TY - JOUR
T1 - Energy justice and energy democracy
T2 - Separated twins, rival concepts or just buzzwords?
AU - Osička, Jan
AU - Szulecki, Kacper
AU - Jenkins, Kirsten E.H.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Author(s)
PY - 2023/10/1
Y1 - 2023/10/1
N2 - Many new concepts have emerged to better capture socio-technical change in energy systems from a normative perspective. Two of the most visible, popularized, and politically charged are Energy Justice and Energy Democracy, but it is the tension between them that has drawn recent controversy. Instead of arguing for the superiority of one over the other, this paper's aim is to demonstrate their differential contribution and areas of productive overlap using both quantitative and qualitative measures. It presents the results of the systematic review of 495 articles on Energy Democracy and Energy Justice in the Web of Science database, with attention to the geographical focus, scale, technology, and social groups dominant in both literatures. We find that both the concepts and literatures employing them are very closely related, almost like twins. The key difference is the failure of the Energy Democracy literature to engage with questions of energy poverty and distributional (in)justice. For Energy Justice, we find that despite lip service paid to, for example, the Global South, normative research in energy transitions sphere remains highly Western-centric. We highlight, too, that both terms are most often used as buzzwords and that this undermines knowledge building and the radical potential for change which is inherent in the two concepts and their applications.
AB - Many new concepts have emerged to better capture socio-technical change in energy systems from a normative perspective. Two of the most visible, popularized, and politically charged are Energy Justice and Energy Democracy, but it is the tension between them that has drawn recent controversy. Instead of arguing for the superiority of one over the other, this paper's aim is to demonstrate their differential contribution and areas of productive overlap using both quantitative and qualitative measures. It presents the results of the systematic review of 495 articles on Energy Democracy and Energy Justice in the Web of Science database, with attention to the geographical focus, scale, technology, and social groups dominant in both literatures. We find that both the concepts and literatures employing them are very closely related, almost like twins. The key difference is the failure of the Energy Democracy literature to engage with questions of energy poverty and distributional (in)justice. For Energy Justice, we find that despite lip service paid to, for example, the Global South, normative research in energy transitions sphere remains highly Western-centric. We highlight, too, that both terms are most often used as buzzwords and that this undermines knowledge building and the radical potential for change which is inherent in the two concepts and their applications.
KW - Conceptual dialogue
KW - Energy Democracy
KW - Energy Justice
KW - Structured review
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85170852765&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.erss.2023.103266
DO - 10.1016/j.erss.2023.103266
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85170852765
SN - 2214-6296
VL - 104
JO - Energy Research and Social Science
JF - Energy Research and Social Science
M1 - 103266
ER -