assemblage”’ inBickerstaffK,
WalkerG,andBulkeleyH(2013)‘Energyjusticeinachangingclimate:socialequityand
low-carbonenergy’,ZedBooks,London(Chapter1)
DayR,WalkerGandSimcockN(2016)‘Conceptualisingenergyuseandenergypovertyusinga
capabilitiesframework’,EnergyPolicy93:255-264
FraserN(2014)‘JusticeInterrupts’,Routledge,London
GagnonL,BelangerCandUchiyamaY(2002)‘Life-cycleassessmentofelectricitygeneration
options:Thestatusofresearchin2001’,EnergyPolicy30:1267-1278
GoedkoopFandDevine-WrightP(2016)‘Partnershiporplacation?Theroleoftrustandjustice
inthesharedownershipofrenewableenergyprojects’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience
17:135-146
GoldembergJoseetal.: ‘WorldEnergyAssessment:Energyandthechallengeofsustainability’,
2000,UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme,NewYork
Halff A,Sovacool BKandRozhon J (Eds.) (2014)‘Energy poverty: global challenges and local
solutions’,OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford
Hall MS (2013) ‘Energy Justice and Ethical Consumption: Comparison, Synthesis and Lesson
Drawing’,LocalEnvironment:TheInternationalJournalofJusticeandSustainability 18(4):
422-437
HeffronRJandMcCauleyD(2014)‘Achievingsustainablesupplychainsthroughenergyjustice’,
AppliedEnergy123:435-437
HeffronRJ,McCauleyDandSovacoolBK(2015) ‘Resolvingsociety’senergytrilemmathrough
theenergyjusticemetric’,EnergyPolicy87:168-176
Jenkins K, McCauley D, Heffron RJ and Stephan H (2014) 'Energy justice, a whole systems
approach',Queen'sPoliticalReview29(2):74-87
10
Jenkins K, McCauley D, Heffron R J, Stephan H and Rehner R (2016a) ‘Energy justice: A
conceptualreview’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience11:174-182
Jenkins K (2016b) ‘Sustainable Development and Energy Justice: Two Agendas Combined’.
InHeffron R J and Little G (Eds.) ‘Delivering Energy Law and Policy in the EU andUS’,
EdinburghUniversityPress,Edinburgh
Jenkins K, Heffron R and McCauley D (2016c) ‘The Political Economy of Energy Justice: A
NuclearEnergyPerspective’inVandeGraafT,SovacoolBK,GhoshA,KernFandKlareMT
(Eds.)'ThePalgraveHandbookoftheInternationalPoliticalEconomyofEnergy’,Palgrave
Macmillan
LiddellC,MorrisC,GrayB,CzerwinskaAandThomasB(2016)‘Excesswintermorality
associatedwithAlzheimer’sdiseaseandrelateddementiasintheUK:Acaseforenergy
justice’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience11:256-262
McCauleyD,HeffronRJ,PavlenkoM,RehnerR,HolmesR(2016) ‘Energy justice in theArctic:
Implications for energy infrastructural development in the Arctic’,EnergyResearchand
SocialScience16:1:141-146
McCauley D, Heffron RJ, Stephan H and Jenkins K (2013) ‘Advancing energy justice: the
triumvirateoftenets’,InternationalEnergyLawReview32(3):107-110
Meadows(2009)‘ThinkinginSystems:APrimer’,Earthscan,London
MillerCA,RichterJ,JasonO’Leary(2015)‘Socio-energysystemsdesign:Apolicyframeworkfor
energytransitions’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience6:29-40.
Mullen C and Marsden G (2016) ‘Mobility justice in low carbon energy transitions’, Energy
ResearchandSocialScience18:109-117
RehnerRandMcCauleyD(2016)‘Security,justiceandtheenergycrossroads:Assessingthe
implicationsofthenuclearphase-outinGermany’,EnergyPolicy88:289-298
Saikkonen L, Ollikainen M and Lankoski J (2014) ‘Imported palm oil for biofuels in the EU:
Profitability,greenhousegasemissionsandsocialwelfareeffects’,BiomassandBioenergy
68:7-23
Sidortsov R and Sovacool BK (2015) ‘Left out in the cold: energy justice and Arctic energy
research’,JournalofEnvironmentalStudiesandSciences5:302-307
SimcockandMullen(2016)‘Energydemandforeverydaymobilityanddomesticlife:Exploring
thejusticeimplications’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience18:1-6
SimpsonGandCliftonJ(2016)‘Subsidiesforresidentialsolarphotovoltaicenergysystemsin
WesternAustralia:Distributional,proceduralandoutcomejustice’,EnergyResearchand
SocialScience65:262-273
SovacoolBK(2013)‘EnergyandEthics:JusticeandtheGlobalEnergyChallenge’,Palgrave
Macmillan
11
SovacoolBK (2014a) ‘What arewedoing here?Analysing fifteen years of energy scholarship
andproposingasocialscienceresearchagenda’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience1:1-
29
SovacoolBK(2014b)‘Energystudiesneedsocialscience’,Nature511:529–30
SovacoolBK (2015) ‘Fuelpoverty, affordability, andenergy justice inEngland:Policy insights
fromtheWarmFrontProgram’,Energy93:361-371
SovacoolBK (2016) ‘How longwill it take?Conceptualizing the temporaldynamicsof energy
transitions’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience13:202-215
Sovacool BK and Dworkin MH (2014) ‘Global Energy Justice: Principles, Problems, and
Practices’,Cambridge:CUP
Sovacool BK, Heffron RJ, McCauley D and Goldthau A (2016) ‘Energy decisions reframed as
justiceandethicalconcerns’.NatureEnergy1:1-6
Sovacool BK, Sidortsov EV and Jones BR (2014) ‘Energy security, equality, and justice’,
Earthscan
StegenKS(2015)‘Heavyrareearths,permanentmagnets,andrenewableenergies:An
imminentcrisis’,EnergyPolicy79:1-8
Stern,P.,Sovacool,B.andDietz,T.,(2016)‘TowardsaScienceofClimateandEnergyChoices’,
NatureEnergy,1,pp.547-555
UNECE(1998)‘ConventiononAccesstoInformation,PublicParticipationinDecision-making
andAccesstoJusticeinEnvironmentalMatters’,UnitedNationsEconomicCommissionfor
Europe,Aarhus,Denmark.
UNECE(2006)‘YourRighttoaHealthyEnvironment:ASimplifiedGuidetotheAarhus
ConventiononAccesstoInformation,PublicParticipationinDecisionMakingandAccess
toJusticeinEnvironmentalMatters’.UnitedNationsEconomicCommissionforEurope,
UnitedNations,NewYork:Geneva.
Walker G, Simcock N and Day R (2016) ‘Necessary energy uses and aminimum standard of
livingintheUnitedKingdom:Energyjusticeorescalatingexpectations?’,EnergyResearch
andSocialScience18:129-138
Wong CML (2016) ‘Assembling Interdisciplinary Energy Research through an Actor Network
Theory(ANT)frame’,EnergyResearchandSocialScience12:106-110
WorldEnergyCouncil (1993):“Energy forTomorrow'sWorld: TheRealities, theOptions and
theAgendaforAchievement’,KoganPageLtd.,London.
YennetiKandDayR(2016)‘DistributionaljusticeinsolarenergyimplementationinIndia:The
caseofCharankasolarpark’,JournalofRuralStudies46:35-46
