Assessing energy justice in climate change policies: an empirical examination of China's energy transition

IF 5.3 1区 社会学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Fanglei Zhong, Jingwen Tian, Chenxi Zhao, Shuai Zha, Xiao Chen, Yuhan Zhang
{"title":"Assessing energy justice in climate change policies: an empirical examination of China's energy transition","authors":"Fanglei Zhong, Jingwen Tian, Chenxi Zhao, Shuai Zha, Xiao Chen, Yuhan Zhang","doi":"10.1080/14693062.2023.2261894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTAn energy transition programme based on the principles of energy justice is an important way to mitigate climate change; however, empirical studies on energy justice remain scarce. This study explores key aspects of energy transition policy implementation in China, using three dimensions of energy justice – distributional, recognition and procedural justice – to establish an analytical framework and help develop quantification methodologies. We focused on Luquan District, Shijiazhuang City (Hebei Province, China), to assess energy justice levels following the implementation of China’s ‘coal-to-gas’ energy transition policy in rural regions. The findings indicate that China’s rural energy policy has not delivered energy justice. Analysis revealed a markedly low procedural justice index, registering a mere 0.37 on a scale of 0–1, attributable to factors such as the lack of involvement of rural households and a lack of transparency in the design and formulation of policy, as well as a lack of access of rural households to policy-related information. Furthermore, insufficient acknowledgment of the needs of specific groups during the energy transition has negatively impacted recognition justice, resulting in a mid-level index value of 0.69. By comparison, this study shows reveals a reasonably high energy distributional justice index value of 0.89. These findings suggest the need for the government to enhance energy policy communication and responsiveness to its stakeholders, to acknowledge and fairly address the energy transition needs of rural consumers, and to implement targeted energy subsidies to augment distributional justice and preclude the waste of limited financial resources. The analytical framework and calculation methods presented here could contribute to quantifying energy justice levels and to informing energy transition policy both in China and more broadly elsewhere in the world.Key policy insightsSince 2013, implementation of China’s ‘coal-to-gas’ energy transition policy has engendered impacts on different dimensions of social justice that have influenced the realization of a just transition.A composite index system is established, encompassing distributional justice, recognition justice, and procedural justice, and quantitative exploration of energy justice is undertaken using a reverse deduction method.The greatest losses in justice, following implementation of China’s ‘coal-to-gas’ energy transition policy, are related to procedural justice, whereas recognition justice incurs moderate losses, and distributional justice experiences the lowest level of losses.Acknowledging the disparities among different groups, the ideal allocation of energy subsidies should be actualized through preliminary surveys, consultation and coordination, thereby preventing resource wastage.Recognizing individual rights and guaranteeing that the policy implementation process is open, transparent and participatory, could enhance energy justice and movement toward a just transition in the context of climate change policy.KEYWORDS: Energy justiceloss of justicerural energy transitioncoal-to-gas policyjust transition AcknowledgmentsThe authors are grateful to all editors for their helpful comments and suggestions, which have helped improve the quality of this paper considerably.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 The unit ‘mu’ is a Chinese measurement of unit area, where 1 mu is equivalent to 1/15th of a hectare, i.e., 3 mu translates to 0.2 ha.Additional informationFundingThis research was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant Nos 2022YFC3800705, 2018YFD1100102 and 2018YFC1509007) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos 41801208, 41371529 and 41071353).","PeriodicalId":48114,"journal":{"name":"Climate Policy","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Climate Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2023.2261894","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACTAn energy transition programme based on the principles of energy justice is an important way to mitigate climate change; however, empirical studies on energy justice remain scarce. This study explores key aspects of energy transition policy implementation in China, using three dimensions of energy justice – distributional, recognition and procedural justice – to establish an analytical framework and help develop quantification methodologies. We focused on Luquan District, Shijiazhuang City (Hebei Province, China), to assess energy justice levels following the implementation of China’s ‘coal-to-gas’ energy transition policy in rural regions. The findings indicate that China’s rural energy policy has not delivered energy justice. Analysis revealed a markedly low procedural justice index, registering a mere 0.37 on a scale of 0–1, attributable to factors such as the lack of involvement of rural households and a lack of transparency in the design and formulation of policy, as well as a lack of access of rural households to policy-related information. Furthermore, insufficient acknowledgment of the needs of specific groups during the energy transition has negatively impacted recognition justice, resulting in a mid-level index value of 0.69. By comparison, this study shows reveals a reasonably high energy distributional justice index value of 0.89. These findings suggest the need for the government to enhance energy policy communication and responsiveness to its stakeholders, to acknowledge and fairly address the energy transition needs of rural consumers, and to implement targeted energy subsidies to augment distributional justice and preclude the waste of limited financial resources. The analytical framework and calculation methods presented here could contribute to quantifying energy justice levels and to informing energy transition policy both in China and more broadly elsewhere in the world.Key policy insightsSince 2013, implementation of China’s ‘coal-to-gas’ energy transition policy has engendered impacts on different dimensions of social justice that have influenced the realization of a just transition.A composite index system is established, encompassing distributional justice, recognition justice, and procedural justice, and quantitative exploration of energy justice is undertaken using a reverse deduction method.The greatest losses in justice, following implementation of China’s ‘coal-to-gas’ energy transition policy, are related to procedural justice, whereas recognition justice incurs moderate losses, and distributional justice experiences the lowest level of losses.Acknowledging the disparities among different groups, the ideal allocation of energy subsidies should be actualized through preliminary surveys, consultation and coordination, thereby preventing resource wastage.Recognizing individual rights and guaranteeing that the policy implementation process is open, transparent and participatory, could enhance energy justice and movement toward a just transition in the context of climate change policy.KEYWORDS: Energy justiceloss of justicerural energy transitioncoal-to-gas policyjust transition AcknowledgmentsThe authors are grateful to all editors for their helpful comments and suggestions, which have helped improve the quality of this paper considerably.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 The unit ‘mu’ is a Chinese measurement of unit area, where 1 mu is equivalent to 1/15th of a hectare, i.e., 3 mu translates to 0.2 ha.Additional informationFundingThis research was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant Nos 2022YFC3800705, 2018YFD1100102 and 2018YFC1509007) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos 41801208, 41371529 and 41071353).
气候变化政策中的能源公正评估:中国能源转型的实证研究
摘要基于能源公平原则的能源转型规划是减缓气候变化的重要途径;然而,关于能源公平的实证研究仍然很少。本研究探讨了中国能源转型政策实施的关键方面,利用能源公平的三个维度——分配公平、承认公平和程序公平——建立了一个分析框架,并有助于开发量化方法。我们以中国河北省石家庄市鹿泉区为研究对象,评估中国“煤制气”能源转型政策在农村地区实施后的能源公平水平。研究结果表明,中国农村能源政策并未实现能源公平。分析显示,程序公正指数明显较低,在0-1的范围内仅为0.37,原因包括农村家庭缺乏参与,政策设计和制定缺乏透明度,以及农村家庭无法获得与政策有关的信息。能源转型过程中对特定群体需求的认识不足,对认识公正产生了负面影响,导致该指数为0.69,处于中等水平。通过比较,本研究显示出较高的能量分配公平指数值为0.89。这些发现表明,政府需要加强对利益相关者的能源政策沟通和响应,承认并公平地解决农村消费者的能源转型需求,并实施有针对性的能源补贴,以增强分配正义,防止有限的财政资源浪费。本文提出的分析框架和计算方法有助于量化能源公平水平,并为中国乃至世界其他地区的能源转型政策提供信息。自2013年以来,中国“煤制气”能源转型政策的实施对社会公正的不同维度产生了影响,影响了公正转型的实现。建立了包括分配公平、承认公平和程序公平在内的综合指标体系,并采用逆向演绎法对能源公平进行了定量探索。中国实施“煤改气”能源转型政策后,司法损失最大的是程序司法,而承认司法损失较小,分配司法损失最小。认识到不同群体之间的差异,应通过初步调查、协商和协调,实现能源补贴的理想分配,从而防止资源浪费。承认个人权利并保证政策实施过程的公开、透明和参与性,可以在气候变化政策的背景下加强能源正义和朝着公正过渡的运动。关键词:能源公正能源转型煤改气政策转型致谢感谢各位编辑提出的宝贵意见和建议,大大提高了本文的写作质量。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。注1“亩”是中国单位面积的计量单位,1亩等于1/15公顷,即3亩等于0.2公顷。本研究得到国家重点研发计划项目(资助号:2022YFC3800705、2018YFD1100102和2018YFC1509007)和国家自然科学基金项目(资助号:41801208、41371529和41071353)的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Climate Policy
Climate Policy Multiple-
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
8.50%
发文量
102
期刊介绍: Climate Policy, a prestigious peer-reviewed academic journal, strives to publish outstanding research and analysis on various facets of climate policy such as mitigation and adaptation. Our primary objective is to ensure that our top-notch research is easily accessible and applicable not only to scholars but also policymakers and practitioners. By providing a platform for groundbreaking ideas, pioneering methodologies, and evidence-based insights, our journal aims to contribute to the implementation of an efficient strategy in addressing climate change.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信