1932
0

Annual Review of Environment and Resources

Volume 49, 2024

Just Sustainability Transitions: Politics, Power, and Prefiguration in Transformative Change Toward Justice and Sustainability

Abstract

Facing the world's ecological, economic, and social challenges requires us to connect the concepts of justice, sustainability, and transitions. Bridging and discussing heterogeneous fields, we argue that these concepts need to complement each other, and we present just sustainability transitions (JUSTRAs) to do so. To define JUSTRAs, we review the state-of-the-art literature, focusing on the understanding of these three concepts and their pairings in various disciplinary fields and empirical settings (e.g., environmental justice, just transitions, sustainability transitions, energy justice, food justice, urban justice). We center marginalized voices to highlight the processes of radical transformative change that JUSTRAs seek. We offer three analytical lenses that further the understanding of JUSTRAs: politics, power, and prefiguration. We argue that these complementary lenses are necessary to remake the world in both critical and pragmatic ways. Finally, we present a research agenda on JUSTRAs, foregrounding three complementary modes of inquiry: analyzing, critiquing, designing.

Keyword(s): just sustainability transitions, justice, politics, power, prefiguration, transformation
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081722
2024-10-18
2025-06-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/energy/49/1/annurev-environ-112321-081722.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081722&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Schlosberg D. 2007.. Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford, UK:: Oxford Univ. Press. , 1st ed..
     [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.
    Fraser N. 1999.. Social justice in the age of identity politics: redistribution, recognition, and participation. . In Culture and Economy After the Cultural Turn, ed. LJ Ray, RA Sayer , pp. 25–52. London:: SAGE
     [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.
    Young IM. 1990.. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ:: Princeton Univ. Press. 286 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.
    Hopwood B, Mellor M, O'Brien G. 2005.. Sustainable development: mapping different approaches. . Sustain. Dev. 13:(1):38–52
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.
    Brundtland H. 1987.. Our common future: report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Rep. A/42/427 , United Nations, Geneva:
     [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.
    Kenis A, Bono F, Mathijs E. 2016.. Unravelling the (post-)political in transition management: interrogating pathways towards sustainable change. . J. Environ. Policy Plan. 18:(5):568–84
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.
    Clark WC, Harley AG. 2020.. Sustainability science: toward a synthesis. . Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 45::331–86
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.
    Scoones I. 2016.. The politics of sustainability and development. . Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41::293–319
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.
    Agyeman J, Schlosberg D, Craven L, Matthews C. 2016.. Trends and directions in environmental justice: from inequity to everyday life, community, and just sustainabilities. . Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41::321–40
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.
    Bennett NJ, Blythe J, Cisneros-Montemayor AM, Singh GG, Sumaila UR. 2019.. Just transformations to sustainability. . Sustainability 11:(14):3881
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.
    Swilling M. 2020.. The Age of Sustainability: Just Transitions in a Complex World. London:: Taylor & Francis
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.
    Loorbach D, Frantzeskaki N, Avelino F. 2017.. Sustainability transitions research: transforming science and practice for societal change. . Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 42::599–626
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  13. 13.
    Feola G. 2015.. Societal transformation in response to global environmental change: a review of emerging concepts. . Ambio 44:(5):376–90
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.
    Hölscher K, Wittmayer JM, Loorbach D. 2018.. Transition versus transformation: What's the difference?. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 27::1–3
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.
    Child M, Breyer C. 2017.. Transition and transformation: a review of the concept of change in the progress towards future sustainable energy systems. . Energy Policy 107::11–26
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  16. 16.
    Stevis D. 2023.. Just Transitions: Promise and Contestation. Cambridge, UK:: Cambridge Univ. Press. , 1st ed..
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.
    Henry MS, Bazilian MD, Markuson C. 2020.. Just transitions: histories and futures in a post-COVID world. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 68::101668
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.
    Wang X, Lo K. 2021.. Just transition: a conceptual review. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 82::102291
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.
    Heffron RJ, McCauley D. 2018.. What is the “just transition”?. Geoforum 88::74–77
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.
    Bell K. 2020.. Working-Class Environmentalism: An Agenda for a Just and Fair Transition to Sustainability. Cham, Switz:.: Springer
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.
    Teitel R. 2003.. Transitional justice genealogy (symposium: Human Rights in Transition). . Harv. Hum. Rights J. 16::69
     [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.
    Gready P, Robins S. 2020.. Transitional justice and theories of change: towards evaluation as understanding. . Int. J. Transit. Justice 14:(2):280–99
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.
    Arthur P. 2009.. How “transitions” reshaped human rights: a conceptual history of transitional justice. . Hum. Rights Q. 31:(2):321–67
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.
    McEvoy K, Mallinder L, eds. 2017.. Transitional Justice: Critical Concepts in Law. Vol. 1: Transitional Justice: Origins, Boundaries and Methods in Transitional Justice. London, UK:: Routledge
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.
    Bullard R, Wright BH. 1987.. Mid-American review of sociology. . Soc. Thought Res. 12:(2):21–37
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.
    Sikor T, Newell P. 2014.. Globalizing environmental justice?. Geoforum 54::151–57
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.
    Gonzalez-Ricoy I, Rey F. 2019.. Enfranchising the future: climate justice and the representation of future generations. . WIREs Clim. Change 10:(5):e598
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.
    IPCC. 2022.. Global warming of 1.5°C. Spec. Rep. , IPCC, Cambridge, UK:
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.
    Lehmann R, Tittor A. 2023.. Contested renewable energy projects in Latin America: bridging frameworks of justice to understand “triple inequalities of decarbonisation policies. .” J. Environ. Policy Plan. 25:(2):182–93
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.
    Schlosberg D, Collins LB. 2014.. From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice. . WIREs Clim. Change 5:(3):359–74
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.
    Agyeman J, Bullard RD, Evans B. 2003.. Just Sustainabilities: Development in an Unequal World. Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press. 372 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.
    Agyeman J. 2013.. Introducing Just Sustainabilities: Policy, Planning, and Practice. London:: Zed Books. 170 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.
    Markard J, Raven R, Truffer B. 2012.. Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. . Res. Policy 41:(6):955–67
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.
    Truffer B, Rohracher H, Kivimaa P, Raven R, Alkemade F, et al. 2022.. A perspective on the future of sustainability transitions research. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 42::331–39
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.
    Frantzeskaki N, McPhearson T, Kabisch N. 2021.. Urban sustainability science: prospects for innovations through a system's perspective, relational and transformations’ approaches. . Ambio 50:(9):1650–58
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.
    Geels FW. 2014.. Regime resistance against low-carbon transitions: introducing politics and power into the multi-level perspective. . Theory Cult. Soc. 31:(5):21–40
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.
    Avelino F, Grin J, Pel B, Jhagroe S. 2016.. The politics of sustainability transitions. . J. Environ. Policy Plan. 18:(5):557–67
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  38. 38.
    Wittmayer JM, Avelino F, Van Steenbergen F, Loorbach D. 2017.. Actor roles in transition: insights from sociological perspectives. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 24::45–56
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  39. 39.
    Seyfang G, Haxeltine A. 2012.. Growing grassroots innovations: exploring the role of community-based initiatives in governing sustainable energy transitions. . Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy 30:(3):381–400
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.
    Smith A, Stirling A. 2018.. Innovation, sustainability and democracy. . J. Self Gov. Manag. Econ. 6:(1):64
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.
    van Steenbergen F, Schipper K. 2017.. Struggling with justice in transition. Essay, DRIFT for Transition, Rotterdam:
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.
    Swilling M, Anecke E. 2013.. Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World. . Tokyo:: U. N. Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.
    Feola G. 2020.. Capitalism in sustainability transitions research: time for a critical turn?. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 35::241–50
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.
    Ghosh B, Ramos-Mejía M, Machado RC, Yuana SL, Schiller K. 2021.. Decolonising transitions in the Global South: towards more epistemic diversity in transitions research. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 41::106–9
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.
    Arora S, Stirling A. 2023.. Colonial modernity and sustainability transitions: a conceptualisation in six dimensions. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 48::100733
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.
    Castán Broto V, Baptista I, Kirshner J, Smith S, Neves Alves S. 2018.. Energy justice and sustainability transitions in Mozambique. . Appl. Energy 228::645–55
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.
    Heffron RJ, McCauley D. 2017.. The concept of energy justice across the disciplines. . Energy Policy 105::658–67
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.
    Sovacool BK, Burke M, Baker L, Kotikalapudi CK, Wlokas H. 2017.. New frontiers and conceptual frameworks for energy justice. . Energy Policy 105::677–91
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.
    Jenkins K, McCauley D, Heffron R, Stephan H, Rehner R. 2016.. Energy justice: a conceptual review. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 11::174–82
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.
    McCauley D, Ramasar V, Heffron RJ, Sovacool BK, Mebratu D, Mundaca L. 2019.. Energy justice in the transition to low carbon energy systems: exploring key themes in interdisciplinary research. . Appl. Energy 233–234::916–21
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  51. 51.
    Carley S, Konisky DM. 2020.. The justice and equity implications of the clean energy transition. . Nat. Energy 5:(8):569–77
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  52. 52.
    Hess DJ, McKane RG, Pietzryk C. 2022.. End of the line: environmental justice, energy justice, and opposition to power lines. . Environ. Polit. 31:(4):663–83
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.
    Tribaldos T, Kortetmäki T. 2022.. Just transition principles and criteria for food systems and beyond. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 43::244–56
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.
    Kaljonen M, Kortetmäki T, Tribaldos T, Huttunen S, Karttunen K, et al. 2021.. Justice in transitions: widening considerations of justice in dietary transition. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 40::474–85
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  55. 55.
    Kalfagianni A. 2015.. “ Just food.” The normative obligations of private agrifood governance. . Glob. Environ. Change 31::174–86
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.
    Béné C. 2022.. Why the Great Food Transformation may not happen: a deep-dive into our food systems’ political economy, controversies and politics of evidence. . World Dev. 154::105881
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.
    Clapp J. 2020.. Food. Cambridge, UK:: Polity. , 3rd ed..
     [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.
    Chiles RM, Broad G, Gagnon M, Negowetti N, Glenna L, et al. 2021.. Democratizing ownership and participation in the 4th Industrial Revolution: challenges and opportunities in cellular agriculture. . Agric. Hum. Values 38:(4):943–61
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.
    Soja EW. 2010.. Seeking Spatial Justice. Minneapolis:: Univ. Minn. Press. 256 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.
    Wijsman K, Berbés-Blázquez M. 2022.. What do we mean by justice in sustainability pathways? Commitments, dilemmas, and translations from theory to practice in nature-based solutions. . Environ. Sci. Policy 136::377–86
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.
    Anguelovski I, Brand AL, Chu E, Goh K. 2018.. Urban planning, community (re)development, and environmental gentrification: emerging challenges for green and equitable neighborhoods. . In The Routledge Handbook of Environmental Justice, pp. 449–62. London:: Routledge
     [Google Scholar]
  62. 62.
    Haase D, Kabisch S, Haase A, Andersson E, Banzhaf E, et al. 2017.. Greening cities—to be socially inclusive? About the alleged paradox of society and ecology in cities. . Habitat Int. 64::41–48
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  63. 63.
    Harvey D. 2008.. The right to the city. . New Left Rev. 53::23–40
     [Google Scholar]
  64. 64.
    Marcuse P, Connolly J, Novy J, Olivo I, Potter C, Steil J. 2009.. Searching for the Just City: Debates in Urban Theory and Practice. London:: Routledge. 285 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. 65.
    Castán Broto V, Westman L. 2017.. Just sustainabilities and local action: evidence from 400 flagship initiatives. . Local Environ. 22:(5):635–50
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  66. 66.
    Kotsila P, Anguelovski I, Sekulova F, García-Lamarca M. 2022.. Injustice in Urban Sustainability: Ten Core Drivers. London:: Routledge. , 1st ed..
     [Google Scholar]
  67. 67.
    Stevis D, Felli R. 2020.. Planetary just transition? How inclusive and how just?. Earth Syst. Gov. 6::100065
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  68. 68.
    Chao S, Bolender K, Kirksey E. 2022.. The Promise of Multispecies Justice. Durham, NC:: Duke Univ. Press. 191 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. 69.
    Bouzarovski S. 2022.. Energy and labour: thinking across the continuum. . Prog. Hum. Geogr. 46:(3):753–74
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  70. 70.
    Chatterton P. 2016.. Building transitions to post-capitalist urban commons. . Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 41:(4):403–15
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.
    Wolfram M, Kienesberger M. 2023.. Gender in sustainability transition studies: concepts, blind spots and future orientations. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 46::100686
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  72. 72.
    Standal K, Talevi M, Westskog H. 2020.. Engaging men and women in energy production in Norway and the United Kingdom: the significance of social practices and gender relations. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 60::101338
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  73. 73.
    Lieu J, Sorman AH, Johnson OW, Virla LD, Resurrección BP. 2020.. Three sides to every story: gender perspectives in energy transition pathways in Canada, Kenya and Spain. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 68::101550
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  74. 74.
    Greene M. 2018.. Socio-technical transitions and dynamics in everyday consumption practice. . Glob. Environ. Change 52::1–9
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  75. 75.
    Glover D, Sumberg J. 2020.. Youth and food systems transformation. . Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4::101
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  76. 76.
    Alda-Vidal C, Browne AL, Hoolohan C. 2020.. “ Unflushables”: establishing a global agenda for action on everyday practices associated with sewer blockages, water quality, and plastic pollution. . WIREs Water 7:(4):e1452
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  77. 77.
    Johnson OW, Han JY-C, Knight A-L, Mortensen S, Aung MT, et al. 2020.. Intersectionality and energy transitions: a review of gender, social equity and low-carbon energy. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 70::101774
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.
    Ahlborg H. 2018.. Changing energy geographies: the political effects of a small-scale electrification project. . Geoforum 97::268–80
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.
    Cherunya PC, Ahlborg H, Truffer B. 2020.. Anchoring innovations in oscillating domestic spaces: why sanitation service offerings fail in informal settlements. . Res. Policy 49:(1):103841
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.
    Pilloni M, Hamed TA, Joyce S. 2020.. Assessing the success and failure of biogas units in Israel: social niches, practices, and transitions among Bedouin villages. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 61::101328
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  81. 81.
    Kronsell A. 2013.. Gender and transition in climate governance. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 7::1–15
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  82. 82.
    Thoyre A. 2020.. Home climate change mitigation practices as gendered labor. . Womens Stud. Int. Forum 78::102314
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.
    Mechlenborg M, Gram-Hanssen K. 2020.. Gendered homes in theories of practice: a framework for research in residential energy consumption. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 67::101538
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  84. 84.
    Retamal M, Schandl H. 2018.. Dirty laundry in Manila: comparing resource consumption practices for individual and shared laundering. . J. Ind. Ecol. 22:(6):1389–1401
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  85. 85.
    Anderson CR, Bruil J, Chappell MJ, Kiss C, Pimbert MP. 2019.. From transition to domains of transformation: getting to sustainable and just food systems through agroecology. . Sustainability 11:(19):5272
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  86. 86.
    Sovacool BK, Hook A, Martiskainen M, Brock A, Turnheim B. 2020.. The decarbonisation divide: contextualizing landscapes of low-carbon exploitation and toxicity in Africa. . Glob. Environ. Change 60::102028
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  87. 87.
    Preuß S, Galvin R, Ghosh B, Dütschke E. 2021.. Diversity in transition: Is transitions research diverse (enough)?. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 41::116–18
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  88. 88.
    Cannon CEB, Chu EK. 2021.. Gender, sexuality, and feminist critiques in energy research: a review and call for transversal thinking. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 75::102005
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  89. 89.
    Leslie LM. 2017.. A status-based multilevel model of ethnic diversity and work unit performance. . J. Manag. 43:(2):426–54
     [Google Scholar]
  90. 90.
    Newell P. 2021.. Race and the politics of energy transitions. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 71::101839
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  91. 91.
    Sheller M. 2015.. Racialized mobility transitions in Philadelphia: connecting urban sustainability and transport justice. . City Soc. 27:(1):70–91
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  92. 92.
    Pulido L. 2000.. Rethinking environmental racism: white privilege and urban development in southern California. . Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 90:(1):12–40
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  93. 93.
    Kosanic A, Petzold J, Martín-López B, Razanajatovo M. 2022.. An inclusive future: disabled populations in the context of climate and environmental change. . Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 55::101159
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  94. 94.
    Velasco-Herrejón P, Bauwens T, Calisto Friant M. 2022.. Challenging dominant sustainability worldviews on the energy transition: lessons from Indigenous communities in Mexico and a plea for pluriversal technologies. . World Dev. 150::105725
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  95. 95.
    Doyon A, Boron J, Williams S. 2021.. Unsettling transitions: representing Indigenous peoples and knowledge in transitions research. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 81::102255
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  96. 96.
    Sharma NK, Hargreaves T, Pallett H. 2023.. Social justice implications of smart urban technologies: an intersectional approach. . Build. Cities 4:(1):315–33
     [Google Scholar]
  97. 97.
    Sovacool BK, Bell SE, Daggett C, Labuski C, Lennon M, et al. 2023.. Pluralizing energy justice: incorporating feminist, anti-racist, Indigenous, and postcolonial perspectives. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 97::102996
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  98. 98.
    Bell SE, Daggett C, Labuski C. 2020.. Toward feminist energy systems: why adding women and solar panels is not enough. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 68::101557
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  99. 99.
    Daggett C. 2018.. Petro-masculinity: fossil fuels and authoritarian desire. . Millenn. J. Int. Stud. 47:(1):25–44
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  100. 100.
    Alonso-Fradejas A. 2021.. “ Leaving no one unscathed” in sustainability transitions: the life purging agro-extractivism of corporate renewables. . J. Rural Stud. 81::127–38
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  101. 101.
    Marín A, Goya D. 2021.. Mining—the dark side of the energy transition. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 41::86–88
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  102. 102.
    Newell P, Phillips J. 2016.. Neoliberal energy transitions in the South: Kenyan experiences. . Geoforum 74::39–48
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  103. 103.
    Wieczorek AJ. 2018.. Sustainability transitions in developing countries: major insights and their implications for research and policy. . Environ. Sci. Policy 84::204–16
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  104. 104.
    Yenneti K, Day R, Golubchikov O. 2016.. Spatial justice and the land politics of renewables: dispossessing vulnerable communities through solar energy mega-projects. . Geoforum 76::90–99
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  105. 105.
    Hopkins D, Kester J, Meelen T, Schwanen T. 2020.. Not more but different: a comment on the transitions research agenda. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 34::4–6
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  106. 106.
    Hansen UE, Nygaard I, Romijn H, Wieczorek A, Kamp LM, Klerkx L. 2018.. Sustainability transitions in developing countries: stocktaking, new contributions and a research agenda. . Environ. Sci. Policy 84::198–203
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  107. 107.
    Larbi M, Kellett J, Palazzo E. 2022.. Urban sustainability transitions in the Global South: a case study of Curitiba and Accra. . Urban Forum 33:(2):223–44
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  108. 108.
    Vela Almeida D, Kolinjivadi V, Ferrando T, Roy B, Herrera H, et al. 2023.. The “greening” of empire: the European Green Deal as the EU first agenda. . Polit. Geogr. 105::102925
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  109. 109.
    Álvarez L, Coolsaet B. 2020.. Decolonizing environmental justice studies: a Latin American perspective. . Capital. Nat. Social. 31:(2):50–69
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  110. 110.
    Tornel C. 2023.. Decolonizing energy justice from the ground up: political ecology, ontology, and energy landscapes. . Prog. Hum. Geogr. 47:(1):43–65
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  111. 111.
    Lennon M. 2017.. Decolonizing energy: Black Lives Matter and technoscientific expertise amid solar transitions. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 30::18–27
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  112. 112.
    Perry KK. 2023.. ( Un)just transitions and Black dispossession: the disposability of Caribbean “refugees” and the political economy of climate justice. . Politics 43:(2):169–85
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  113. 113.
    Sojoyner D, Willoughby-Herard T, Kelley RDG, Robinson CJ. 2021.. Black Marxism: The Making of the Black Radical Tradition. Chapel Hill, NC:: Univ. N. C. Press. , 3rd ed..
     [Google Scholar]
  114. 114.
    Singh NP. 2022.. Black Marxism and the antinomies of racial capitalism. . In After Marx: Literature, Theory, and Value in the Twenty-First Century, ed. C Nealon, C Lye , pp. 23–39. Cambridge, UK:: Cambridge Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  115. 115.
    Mignolo WD, Walsh CE. 2018.. On Decoloniality: Concepts, Analytics, Praxis. Durham, NC:: Duke Univ. Press. 256 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  116. 116.
    Celermajer D, Schlosberg D, Rickards L, Stewart-Harawira M, Thaler M, et al. 2021.. Multispecies justice: theories, challenges, and a research agenda for environmental politics. . Environ. Polit. 30:(1–2):119–40
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  117. 117.
    Tschakert P, Schlosberg D, Celermajer D, Rickards L, Winter C, et al. 2021.. Multispecies justice: climate-just futures with, for and beyond humans. . WIREs Clim. Change 12:(2):e699
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  118. 118.
    Contesse M, Duncan J, Legun K, Klerkx L. 2021.. Unravelling non-human agency in sustainability transitions. . Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 166::120634
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  119. 119.
    Tschersich J, Kok KPW. 2022.. Deepening democracy for the governance toward just transitions in agri-food systems. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 43::358–74
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  120. 120.
    Pineda-Pinto M, Herreros-Cantis P, McPhearson T, Frantzeskaki N, Wang J, Zhou W. 2021.. Examining ecological justice within the social-ecological-technological system of New York City, USA. . Landsc. Urban Plan. 215::104228
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  121. 121.
    Wijsman K. Assembling coasts: climate change, resilience, and the politics of belonging. PhD Diss. , New Sch:.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. 122.
    Biermann F, Kalfagianni A. 2020.. Planetary justice: a research framework. . Earth Syst. Gov. 6::100049
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  123. 123.
    Johnson A, Sigona A. 2022.. Planetary justice and “healing” in the Anthropocene. . Earth Syst. Gov. 11::100128
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  124. 124.
    Fricker M. 2007.. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford, UK:: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  125. 125.
    Anguelovski I, Brand AL, Connolly JJT, Corbera E, Kotsila P, et al. 2020.. Expanding the boundaries of justice in urban greening scholarship: toward an emancipatory, antisubordination, intersectional, and relational approach. . Ann. Am. Assoc. Geogr. 110:(6):1743–69
     [Google Scholar]
  126. 126.
    Stevis D, Felli R. 2015.. Global labour unions and just transition to a green economy. . Int. Environ. Agreem. Polit. Law Econ. 15:(1):29–43
     [Google Scholar]
  127. 127.
    Ciplet D, Harrison JL. 2020.. Transition tensions: mapping conflicts in movements for a just and sustainable transition. . Environ. Polit. 29:(3):435–56
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  128. 128.
    Wilson J, Swyngedouw E, eds. 2014.. The Post-Political and Its Discontents: Spaces of Depoliticization, Spectres of Radical Politics. Edinburgh:: Edinburgh Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  129. 129.
    Blakey J, Machen R, Ruez D, Medina García P. 2022.. Intervention: Engaging post-foundational political theory requires an “enmeshed” approach. . Polit. Geogr. 99::102689
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  130. 130.
    Collins PH. 2019.. Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory. Durham, NC:: Duke Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  131. 131.
    McArthur J. 2022.. Critical theory in a decolonial age. . Educ. Philos. Theory 54:(10):1681–92
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  132. 132.
    Kinna R, Gordon U, eds. 2019.. Routledge Handbook of Radical Politics. New York:: Routledge. , 1st ed..
     [Google Scholar]
  133. 133.
    Fraser N. 2011.. Social exclusion, global poverty, and scales of (in)justice : rethinking law and poverty in a globalizing world. . Stellenbosch Law Rev. 22:(3):452–62
     [Google Scholar]
  134. 134.
    Köhler J, Geels FW, Kern F, Markard J, Onsongo E, et al. 2019.. An agenda for sustainability transitions research: state of the art and future directions. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 31::1–32
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  135. 135.
    Sovacool BK. 2021.. Who are the victims of low-carbon transitions? Towards a political ecology of climate change mitigation. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 73::101916
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  136. 136.
    Sultana F. 2022.. The unbearable heaviness of climate coloniality. . Polit. Geogr. 99::102638
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  137. 137.
    Jhagroe S, Loorbach D. 2015.. See no evil, hear no evil: the democratic potential of transition management. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 15::65–83
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  138. 138.
    Langhelle O, Meadowcroft J, Rosenbloom D. 2019.. Politics and technology: deploying the state to accelerate socio-technical transitions for sustainability. . In What Next for Sustainable Development?, ed. J Meadowcroft, D Banister, E Holden, O Langhelle, K Linnerud, G Gilpin , pp. 239–59. Cheltenham, UK:: Edward Elgar
     [Google Scholar]
  139. 139.
    O'Brien K, Carmona R, Gram-Hanssen I, Hochachka G, Sygna L, Rosenberg M. 2023.. Fractal approaches to scaling transformations to sustainability. . Ambio 52:(9):1448–61
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  140. 140.
    Patterson J, Wyborn C, Westman L, Brisbois MC, Milkoreit M, Jayaram D. 2021.. The political effects of emergency frames in sustainability. . Nat. Sustain. 4:(10):841–50
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  141. 141.
    Tornel C. 2023.. Decolonizing energy justice from the ground up: political ecology, ontology, and energy landscapes. . Prog. Hum. Geogr. 47:(1):43–65
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  142. 142.
    Hellmann O. 2023.. Indigenous-washing and colonial amnesia: how New Zealand's nation brand depoliticizes climate change. . Int. J. Commun. 17:(21):4931–51
     [Google Scholar]
  143. 143.
    Hayward C, Lukes S. 2008.. Nobody to shoot? Power, structure, and agency: a dialogue. . J. Power 1:(1):5–20
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  144. 144.
    Haugaard M, ed. 2012.. Power: A Reader. Manchester, UK:: Manchester Univ. Press. 341 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  145. 145.
    Parsons T. 1963.. On the concept of political power. . Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 107:(3):232–62
     [Google Scholar]
  146. 146.
    Avelino F. 2021.. Theories of power and social change. Power contestations and their implications for research on social change and innovation. . J. Polit. Power 14:(3):425–48
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  147. 147.
    Pansardi P, Bindi M. 2021.. The new concepts of power? Power-over, power-to and power-with. . J. Polit. Power 14:(1):51–71
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  148. 148.
    Avelino F, Hielscher S, Strumińska-Kutra M, De Geus T, Widdel L, et al. 2023.. Power to, over and with: exploring power dynamics in social innovations in energy transitions across Europe. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 48::100758
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  149. 149.
    Pasgaard M, Dawson N. 2019.. Looking beyond justice as universal basic needs is essential to progress towards “safe and just operating spaces. .” Earth Syst. Gov. 2::100030
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  150. 150.
    Sen A. 1999.. Development as Freedom. New York:: Alfred Knopf
     [Google Scholar]
  151. 151.
    Nussbaum MC. 2011.. Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach. Cambridge, MA:: Belknap Press. 237 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  152. 152.
    Braidotti R. 2013.. Posthuman humanities. . Eur. Educ. Res. J. 12:(1):1–19
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  153. 153.
    Crenshaw K. 1989.. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. . Univ. Chic. Leg. Forum 8:(1):139–67
     [Google Scholar]
  154. 154.
    Grin J, Rotmans J, Schot J. 2010.. Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. London:: Routledge
     [Google Scholar]
  155. 155.
    Hoffman J. 2013.. Theorizing power in transition studies: the role of creativity and novel practices in structural change. . Policy Sci. 46:(3):257–75
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  156. 156.
    Hess DJ. 2013.. Industrial fields and countervailing power: the transformation of distributed solar energy in the United States. . Glob. Environ. Change 23:(5):847–55
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  157. 157.
    Ahlborg H. 2017.. Towards a conceptualization of power in energy transitions. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 25::122–41
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  158. 158.
    Brisbois MC. 2019.. Powershifts: a framework for assessing the growing impact of decentralized ownership of energy transitions on political decision-making. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 50::151–61
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  159. 159.
    Raj G, Feola G, Hajer M, Runhaar H. 2022.. Power and empowerment of grassroots innovations for sustainability transitions: a review. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 43::375–92
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  160. 160.
    Burke A. 2023.. Interspecies cosmopolitanism: non-human power and the grounds of world order in the Anthropocene. . Rev. Int. Stud. 49:(2):201–22
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  161. 161.
    Schipper K, Silvestri G, Wittmayer JM, Isoke JB, Kulabako R. 2019.. Handle with care: navigating the pluriformity of power to enable actionable knowledge for transitions in informal settlements in the Global South. . Urban Transform. 1:(1):4
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  162. 162.
    Greenwood DJ, Levin M. 2008.. Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change. Thousand Oaks, CA:: SAGE
     [Google Scholar]
  163. 163.
    Monticelli L. 2018.. Embodying alternatives to capitalism in the 21st century. . tripleC 16:(2):501–17
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  164. 164.
    Escobar A. 2015.. Degrowth, postdevelopment, and transitions: a preliminary conversation. . Sustain. Sci. 10:(3):451–62
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  165. 165.
    Bluwstein J. 2021.. Transformation is not a metaphor. . Polit. Geogr. 90::102450
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  166. 166.
    Monticelli L, ed. 2022.. The Future Is Now: An Introduction to Prefigurative Politics. Cambridge, UK:: Policy Press. , 1st ed..
     [Google Scholar]
  167. 167.
    Kaul S, Akbulut B, Demaria F, Gerber J-F. 2022.. Alternatives to sustainable development: What can we learn from the pluriverse in practice?. Sustain. Sci. 17:(4):1149–58
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  168. 168.
    Stirling A. 2009.. Direction, distribution and diversity! Pluralising progress in innovation, sustainability and development. Work. Pap. , STEPS Cent., Brighton, UK:
     [Google Scholar]
  169. 169.
    Liboiron M, Tironi M, Calvillo N. 2018.. Toxic politics: acting in a permanently polluted world. . Soc. Stud. Sci. 48:(3):331–49
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  170. 170.
    Pel B, Haxeltine A, Avelino F, Dumitru A, Kemp R, et al. 2020.. Towards a theory of transformative social innovation: a relational framework and 12 propositions. . Res. Policy 49:(8):104080
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  171. 171.
    Pel B, Wittmayer JM, Avelino F, Loorbach D, De Geus T. 2023.. How to account for the dark sides of social innovation? Transitions directionality in renewable energy prosumerism. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 49::100775
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  172. 172.
    Geels FW, Kern F, Clark WC. 2023.. System transitions research and sustainable development: challenges, progress, and prospects. . PNAS 120:(47):e2206230120
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  173. 173.
    Sahakian M, Moynat O, Senn W, Moreau V. 2023.. How social practices inform the future as method: describing personas in an energy transition while engaging with teleoaffectivities. . Futures 148::103133
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  174. 174.
    Marquardt J, Delina LL. 2019.. Reimagining energy futures: contributions from community sustainable energy transitions in Thailand and the Philippines. . Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 49::91–102
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  175. 175.
    Schlosberg D, Coles R. 2016.. The new environmentalism of everyday life: sustainability, material flows and movements. . Contemp. Polit. Theory 15:(2):160–81
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  176. 176.
    Kotzé LJ. 2019.. Earth system law for the Anthropocene. . Sustainability 11:(23):6796
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  177. 177.
    Fraser N. 2022.. Cannibal Capitalism: How Our System Is Devouring Democracy, Care, and the Planet—And What We Can Do About It. London/New York:: Verso. 190 pp .
     [Google Scholar]
  178. 178.
    Lugones M. 2007.. Heterosexualism and the colonial/modern gender system. . Hypatia 22:(1):186–219
     [Google Scholar]
  179. 179.
    Quijano A. 2007.. Coloniality and modernity/rationality. . Cult. Stud. 21:(2–3):168–78
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  180. 180.
    Mignolo WD. 2011.. Geopolitics of sensing and knowing: on (de)coloniality, border thinking and epistemic disobedience. . Postcolon. Stud. 14:(3):273–83
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  181. 181.
    Schipper K, Avelino F, Van Steenbergen F, Henfrey T, Joshi V. 2020.. Insights on approaches to sustainable just cities. Deliv. 3.3 , UrbanA, E. U.:
     [Google Scholar]
  182. 182.
    hooks b. 2015.. Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. New York:: Routledge. 179 pp .
     [Google Scholar]
  183. 183.
    Temper L, Walter M, Rodriguez I, Kothari A, Turhan E. 2018.. A perspective on radical transformations to sustainability: resistances, movements and alternatives. . Sustain. Sci. 13:(3):747–64
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  184. 184.
    Loorbach DA, Wittmayer J. 2024.. Transforming universities: mobilizing research and education for sustainability transitions at Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands. . Sustain. Sci. 19::19–33
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  185. 185.
    Mertens DM. 2007.. Transformative paradigm: mixed methods and social justice. . J. Mixed Methods Res. 1:(3):212–25
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  186. 186.
    Wittmayer JM, Schäpke N. 2014.. Action, research and participation: roles of researchers in sustainability transitions. . Sustain. Sci. 9:(4):483–96
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  187. 187.
    Jolivétte AJ. 2015.. Research justice: radical love as a strategy for social transformation. . In Research Justice, ed. AJ Jolivette , pp. 5–12. Cambridge, UK:: Policy Press
     [Google Scholar]
  188. 188.
    Dutta U, Azad AK, Hussain SM. 2022.. Counterstorytelling as epistemic justice: decolonial community-based praxis from the Global South. . Am. J. Commun. Psychol. 69:(1–2):59–70
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  189. 189.
    Westman L, Castán Broto V. 2022.. Urban transformations to keep all the same: the power of ivy discourses. . Antipode 54:(4):1320–43
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  190. 190.
    Avelino F, Grin J. 2017.. Beyond deconstruction: a reconstructive perspective on sustainability transition governance. . Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 22::15–25
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  191. 191.
    Hughes S, Hoffmann M. 2020.. Just urban transitions: toward a research agenda. . WIREs Clim. Change 11:(3):e640
     [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  192. 192.
    Zuberi T, Bonilla-Silva E, eds. 2008.. White Logic, White Methods: Racism and Methodology. Lanham, MD:: Rowman & Littlefield. 416 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081722
Loading
Just Sustainability Transitions: Politics, Power, and Prefiguration in Transformative Change Toward Justice and Sustainability
Annual Review of Environment and Resources 49, 519 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081722
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081722
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081722
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error