Seeking recognition justice in Arizona coal country

Abstract

The 2019 closure of a coal-fired coal plant within the Navajo Nation was economically ruinous for many communities. A just transition funding package – negotiated between representatives of the Navajo Nation and the electric utility Arizona Public Service – would have delivered nearly $150 million to rural and Indigenous coal-impacted Arizona communities, but Arizona's utility regulators opposed the use of ratepayer funds in such a plan, resulting in years-long controversy. This paper examines stakeholders' appeals to moral arguments from both sides of the funding controversy and describes why the funding package stalled despite apparent popularity. Methodologically, the paper uses content analysis of public testimony to catalogue appeals to distribution, procedural, and recognition justice. The paper complements that analysis with semi-structured interviews conducted in and around Arizona. Proponents of the transition funding appealed to distribution, procedural, and recognition justice, but opponents relied exclusively on distribution and procedural justice. A critical aspect of recognition justice is its emphasis on equalizing power imbalances; the energy and political landscape of Arizona is rife with such disparity. Appeals to recognition justice, with its emphasis on restoration and leveling socio-political hierarchies, are ill-suited for maintaining an unjust status quo. The paper's discussion section further explores the use of “sacrifice” as a framing for Black Mesa's role in the American Southwest's energy systems. Finally, the paper suggests further avenues for research, including the ways in which injustice has been compounded by the federal government's recent seizure of funding and issues of power, politics, and demographics in underexamined political races.