What does “just” mean in just energy transitions? Different perspectives between EU institutional debates and scientific literature

Bibliographic Data

ID13137751
AuthorsGiacomo Chiara (0000-0003-4635-0084, Ca' Foscari University of Venice, corresponding author), Ignazio Terrana (0009-0000-3981-6910, Sapienza University of Rome), Mauro Sarrica (0000-0003-1167-2788, Sapienza University of Rome), Sonia Brondi (0000-0002-9651-2216, Ca' Foscari University of Venice)
Year2025
Volume7
Publication date2025-05-26
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFrontiers in Political Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2673-3145 • E-ISSN: 2673-3145
PublisherFrontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/fpos.2025.1572855
OpenAlexW4410759583
LanguageEN
References cited91

Introduction In light of systemic challenges and radical transformations, such as those at the intersection of energy transitions and justice, there is an increasing need for closer integrations between academic research and policy planning. From this assumption, the current article examines institutional and scientific discourses on just transition to understand which themes and perspectives are common and which areas could benefit from mutual exchanges between the two domains. Methods Thematic analysis of institutional texts about the Just Transition Mechanism and scientific literature on energy and environmental justice (2020-2023) was conducted to uncover shared or disputed discourses. Three overarching aspects and seven sub-themes were highlighted: focus (topics and levels of abstraction), justice (forms and dimensions), and actors (typologies, agency, and relationships). Results Institutional texts emphasize economic-financial stances and restorative or distributive justice, while the scientific literature stresses social stances and recognition or procedural dimensions. A few cross-cutting discourses further organize these results. Discussion The prevailing discourse, common in institutional and scientific texts, focuses on criticisms of policy and governance. They advocate for the inclusiveness of Global South actors, reflecting on their agency against (in)just transitions and suggesting strategies for building public engagement and resilience. Overall, institutional and scientific texts reveal internal and reciprocal tensions among themes, with the scientific literature exhibiting greater diversity than institutional debates

Economics · Energy (signal processing · Physics · Political science · Positive economics · Quantum mechanics · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Global Energy and Sustainability Research · Sustainability and Climate Change Governance

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access