The planet is experiencing an environmental crisis of epic proportions and various socio-economic limitations that have deterred necessary responses. This dual challenge of protecting the natural environment while providing for growing populations presents a significant threat to societal structures as we know them, impacting everything from job markets, through global food security to access to clean water and air. To avert further damage to the environment, countries have no choice but to invest into transitioning from carbon-intensive energy systems to systems based on cleaner, renewable sources. Whilst such transitions address the climate emergency, the socio-economic impacts are routinely overlooked, or are meant to be addressed separately from the transition itself. The world must, quite evidently, undertake impending transitions mindfully, with a focus on completing the process efficiently and with minimal harm both to the natural environment and to social structures [1].
While such a transition might seem straightforward on paper, the process itself has several layers that need to be addressed adequately. The phasing out of the fossil fuel-fired power plants is projected to lead to retrenchment of the workforce and to abandoning of the land on which the plants or mines were established. Addressing the needs and concerns of communities and utilizing existing human and physical resources could ensure that the transition to renewable energy technologies is equitable and inclusive. By prioritizing social justice and economic fairness, the just energy transition seeks to leave nobody and nothing behind.
In the past, “just transition” was a framework developed by the trade union movement to secure workers’ livelihoods when the economic system shifted to newer means of production. In recent times, the concept of “Just Transition” gained prominence when it was mentioned in the Paris Agreement, negotiated under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2015. Since then, it has been incorporated into national plans and policies of most member countries of the Paris Agreement[2].
The primary aspect of the socio-economic effects of a transition relates to the workforce. Some of the workers might retire, and others are likely to find new employment in a different sector, perhaps elsewhere. Some former power plant or coal mine workers might find employment in the new low-carbon energy sector at the same location or elsewhere. Re-skilling offers the retrenched workers the option to seek such opportunity in the new growth sector replacing the fossil fuel power plantat the same location.
In most cases, the transition causes disruptions for the communities, as they would have built their lives around the carbon-intensive plants and operations. Hence, some of the mine or power plant workers might choose to stay back within the familiar confines of the townships, towns and communities. Such communities are ill-equipped for the loss of employment, which leads to poverty, deteriorating living standards, lifestyle changes, weakening of networks and social groups, and erosion of individual and community identity. People belonging to these communities experience a profound sense of loss around identity and attachment, including their sense of belonging, lifestyle, and familial and kin connections associated with living and/or working in a coal community. Mine closures consequently affect the mental health of former miners and their families enhancing emotional trauma and psychological stress, possibly even leading to an increase in crime, substance abuse and alcohol consumption [3]. To resolve this issue, the land, building and other structures may be repurposed into solar farms, battery storage systems, data centers, geothermal power plants, amusement parks and other civic and community amenities etc., creating more job opportunity in the same geographical location which might be of great value for the workers choosing not to relocate. As some of such jobs might need re-skilling of people, such re-purposing of the assets integrates both processes into one – creating new economic opportunity in the town, while also employing former power plant and mine personnel.
However, during the transition, the status of employed, unemployed, retired and re-skilled employees is dispersed in different directions, making it hard to keep track and to summarize the situation. Although there is widespread optimism regarding job creation through low-carbon energy technology deployment, an increasing body of literature has highlighted that the advantages and burdens of the energy transition might not be distributed equally among the population. Furthermore, merely reskilling of retrenched works on the one hand, and creating employment on the other – almost independent of such re-skilling – do not always ensure fair outcomes for all concerned. It is not immediately apparent that re-skilled workers were employed following the skilling program, or if the capacity building had been specifically linked to continuing employment of the former mining and power plant workers. Specifically, the increase in renewable energy employment in regions that have traditionally relied on fossil fuel energy systems has generally fallen short of compensating the job losses faced during the phase-out.The literature on just transitions describes this phenomenon as the inequality in distribution resulting from ill-conceived energy transitions. Therefore, it is crucial to analyze the inadequate access to transition opportunities and the shift of geographical locations, as this knowledge is vital for supporting a just transition, which has so far been subject to limited empirical scrutiny [4]. For the most part, a “just transition” appears to have thus far remained an aspiration, and whether the transition was “just” is yet to be assessed and confirmed. This leaves a significant gap in the discourse surrounding social and economic structures where the re-skilling of retrenched employees might not correspond with the employment generated.
References:
García-García, P., Carpintero, Ó., &Buendía, L. (n.d.). Just energy transitions to low carbon economies: A review of the concept and its effects on labour and income. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, 101664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101664 , last accessed 30 May 2025.
Gómez, C. (n.d.). What is a ‘Just transition,’ and are countries really making progress? World Resources Institute. https://www.wri.org/insights/what-is-just-transition-tracking-progress , last accessed 30 May 2025.
Jordan, J. and Tenzing, J. 2024. Social Foundations of a Just Coal Transition. Washington DC: World Bank, last accessed 25July 2025.
Wu, H., Liu, J., Hu, X., He, G., Zhou, Y., Wang, X., Liu, Y., Ma, J., & Tao, S. (2024). Fewer than 15% of coal power plant workers in China can easily shift to green jobs by 2060. One Earth, 7(11). https://www.cell.com/one-earth/fulltext/S2590-3322(24)00530-X?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS259033222400530X%3Fshowall%3Dtrue, last accessed 7August 2025.
Kuokkanen, A., Skills for the energy transition in the changing labour market, European Commission, Petten, 2023, JRC135382. last accessed July 17 2025