This policy brief highlights the significance of addressing recognition and inclusion in just energy transitions, drawing on ananalysis of visions of a just transition in Poland and particularly in the Silesian Voivodeship. It emphasizes political and sociocultural dimensions of just transitions.

Matters of justice have been increasingly recognized as important in low-carbon energy transitions. Energy justice research has acknowledged that energy transitions will have far-reaching consequences for workforces in carbon-intensive industries and also beyond this group. Although energy justice studies have started to take on board the concept of intersectionality, this field of research remains understudied. There is a need for explorations of how intersectionality can be conceptually integrated into the analytical framework of energy justice and for more empirical analyses that demonstrate how this can be done in practice. This paper attempts to address this gap by re-formulating the energy justice framework into an intersectional energy justice framework. It draws on the concepts of structural, political, and representational intersectionality to make the analysis of intersecting power relations in energy transitions more nuanced. This conceptual framework is applied to the empirical analysis of the planned hard coal phase-out in the Silesian Voivodeship in Poland. The results of 20 semistructured stakeholder interviews demonstrate that, while gender, age, and economic status as categories of difference are noted, groups and actors with intersecting identities receive little attention. It is argued that the interplay of discursive and political dimensions may reinforce intersecting inequalities.

The concept of energy democracy has become a prominent concept for analyzing political power shifts in the energy sector. While conceptualizations of energy democracy often incorporate ideas about social inclusion, inclusion is rarely defined and problematized in these conceptualizations. Limited discussion of what inclusion may mean in energy democracy literature can have a direct effect on how inclusion is operationalized in empirical investigations of energy democracy. The paper first argues that it is crucial to explicitly discuss what ideas of inclusion are embedded in conceptualizations of energy democracy. It then suggests that social inclusion can be operationalized as formal and internal inclusion in energy democracy research, following the theory of deliberative democracy developed by Iris Marion Young. It is also recognized that are other ways for conceptualizing inclusion in energy democracy. The case of empowerment of users in smart grids is discussed to illustrate the usefulness of the focus on two levels of inclusion in empirical studies of energy democracy.

While research on just transitions is expanding fast, there is a need for more studies focusing on the politics of just transitions. As the realization of a just transition depends in practice on common visions and possibilities for building coalitions between stakeholders, it is important to focus on how a just transition is envisioned by diverse actors. This paper examines how just energy transitions are envisioned by public authorities, business sectors and civil society in Poland and specifically the Silesian region, how their visions conflict and align with each other, and with what consequences for those transitions. The analysis draws on semi-structured interviews and publicly available materials. Three visions are identified: a just transition as social justice for labor in the coal-mining industry and related business, as a just transformation of the region, and as an opportunity for a systemic change. The paper argues that similarities and differences between visions create both opportunities and challenges for a just transition.

The implications of energy transitions extend beyond the often-discussed effects on jobs and retraining opportunities for workers in the carbon-intensive industries. This paper argues that the concept of justice as recognition has an untapped potential for exploring diverse types of injustices that have not received sufficient attention so far. This paper contributes to the critical discussion of the concept of recognition-based energy justice by considering recognition theory by Fraser, which has become an established approach in energy justice literature, and other recognition theories, which have already been discussed in environmental justice literature, in the context of energy transitions. Five conceptions of recognition are distinguished: the understanding of recognition as (a) equal standing without cultural domination, disrespect, and non-recognition; (b) deeper inclusion (inclusive narratives, rhetoric and greetings); (c) respect for identity and culture; (d) self-esteem; and (e) the absence of violence. The conceptual discussion is followed by an empirical analysis of recognition-based justice in the case of the planned coal phase-out in Poland. Building on semi-structured interviews with stakeholders and diverse texts, the analysis demonstrates that in the case of the planned coal phase-out in Poland, three aspects of recognition may be particularly relevant – non-recognition in energy transitions, the self-esteem of local communities, and respect for culture and identity. The paper then argues that a pluralist approach to studies of recognition in energy transitions based on awareness about socio-cultural contexts of studied cases is necessary.

Unless just and inclusive, transitions to low carbon-energy systems are unlikely to receive sufficient legitimacy and broad public support. While research on inequalities and injustices in energy transitions is growing, these issues remain less explored in the case of the digitalisation of the energy systems through smart grids and smart homes. This paper aims to synthetise our understandings of inequality, exclusion and vulnerability in energy transitions by systemically analysing different dimensions of marginalisation in the transition to a digitalised electricity infrastructure in Sweden. To synthetise understandings of marginalisation and exclusion, conceptualisations of these processes in different social science approaches to energy studies are reviewed. Moreover, an empirical analysis of interviews with a range of Swedish actors such as energy utilities, social housing developers or pensioner organisations is carried out and enriched by previous research on smart grid users. The empirical analysis demonstrates what specific forms that diverse categories of marginalisation, as already identified generally in different social science approaches to energy studies, may take in smart grids. We argue that marginalisation of household users in smart grids may take place along multiple dimensions, relating to matters of literacy, participation, infrastructure, and the economy. The analysis suggests that bundles of marginalisation aspects concerning household users in sustainable energy transitions should be recognised and addressed simultaneously. 

Smart grid development is an area where the discussion about who can be negatively affected by low-carbon energy transitions has progressed. The research on vulnerable households in smart grids often focuses on how potentially vulnerable groups react to smart energy technologies. This paper contributes to the literature by highlighting how a broad range of actors in society think about neglected and vulnerable households in smart grids. The research question concerns how stakeholders frame potential inequalities, differentiations, and vulnerabilities in smart grids in Sweden. The frame analysis is carried out, building on interviews with national and local public authorities dealing with energy issues and consumer advice, actors involved in developing, testing, and using smart energy technologies as well as interest organizations representing diverse social groups. Three narratives are identified that frame potentially neglected households as consumers without economic benefits; as users without technological interests, competences, and access to technologies; and as households with intersecting vulnerabilities. It is argued that, since there could be different interpretations of inequalities in smart grids, the governance of smart grids, and specifically discussions of neglected/vulnerable households in smart grids, can benefit from the involvement of a broad coalition of actors. 

The empowerment of users, their active role in managing electricity use or as micro-producers, and the potential for self-sufficient local energy communities play an important role in the legitimization of smart grids and are highlighted in many policy documents. However, the extent to which energy system configurations associated with smart grids actually empower users and are socially inclusive is an open question. In this chapter, we briefly discuss the social inclusivity of smart grid roll-out in Sweden as an element of a democratic energy system and focus on how the interests and needs of some users may be disregarded and even “designed out” in the implementation process of smart grids.

This article presents the results of an interview study carried out with sixteen data-protection authorities in Central and Eastern Europe. The study focuses on the way that data protection authorities reason about the past. The theoretical argument advanced in the text is that data protection in a post-communist context bears a specific historical significance due to the recent experiences with the extensive, coercive state surveillance that was systematized under the communist regimes. The article focuses on the institutional role conceptions of data protection authorities-a theoretical concept that denotes perceptions of the role of an organization within the larger institutional environment. High-level officials from data protection authorities in sixteen countries were interviewed about change and continuity in surveillance. The results show that historical reflectivity is not a dominant feature of the leadership of contemporary data protection authorities and that different countries differ considerably. The respondents least able or willing to discuss the topics of change and continuity are in societies with recent high-level surveillance scandals, such as Bulgaria and North Macedonia.