Do all roads lead to Rome? Assessing the effectiveness of governance strategies for energy justice

IF 9.3 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Energy Policy Pub Date : 2026-04-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-23 DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2026.115089
Kees van der Wel, Sanne Akerboom
{"title":"Do all roads lead to Rome? Assessing the effectiveness of governance strategies for energy justice","authors":"Kees van der Wel,&nbsp;Sanne Akerboom","doi":"10.1016/j.enpol.2026.115089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While the ‘promised land’ of clean, affordable, and abundant energy is in reach for some, it is but a distant dream for others. Socioeconomically disadvantaged groups often do not have the means and opportunities to enter this ‘land of milk and honey’. In response to growing awareness of this issue, the call for a more just, inclusive, and fair energy transition has found its way to policy agendas. To implement this energy justice agenda, policy-makers must decide on a governance strategy – i.e., a plan of action outlining <em>who</em> should do <em>what,</em> and <em>how</em>. The field of public administration offers three such strategies: rowing, steering, and serving. However, no study has yet examined the strengths and weaknesses of these different strategies in achieving energy justice, leaving policymakers without guidance on how to choose between them. To address this gap, we evaluated two initiatives for each strategy using an assessment framework with five criteria based on energy justice literature. Our analysis revealed three key patterns: (i) each strategy has its own strengths and weaknesses for realizing a just transition, (ii) there are synergies and trade-offs between the criteria, and (iii) each strategy has broad but seemingly superficial support. These findings suggest that no single strategy is perfect, and none will become perfect due to the inherent trade-offs between criteria. However, hybrid strategies that use the strengths of one strategy to offset another strategy's weaknesses could offer an effective approach to pursuing energy justice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11672,"journal":{"name":"Energy Policy","volume":"211 ","pages":"Article 115089"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421526000236","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the ‘promised land’ of clean, affordable, and abundant energy is in reach for some, it is but a distant dream for others. Socioeconomically disadvantaged groups often do not have the means and opportunities to enter this ‘land of milk and honey’. In response to growing awareness of this issue, the call for a more just, inclusive, and fair energy transition has found its way to policy agendas. To implement this energy justice agenda, policy-makers must decide on a governance strategy – i.e., a plan of action outlining who should do what, and how. The field of public administration offers three such strategies: rowing, steering, and serving. However, no study has yet examined the strengths and weaknesses of these different strategies in achieving energy justice, leaving policymakers without guidance on how to choose between them. To address this gap, we evaluated two initiatives for each strategy using an assessment framework with five criteria based on energy justice literature. Our analysis revealed three key patterns: (i) each strategy has its own strengths and weaknesses for realizing a just transition, (ii) there are synergies and trade-offs between the criteria, and (iii) each strategy has broad but seemingly superficial support. These findings suggest that no single strategy is perfect, and none will become perfect due to the inherent trade-offs between criteria. However, hybrid strategies that use the strengths of one strategy to offset another strategy's weaknesses could offer an effective approach to pursuing energy justice.
条条大路通罗马吗?评估能源公正治理战略的有效性
虽然清洁、廉价和丰富能源的“应许之地”对一些人来说触手可及,但对另一些人来说,这只是一个遥远的梦想。社会经济上处于不利地位的群体往往没有进入这片“牛奶和蜂蜜之地”的手段和机会。随着人们对这一问题的认识日益提高,对更加公正、包容和公平的能源转型的呼吁已被提上了政策议程。为了实施这一能源正义议程,政策制定者必须决定一项治理战略——即一项行动计划,概述谁应该做什么,以及如何做。公共行政领域提供了三种这样的策略:划船、掌舵和服务。然而,目前还没有研究考察这些不同战略在实现能源公平方面的优缺点,这使得政策制定者在如何在它们之间进行选择方面缺乏指导。为了解决这一差距,我们使用基于能源公正文献的五个标准的评估框架评估了每个战略的两个举措。我们的分析揭示了三个关键模式:(i)每个战略都有自己的优势和弱点,以实现公正的过渡;(ii)标准之间存在协同效应和权衡;(iii)每个战略都有广泛但看似肤浅的支持。这些发现表明,没有单一的策略是完美的,由于标准之间的内在权衡,没有一个策略会变得完美。然而,利用一种战略的优势来抵消另一种战略的弱点的混合战略可能是追求能源公平的有效途径。
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
Energy Policy
Energy Policy 管理科学-环境科学
CiteScore
17.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
540
审稿时长
7.9 months
期刊介绍: Energy policy is the manner in which a given entity (often governmental) has decided to address issues of energy development including energy conversion, distribution and use as well as reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in order to contribute to climate change mitigation. The attributes of energy policy may include legislation, international treaties, incentives to investment, guidelines for energy conservation, taxation and other public policy techniques. Energy policy is closely related to climate change policy because totalled worldwide the energy sector emits more greenhouse gas than other sectors.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书