Just and Sustainable Transitions for a Net-Zero Asia:
Emerging Issues and Solutions
So-Young Lee, Matthew Hengesbaugh, Nobue Amanuma
Integrated Sustainability Centre, IGESKey Messages•

The concept of a just transition is garnering attention in international policy processes yet is still not
well defined.

•

Much of the focus in defining and operationalising a just transition relates to early efforts aimed at
reducing employment losses from structural changes in energy systems.

•

Countries in Asia offer many lessons and experiences concerning social and environmental justiceissues that are relevant to discussions on just transition; these lessons should be reflected in defining
and operationalising a just transition. This is especially important because many countries in Asia areproposing ambitious net-zero targets.

•

Asia’s traditional values and views on the relationship between human and the environment can also
provide important insights into the various ways that a just transition affects different groups, and how
policies can be tailored to reduce the impact of socioeconomic changes on health and livelihoods.

•

Many examples of solutions from Asia are not new, but require further advocacy and support to gain
traction. This is particularly true for locally-driven initiatives that provide both environmental and social
benefits.

•

To improve prosperity of all and foster a truly just transition, policymakers should go beyond
addressing the needs of those left behind and consider traditional Asian values related to sustainable
and modest lifestyles.

1. Introduction
It is well established that a majority of the world’s advanced economies—along with high-income segments ofdeveloping countries—are primarily responsible for the current climate crisis, owing to their disproportionate
consumption and overexploitation of planetary resources. The adverse impacts of the climate emergency suchas extreme weather and natural disasters have become a significant driver of social inequality, especially among
those with smaller carbon footprints, who increasingly bear the brunt of planetary crises (Lee and Zusman 2019;
O’Brien and Leichenko 2000; Parks and Roberts 2006). The concept of climate justice has thus emerged as a
key socioeconomic issue associated with a net-zero transition. However, the definition and scope of what
constitutes climate justice—particularly how it relates to a just transition for all—remains contested. For
instance, the European Union has already adopted a Just Transition Mechanism within its domestic bordersthat is limited to job creation at present.
The debate about just transitions is unique in that it considers a wide range of stakeholders, encompassing
multiple views around how social equity relates to net-zero development 1. For instance, multi-stakeholder
technical working groups within the United Nations (UN) system have prepared a thematic report (UN 2021)
outlining a global roadmap to achieve Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7 on affordable and clean energy
by 2030, with a view towards achieving net-zero by 2050—the product of which was presented during the UN’s
High-level Dialogue on Energy in 2021. One of the technical working groups focusing on Enabling the SDGs
through Just Energy Transitions conceded that there was difficulty in incorporating concepts of inclusivenessand justice into the proposed recommendations for the draft report (IISD 2021). Much of the cited challenges
involve a lack of shared agreement on the definition, purpose, intended beneficiaries and others. This is despite
the fact that there is wide-ranging consensus that inclusiveness and justice should be factored into net-zerodevelopment and associated policy and implementation processes.

1 Since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2018) made it clear that ambitious mitigation actions are
crucial to limit warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, many countries and cities have pledged net-zero emission
targets. For example, the European Union (EU) announced its Green Deal initiative in 2019 and China followed suit bycommitting to carbon neutrality by 2060; and the Leader Summit on Climate pushed major countries to commit to carbon
neutrality by 2050. As of November 2021, more than 140 countries had committed to carbon neutrality targets. Net Zeroby 2050, published by the International Energy Agency (IEA), emphasises the need for the “immediate and massive
deployment of all available clean and efficient energy technologies” (2021: 14) along with the introduction of technologies
to help transition from existing fossil-based to carbon free systems. Due to the emphasis on rapid technological changes
in these pledges, there is a need for a concrete understanding of not only the targets but also the impacts of net-zerodevelopment on people that could be left behind.

2The complexity of defining and operationalising a just transition has long been recognised. Part of the reason
for this complexity is the required deep reductions in global emissions are complicated by economics, politics,
culture, geography and knowledge—issues which cannot be resolved through technical improvements alone(Smith and Stirling 2010; Sovacool 2019; Geels et al. 2016; Creutzig et al. 2018; IPCC 2018). However, although
the majority of countries in Asia have pledged net-zero targets, the concept of just transition has yet to receive
full attention within the region. One potential consequence of the limited attention is that governments resort
to adopting existing ideas to keep pace with the so-called “global standard,” mimicking technologicalinnovations and structuring transitions to respond to immediate needs. As the just transition debate still tends
to be limited to job security, countries in Asia need a more balanced account of a just transition. Such abalanced account would correspond with the diverse models of development in the region, while fosteringtransformative change and climate justice over the long-term.
All these concerns have a bearing not only on domestic policymaking processes but international discussions
where there is a need to more comprehensively understand these issues. To help policymakers envision what
policies might be deployed to make a net-zero transition just, this paper will review concepts of environmental
and climate justice, while also recognising that technological transitions have been unable to sufficiently
address climate-related challenges. The paper then explores the applicability of the just transition concept inAsia, noting that structural conditions and societal challenges vary across countries in the region. In the final
section, the paper will examine a diverse range of solutions centred on principles of inclusive, just and resilient
societies in Asia, discussing opportunities for potential implementation through local and collective
collaboration.

2. Just Transitions: Origins
In view of the growing climate emergency and its associated impacts on human society and the wider
environment, a speedy transition from fossil fuels to renewables is essential. Nonetheless, it is also clear thatsuch a transition may also have unintended and immediate economic impacts on local workers, many of whose
livelihoods depend upon polluting industries such as fossil fuels. These pressures can compound othervulnerabilities facing workers and communities, including environmental degradation and social problems
arising from the pursuit of unsustainable economic growth. For example, in Kentucky, U.S, a heavy reliance on
coal production resulted in less investment and less industrial diversification comparable to non-coal
dependent areas. Coal industry workers, in turn, received lower incomes than neighboring villages. Beyond
these economic disadvantages, workers in surrounding communities suffered from health problems as a resultof toxins released from coal dust and polluted water, as well as from labour safety violations associated with3

extraction, processing and distribution of mining products. Similar cases can be found in many other regions
following comparable industrial paths (Perry 1982; Cha 2019).
Considering these issues, there have long been social and environmental movements mobilised under thebanner of “environmental justice” driven by the credo of overcoming inequalities and addressing disparities(Walker 2009; Schlosberg 2013; Sikor and Newell 2014; Martinex-Alier et al. 2016; Holifield et al. 2018; Temper2018). Since the 1990s, as environmental externalities associated with fossil fuels, including climate change,
have become increasingly apparent, the concept of “climate justice” emerged to address the disproportionate
impacts of climate change on marginalised groups and communities, who had made no or little contributions
to greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) (Meikle et al. 2016; Jafry 2019). Climate justice considers issues beyond
technical measures required for reducing GHGs; it also necessitates addressing underlying issues of injusticein parallel to environmental inequality.
While “climate justice” places its emphasis on addressing root causes of climate crisis and distributional
inequality of climate impacts, “energy justice” calls attention to the need for an equitable supply of affordable
and sustainable energy for all (McCauley et al. 2016; 2019). The concept of energy justice traces back decades,
first emerging in the 1980s (Perez-Guerrero 1982; Weinberg 1985); the recent concept of net-zero transition
has revived thoughts around how energy pathways need to be pursued in a more inclusive and sustainable
manner. The concept of just transition, therefore, addresses both environmental and social implications ofenergy development, including potential disproportionate economic consequences stemming from atransition to a net-zero future (Newell and Mulvaney 2013; Heffron and McCauley 2017).
Initially conceived in the 1970s, the concept of just transition originated in the U.S. labour movement at a time
when environmental issues where still considered peripheral in discussions around social justice. Led by tradeunions including the Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers (OCAW) in the 1990s, the concept first arose as a
response to more stringent environmental regulations set out under the U.S. Superfund Act, which resulted in
employment losses within certain areas targeted for environmental remediation (Bazilian and Markuson 2020).
Since that time, a just transition has gained traction at the international level, endorsed by multilateral
institutions such as the International Labour Organization (ILO), UN Environment Programme (UNEP),
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC), among others (Galgóczi, 2018), and the concept has been spread to and widelyadopted beyond unions and workers (Snell 2018; Kreinin 2020). As both the ILO (2015) in its guidelines for ajust transition and Trade Union Development Cooperation Network’s report (2019) emphasised the importantrole of governments for the integration of just transition in policies, an immediate action to promote justtransition would be for national governments to intervene in the economic sector by creating green jobs orproviding welfare and compensations for those directly impacted by a net-zero transition.
4

From a long-term perspective, however, more diversified approaches should be considered regarding to whomis being treated unjustly, how they are involved, and what institutions and policies are needed given that theclimate crisis has impacted intersectional segments of society, ranging from class, race, gender as well as
different countries and regions (Harcourt and Nelson 2015; Gore and Alestig 2020; Hickel 2020). Understoodin this context, the basic goal of just transition should not be limited to providing solutions only for workers
and fossil fuel communities, but be more widely applied to support a net-zero future for all. The concept ofjust transition therefore needs to broaden its scope to account for inequalities resulting from the shift towards
net-zero while also addressing the marginalisation and dispossession of key social groups. Otherwise, new job
opportunities could be regarded only as the instant proxy for transitions and fossil fuel dependent communities
might resist a rapid shift as exemplified by coal dependent areas in the U.S (Saha and Muro 2016). By thisreading, a just transition is consistent with but extends beyond ensuring decent jobs for workers. It also requires
building resilient and sustainable livelihoods for communities, and equal societies for citizens.

3. Net-Zero, a Positive Target for All? Applicability in Asia
The just transition approach originated from efforts to advance labour rights of workers directly affected by a
low carbon transition: it thereafter expanded to also encompass livelihoods and health concerns of workers
and communities located in close vicinity to extractive industries. As prevailing macroeconomic development
strategies are often largely propelled by the fossil fuel industry, especially in advanced economies, the conceptof just transition should be contextualised appropriately. However, in order for it to be relevant to countries in
Asia, a just transition definitions should also seek to avoid generalising about stages of economic development,
as starting conditions and socioeconomic challenges differ across regions and countries.
This section seeks to explore specific applications of the just transition concept, making use of a critical justicelens. In so doing, the section elaborates on general frameworks concerning environmental injustice narratives,
including how impacts vary across different groups (distributional justice), how those groups and communities
are included in the process of planning and decision-making (procedural justice), and how specific interests ofvarious actors have been marginalised (cognitive justice) (Fraser 1998; Menton et al. 2020) 2. An example fromIndonesia illustrates this point. The economy of Indonesia has been described as a hybrid form of capitalism“characterised by a combination of market-based policies and institutions, direct forms of state intervention,and coordination based on the predatory interests of powerful politico-business families” (Rosser 2014: 79 in

2 This intragenerational injustice dimension covers not only unequal distribution of environmental impacts between
different class, race, gender etc within a specific country or society but also between regions, namely “environmentalcolonialism” (Agarwal and Narain, 1991).

5

Fünfgeld 2019: 227). This characterisation is not unique to Indonesia or other countries in Asia—the existenceof patronage networks between business actors, politicians and elites is well documented, many of whom are
directly or indirectly associated with domestic coal industries (Toumbourou, et al. 2020).
Understood from the perspective of procedural injustice, these actors position coal as a primary energy sourcefrom which they seek to benefit, excluding local communities in the process. By way of example, the East
Kalimantan government of Indonesia adopted provincial regulations strengthening oversight over coal mining
and clean-up operations in 2013, the end result of a long-fought activist campaign. While this case is notablein that it was the first instance of a successful locally driven, worker-led movement against coal in Indonesia,
farm and fishing communities residing near major mines and power plants continue to face severe impacts on
their health and livelihoods from environmental degradation, as well as restricted access to land and coastal
areas (Toumbourou et al. 2020).
Moreover, these distributive and procedural inequalities tend to be obscured by the shadow of overall
economic growth. Indeed, the environmental and social impacts of coal production on Javanese fisherfolk
residing close to the coal-power stations remain unaddressed. This is largely because local residents were notfully informed about the construction of the power plant and its potential side-effects from the start, and had
no legitimate channels through which to appeal and make their voices heard. As a consequence, a number ofprotests took place, with demonstrators demanding the right to access relevant information about planned
construction; Indonesian media televised this as a challenge to the economic status quo. Similarly, even whenthese local communities finally received official recognition for their grievances, they discovered thatcompensation provided to local fisherfolk, was distributed unequally i.e. benefits were only for the boat’s
owners but not shore fishers. Subsequently, a number of local villagers in Java made clear their preference tomaintain their traditional lifestyle and culture—in this case, fishing and salt-making—than to receive instantmonetary compensation.
Such structural injustices may potentially also arise in the push to achieve net-zero targets, but in different
modalities with similar narratives. Many Asian countries, for example, have faced severe air pollution due torapid urbanisation and economic development, which have had disproportionate effects on health and incomeof urban residents. In this connection, the case from Hebei province of China presented below documents
potentially negative side-effects associated with a just transition approach.
Justice Considerations during Industrial Restructuring in Hebei, China
Hebei Province, surrounding Beijing municipality, is a major steel manufacturing industrial area where
thousands of small factories were once located. In order to protect Beijing’s urban population from intense air
pollution emitted from industrial processes during the winter, the Chinese government issued an order to6suspend regular manufacturing operations, which resulted in a number of factory closures. Doing so led tomass unemployment, with job losses estimated as high as one million in Hebei alone. Many of the immediate
employment opportunities that came about after this restructuring were for low-skilled, non-decent jobs.
Ultimately, a large percentage of workers were directly affected by toxic air pollutants, and then laid-off orreassigned to lower tier jobs as part of the government efforts to reduce air pollution. The Hebei government
has since issued a range of social and financial support measures, but they are still limited. In sum, although
the top-down enforcement of environmental policies could easily be adapted to facilitate a net-zero transition,
doing so also could burden different social groups unless appropriate countermeasures are implemented inparallel.

(Source: Schröder 2020)

As the Hebei case illustrates, certain development pathways set out within the existing economic paradigm
may potentially replicate patterns of exploitation by worsening already-existing inequalities.
Nevertheless, it is important to recognise certain caveats concerning promotion of the SDGs—particularly SDG
7, focused on advancing the uptake of renewables and green technologies—in relation to a just transition. For
instance, in some cases the installation of large-scale wind farms and solar parks may lead to a range ofnegative social and environmental consequences (Scheidel and Sorman 2012). In India, for example, aspeculative financial bubble fuelled by the solar industry has given rise to serious concerns. As a case in point,
approximately 20 billion USD investment for domestic manufacturing of solar was announced in 2015 by aninternational private financing consortium made up of Japanese and Taiwanese companies. This large-scale
renewable project has contributed to a number of environmental and social challenges, including accusationsof land grabbing, after the massive solar complex was commissioned land by local authorities in Gujarat, India.
In order to facilitate rapid decarbonization, the development of similar renewable complexes such as windenergy (Dunlap and Arce 2021), biomass for biofuel production (Bastos-Lima and Gupta 2014; Backhouse et al.
2021), hydropower (Del Bene et al. 2018) are commendable. Yet, if key issues remain unresolved, doing may
also exacerbate social tensions and distributional inequities, especially where local residents are not sufficiently
consulted (Global Energy News 2015; Goodman et al. 2019). Notably, some communities facing pressures tothose similar to Gujurat have encountered oppression, dispossession, loss of livelihoods and access rights,
institutional violence, and, in extreme cases, abduction and disappearance of activists (Butt et al. 2019; Mentonand Le Billon 2021 Ramcilovic-Suominen 2021). Taken together, Dudine and Szoke-Burke (2020) emphasisethat principles of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) need to be upheld at all stages of investment
approval for agricultural, forestry, and renewable energy projects.
Seen from another angle, certain innovations may support the development and expansion of low-carbon
technologies, while at the same time contributing to ethical concerns as well as environmental and social risks(Biermann et al. 2022, Bentz et al. 2022) ultimately leading to violations of justice (Zehner 2012) that threaten
7

delivery of the SDGs. To produce batteries for EVs and wind turbines, for instance, rare earth elements (REE)
are indispensable. REEs are mostly imported from China. As the demand of REEs sharply increased, a Mojave
Desert mine in China that was closed due to environmental considerations had to be reopened (Newell andMulvaney 2013). Massive global demand for solar PVs resulted in human rights transgressions in certain
instances, given that PV technologies are very much dependent on semiconductor manufacturing. Since the1970s, a number of environmental litigations have been documented in the PV sector resulting from the useof toxic chemicals, which have increased occupational safety and health risks, especially among female workers(Pellow and Park 2002; Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition 2009). As countries in Asia move to progressively ramp
up their net-zero commitments, scaling up the utilisation and deployment of PVs these health hazards standto be perpetuated, unless corrective actions are taken.

4. Diverse Solutions Towards Just Societies
As outlined above, in order to facilitate a transition to net-zero, policies are needed not only to speed up the
deployment of green technologies and expansion of new infrastructure, but also to address potentiallynegative environmental and social impacts on the workforce and local communities. In this regard, carefully
crafted policies that ensure the provision of unemployment benefits, pensions, and re-skilling of affected
workers are considered essential (Olsen 2009; Newell and Mulvaney 2013). However, the recurrence of certain
environmental and social injustices underlines the significant role that fair and inclusive participation also playa role in guiding a just transition. As Schröder (2020:11) correctly points out, “ill-conceived transitions
implemented without social acceptance can be costly and create unexpected delays”. The case of Germany
below illustrates how efforts to enable a just transition for local workers may take as long as a decade ofplanning to direct its gradual implementation.
Germany’s Successful Decade-Long Transition Out of Coal
Several decades of planning and programmes led the Ruhr area in Germany to graduate from a miningdependent to a more diversified economy. The German Federal Government credits this transformation to a
managed and just transition conducted in close consultation between workers, communities, and labour
unions. In 2007, negotiations started between the Federal Government, states of North Rhine Westphalia andSaarland, RAG Corporation and workers of the Mining, Chemical and Energy Industrial Union on theidentification of options for a socially acceptable transition away from coal mining. A deadline was set for 2018,
at which time the national government planned to terminate subsidies it had long provided to the mining
sector. Together these stakeholder groups adopted a cooperative approach to devise solutions aimed at
generating new employment opportunities. This included the establishment of the RAG Foundation, an
8institution tasked with supporting the delivery of qualification trainings and reskilling programmes while alsofinancing ongoing mining operations. The Foundation also sought to further advance educational, scientificand cultural projects across the Ruhr and Saar regions. Taken together, the inclusive and participatory
collaboration among key stakeholders effectively contributed to careful planning and long-term goals, thereby
enabling workers to find new opportunities in remaining mines, while also extending financial support for
retraining and early retirement schemes.

(Source: ACTU 2016)

Accordingly, climate change solutions should be structured in a socially just and ecologically sound manner.
This is especially relevant to concepts of “energy democracy” and “energy citizenship”, which are emerging andgaining traction across multiple countries. Indeed, a number of governments are placing a growing emphasison expanding citizen ownership of energy supplies. For instance, various renewable energy technologies havethe potential to be more widely decentralised along with sustainable enterprises that could manage thesetechnologies within local communities (Reyes 2015; Healy and Barry 2017). There are already countless lessons
from countries where centralised large-scale electricity systems have led to problems, and which, in turn, haveadopted wider energy democracy. The most popular energy cooperatives include, for instance, ‘cooperative
purchasing’ or ‘community choice aggregation’ in the U.S., ‘remunicipalisation’ of energy distribution models
in Germany, as well as the establishment of more than 200 municipal energy companies in the U.K., where
power has been shifted to public energy supplies in place of private corporatisation (Heinrich Böll Foundation
2018).
Transition strategies for countries in Asia, however, may diverge from those in the West, especially as highcarbon dependent models have contributed to a range of negative environmental and social impacts. To seek
appropriate solutions to achieve sustainable futures in Asia, the cosmopolitan theory of justice (Caney 2005)
along with classic frameworks such as distributive, procedural, and recognition justice may be useful. The cases
provided in the next section will elaborate on these concepts further, seeking to avoid the tendency in research
to position Western knowledge and practice as the basis for global environmental policy and solutions while
ignoring local systems and cultural values (Escobar 2018; Biermann 2020). As Dengler and Seebacher (2019:249) suggest, Western knowledge and practice may be better framed as supplemental ideas and movements
rather than a blueprint “proposed by the Global North and imposed on the Global South”. In other words, totransform hegemonic models, resource-intensive development paradigms, and unsustainable consumption
and production patterns of society towards just and sustainable net-zero future, Asia should lead and generate
solutions tailored to its national and local circumstances, rather than continue to emulate carbon dependent
development models from abroad. Doing so recognises that these models are cause and consequence of theclimate crisis with associated societal inequalities extending across the local and global scales.

5. Forgotten Solutions from Asia
9

While international climate negotiations have started to take stock of the necessary elements for enabling a
rapid net-zero transition, there are still questions around the extent to which substantial changes can be further
pursued. Looking toward solutions from across and within Asia, many regional and local concepts as well associal movements guided by a post-development agenda are aimed at shifting beyond a fossil-fuel based
economies; notable examples include the Gross National Happiness (GNH) index in Bhutan and ideas on radical
ecological democracy in India. There are also a number of implemented projects that have been shaped by amore comprehensive understanding of different forms of environmental injustice, such as energy structuresthat are reoriented towards community-owned models focusing on local production and consumption. This
type of approach originated in the early 1980s, starting among partner communities and other cooperative
activists who sought to build self-sufficient, non-market, off-grid energy solutions; distributed energy systems
today now are widely recognised as an important model for building a just and sustainable future. For example,
there is extensive literature documenting the vast potential of small-scale hydropower in Indonesia (Fünfgeld2019), but these resources remain limited due to the country’s heavy dependence on coal for energy
production. Consequently, some civil society organisations in Indonesia have initiated demonstration projects
to develop small-scale, community-owned energy systems by making use of village funds. As illustrated below,
Fujino Town provides another instructive example of how grassroots action for a solution to the energy systemchallenge.
Independent and Decentralised Renewable Energy after Fukushima disaster
After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, Fujino Town, located in Sagamihara City of Kanagawa
prefecture, Japan, began examining opportunities for a shifting away from centralised energy infrastructure
towards an independent and decentralised renewable energy system. Voluntarily operated by local residents,
activities have included both construction of renewable power generation systems, research and knowledge
sharing on effective energy usage, and promoting peer learning by educating the public on disaster prevention.
Fujino is also part of the Transition Town initiative, which is an international grassroots movement aimed at
encouraging lifestyles that foster sustainability and ensure a safe human environment. Energy transition
activities such as these are also part of a broader objective aimed at positioning Fujino as a transition town fortackling climate change from the bottom-up. Fujino emphasises the careful use of local social andenvironmental resources with a view to designing a more sustainable, socially connected, climate-resilient
community.

(Source: 藤野電力, UN University 2012)

Country- and local-specific strategies should also be tailored to meet the needs of residents. Such strategies
could best be worked out in full consultation with various stakeholders, including workers from the energy
sector, communities and citizen advocacy groups. For instance, recognising that the intended phase out of coalstands to have unequal and varying regional impacts in Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines due to10

differences in labour market characteristics, the ILO (2022) suggests the creation of “just transition
hotspots/zones”. Doing so would help in formulating locally diversified economic plans that support decent
work and provide community stability for culturally and socially just transitions. Correspondingly, when climate
targets were initially introduced to remote communities in Thailand in line with the country’s Climate Change
Master Plan, the government made efforts to communicate via local languages, as opposed to making use oftechnical jargon and terminologies unfamiliar to rural people.
Policy Participation Group in the Korean Presidential Committee on Carbon Neutrality
Korea announced its New Deal in early 2020 as a part of the COVID-19 recovery plan and outlined key strategies
supporting the programme, including recovery measures, expanding infrastructure for a green and digital
economy, supporting job creation, and improving social security systems. The Green New Deal, however,outlined the country’s ambition to move towards net-zero without including a set target year. After the netzero declarations of China and Japan were subsequently made later in 2020, Korea eventually pledged its goalto achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. In order to formulating actions aimed at meeting that goal, a Presidential
Committee on Carbon Neutrality (PCCN) was established, and policy roadmaps were designed in close
consultation with different stakeholders. The PCCN is comprised of 8 subcommittees, with just transition
making up one of the key divisions; others focused on climate change, energy innovation, science technology,
green lifestyles, and so on. A people’s policy participation group was also established with a focus on collecting
and reflect pubic opinions in relevant policy discussions and encourage the active involvement of citizens.
(Source: Lee and Woo 2020; 대한민국정책브리핑. 2021)
The aforementioned cases provide relevant examples where modifications were made to adapt existing models
to national contexts or local situations rather than to pursue complete and radical transformation. Other casesthat also might be considered in Asia include contemporary but frequently overlooked alternative ideas andapproaches that in the past served as the basis for much of the philosophy and culture in Asia: in other words,
indigenous epistemologies. Much of this wisdom is guided by the idea that humans and nature are inextricably
parts of the same whole. Contrasted with the human-nature dichotomy that has characterised much of Westernthought since the time of the Enlightenment, the concept of distributional justice between human and naturein environmental justice itself could also be interrogated in this way. Industrialism and modernity—sometimes
thought of as twin components of dominant culture—coerces living-beings into a morbid state that separates
and alienates us from the wider natural world. Overcoming this alienation is only possible by taking a more
holistic view that emphasises ecological literacy and human values (Lee 2008).
Against this background, the philosophy set out by Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy, for example, addresses theroot causes of climate change such as excessive material consumption and production, while also seeking to11

mitigate adverse and disproportionate impacts of the climate crisis on rural farmers. The Sufficiency Economy
philosophy is developed by the late Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej. The philosophy is built on the following
components: 1) production and consumption at a moderate level (moderation), 2) consideration of
stakeholders and anticipation of possible outcomes (prudence), 3) resilience of economy against external
shocks (self-immunity), 4) knowledge, and 5) morality. It stresses the importance of “the middle path and theneed to balance forces of globalisation with the needs of local resilience” (Birnbaum and Fox 2014), and has
guided sustainable and resilient rural development efforts, including through improved water and agriculturalland management for agriculture. A number of Sufficiency Economy projects have also been implemented witha view to assist rural farmers with identifying opportunities for generating more resilient livelihoods. For
instance, many Agri-Nature Learning Centres have been built throughout Thailand to instruct about sufficiency
economy-based living as well as serving as survival shelters during times of crisis (Birnbaum and Fox 2014).
Doing so has helped in strengthening adaptive capacities of communities to climate change while conserving
and protecting local natural resources (Kansuntisukmongkol 2017). Some studies suggest that Sufficiency
Economy buffered communities against food price hikes that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic (TheNation Thailand 2022).
Many countries in the Asian region still rely on rural agricultural based lifestyles. Yet, in view of evidence that
one-third of world total GHG emission contributions is associated with agri-food systems, through agriculturalland, pre- and post-production activities of food supply chains (FAO 2021; Tubiello et al. 2021), it is clear thatcurrent models of production and consumption is based on the prioritisation of industrial agriculture. Exploring
ways to improve self-sufficiency through small-scale community-based local activities therefore has great
potential for progressively bringing down GHG emissions and ecological footprints as well as revitalisingsociocultural norms for strengthening ecological sustainability (O'Neill 2020; Kallis et al. 2020).
One instructive example is the Cabiokid project conducted in the Philippines, which started in 2001. Amongother achievements, the project successfully transformed a monocultured farmland into diversified organic
agricultural sites by making use of permaculture techniques and involving local community members. The site
supports self-sufficient food systems, achieves close to zero waste, is moving toward more becoming entirely
powered by renewable energy, and ultimately has become a learning centre for regenerative agriculture. The
project is run by a non-profit organisation made up of local people. A women’s cooperative was established in
the community that houses the project to support this project. Similarly, Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement in
Sri Lanka was started by a high school teacher and his students, eventually becoming one of the largest
development organisations in Sri Lanka, effectively mobilising a large-scale democratic revolution thatchampions efforts to eradicate poverty and reduce inequality. Under these efforts, the Lagoswatta Ecovillage
was created as a response to recovery from the 2004 tsunami.

126. Conclusion
International discussions around just transition emphasise accelerating a shift towards resilient, inclusive andsustainable societies. However, it is important to underline that this process should not only be limited toworkers affected by economic restructuring efforts to achieve net-zero emissions. Indeed, it is critical that
central government, local authorities, citizens and local communities around the world are part of a broadersocial dialogue aimed at protecting the rights of workers and others impacted by net-zero policies. This isbecause workers employed in the fossil fuel industry continue to suffer from negative health and environmental
impacts as well as the increasing risk of unemployment. Seen from this light, a just transition is not merely ashift to a clean and green economy: it represents a holistic transformation of society that seeks to avoid thefailures of economic liberalisation, especially in the view of the rights of frontline communities, marginalised
groups, and those previously left behind.
These challenges are multidimensional and complex given that many of the issues facing workers andcommunities vary significantly according to the geographical regions in which they reside. Taking this into
account, proposed solutions should also be tailored and contextualised, especially in cases where a justtransition requires consideration of diverse views about equity and fairness. Indeed, such an understanding
may start with identifying how social and environmental policies and programmes might be better informed
by inclusive policy dialogues organised among different groups of stakeholders. Any such effort would extend
beyond the public sector and include the participation of various actors, with a guiding vision of minimising
impacts and maximising equality (Bickerstaff et al. 2013). Put another way, the success of a net-zero transition
depends on the extent to which resources, values, interests, and beliefs are shared (Demski et al. 2015; Bentz
et al. 2022) which, in turn, depends on the active involvement of a range of different stakeholders.
As highlighted in this paper, a number of issues often preclude local communities in Asia from contributing
effectively to a net-zero transition. Addressing these structural challenges, including providing a voice tostakeholders whose livelihoods are linked to the fossil fuel-based economy, should be given due attention.
Following this recognition, further analyses can determine whether intended net-zero policies may aggravatesocial tensions and inequality over the course of transition. Solutions should aim to specifically engage workers,
communities, and other local stakeholders via local and inclusive consultations, both prior to and over thecourse of project and programme planning as well as policy formulation and review processes so as to ensure
appropriate representation. More importantly, in line with Temper (2019: 104) “rather than simply participation,
justice must [also] include self-governing authority”. Here the concept of self-governance may possibly conflictwith that of procedural justice; nevertheless, any such disparity should be carefully deliberated upon andcorrected as part of wider efforts aimed at achieving a just and sustainable future for all.
13

Installing solar panels and constructing wind turbines, while necessary in themselves to achieve a net-zero
future, do not consider issues of equity and social justice. In order to improve prosperity of all and foster a truly
just transition, policymakers’ attention should go beyond addressing the needs of low-income countries,
disadvantaged communities, and other vulnerable stakeholders, including workers. Similarly, future efforts to
expand Asia’s vision of just transition might also take note of traditional Asian values related to sustainable
and modest lifestyles. Envisaging ways to achieve net-zero should begin with an acknowledgement of thosealready practicing low-carbon lifestyles, as well as understanding and nurturing those in need, including theelderly, children, and the greater natural world. Presently, Bhutan is the only Asian country to have alreadyachieved net-zero. Undoubtedly, all countries are different, but there remain many lessons yet to learn.

14References
Agarwal, A. and Narain, S., 1991. Global Warming in an Unequal World: A Case of Environmental Colonialism.
Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi.
Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU). 2016. Sharing the challenges and opportunities of a clean energy
economy: A Just Transition for coal-fired electricity sector workers and communities. Policy Discussion Paper.
Backhouse, M., Lehmann, R., Lorenzen, K., Lühmann, M., Puder, J., Rodríguez, F., Tittor, A. 2021. Bioeconomy
and inequalities. Socio-ecological perspectives on biomass sourcing and production across South America,
Asia and Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Bentz, J., O’Brien, K., and Scoville-Simonds, M. 2022. ‘Beyond “blah blah blah”: exploring the “how” oftransformation’, Sustainability Science 17: 497-506.
Bickerstaff, K., Walker, G. and Bulkeley, H. eds. 2013. Energy Justice in a Changing Climate: Social Equity and
Low-carbon Energy. Zed books: London.
Biermann, F., Oomen, J., Gupta, A., Ali, S., Conca, M., Maarten, A., Kashwan, P., Kotze, J., Leach, M., Messner, D.,
Chukwumerije, O., Persson, Å., Schlosbert, D. et al. 2022. ‘Solar geoengineering: the case for an international
non-use agreement’, WIREs Climate Chante 13(3): e754.
Birnbaum, Juliana and Fouis Fox. 2014. Sustainable [R]evolution. North Atlantic Books.
Butt, N., Lambrick, F., Menton, M. 2019. ‘The supply chain of violence’, Nature Sustainability 2:742–747.
Caney, S.2005. ‘Cosmopolitan Justice, Responsibility, and Global Climate Change’. Leiden Journal ofInternational Law 18(4): 747-775.
Cha, M. 2019. Ch.16. From the dirty past to the clean future: Addressing historic energy injustices with a justtransition to a low-carbon future in Jafry, T. Routledge Handbook of Climate Justice.
Creutzig, F., Roy, J., Lamb, W., Azevedo, I., de Bruin, W., Dalkmann, H., Edelenbosch, O. et al. 2018. ‘Towards
demand-side solutions for mitigating climate change’. Nature Climate Chang 8: 260-263.
Del Bene, D., Scheidel, A., Temper, L. 2018. ‘More dams, more violence? A global analysis on resistances andrepression around conflictive dams through co-produced knowledge’, Sustainability Science 13:617–633.
Demski, C., Butler, C., Parkhill, K., Spence, A., and Pidgeon, N. 2015. ‘Public values for energy system change’.
Global Environmental Change 34: 59-69.

15

Dengler, C. and Seebacher, L. 2019. ‘What About the Global South? Towards a Feminist Decolonial Degrowth
Approach’, Ecological Economics 157: 246-252.
Dudine, K. and Szoke-Burke, S., 2020. Incorporating Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) into Investment
Approval Processes.

Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/sustainable_investment_staffpubs/5

Dunlap, A. and Arce, M. 2021. ‘‘Murderous energy’ in Oaxaca, Mexico: wind factories, territorial struggle andsocial warfare’, The Journal of Peasant Studies 49(2): 455-480.
Escobar, A. 2018. Designs for the pluriverse: radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds.
Duke University Press, Durham European Commission.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO). 2021. Emissions due to agriculture. Global, regional andcountry trends 2000–2018 FAOSTAT Analytical Brief SeriesNo 18.
Fraser, N. 1998. Social justice in the age of identity politics: redistribution, recognition and participation,
Discussion Paper FS 98-108.
Fünfgeld, A. 2019. Ch.17. Just energy? Structures of energy (in)justice and the Indonesian coal sector in Jafry,
T. Routledge Handbook of Climate Justice.
Galgóczi, B. European Trade Union Institute (ETUI). Just transition towards environmentally sustainableeconomies and societies for all.

ILO ACTRAV Policy Brief. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---actrav/documents/publication/wcms_647648.pdf
Geels, F., Berkhout, F., van Vuuren, D. 2016. ‘Bridging analytical approaches for low-carbon transitions’.
Nature Climate Change 6(6): 576-583.
Global Energy News. 2015. SoftBank, partners eye $20 billion investment in Indian solar projects, Reuters 22
June.
Goodman, J., Ghosh, D., Morton, T. 2019. Ch. 18. Climate technology and climate justice: Energy transition inGermany, India and Australia in Jafry, T. Routledge Handbook of Climate Justice.
Gore, T. and Alestig, M. 2020. Confronting carbon inequality in the European Union: why the European Green
Deal must tackle inequality while cutting emissions. Oxfam policy papers.
Harcourt, W. and Nelson, I. 2015. Practising feminist political ecologies: moving beyond the “green
economy.” Zed, London.

16

Healy, N. and Barry, J. 2017. ‘Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment
and a just transition’. Energy Policy 108: 451-459.
Heffron, R., and McCauley, D. 2017. ‘The concept of energy justice across the disciplines’. Energy Policy 105:658-667.
Heinrich Böll Foundation. 2018 Radical Realism for Climate Justice: A Civil Society Response to the Challengeof Limiting Global Warming to 1.5C. Heinrich Böll Stiftung Publication Series Ecology.
Henry MS, Bazilian MD, Markuson C. Just transitions: Histories and futures in a post-COVID world. Energy Res
Soc Sci. 2020 Oct;68:101668. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2020.101668. Epub 2020 Jul 10. PMID: 32839696; PMCID:
PMC7351418.
Hickel, J. 2020. Less is more: how degrowth will save the world. Penguin Random House, London.
Holifield, R., Chakraborty, J., and Walker, W. 2018. The Routledge handbook of environmental justice.
Routledge, London.
International Labor Organization (ILO), 2022. A just energy transition in Southeast Asia: The impacts of coalphase-out on jobs. ILO
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2018. Global warming of 1.5 °C, an IPCC special report on
the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas
emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change,sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty.
International Energy Agency (IEA). 2021. The Net Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector. IEA.
International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). 2021. April. SDG Knowledge Hub News. Working
Groups Develop Recommendations for Just, Inclusive Energy Transitions. https://sdg.iisd.org/news/workinggroups-develop-recommendations-for-just-inclusive-energy-transitions/International Labour Organization (ILO). 2015. Guidelines for a just transition towards environmentally
sustainable economies and societies for all. ILO.
Jafry, T. ed. 2019. Routledge Handbook of Climate Justice. Routledge, London.
Kallis, G., Paulson, S., D’Alisa, G., and Demaria, F. 2020. The case for degrowth. Polity Press, Cambridge.

17Kansuntisukmongkol, Kulvadee. 2017. Philosophy of sufficiency economy for community-based adaptation toclimate change: lessons learned from Thai case studies.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452315116301321
Kreinin, H. 2020. Typologies of Just Transitions: Towards Social-Ecological Transformation. Working Paper
Series. Institute for Ecological Economics.
Lee, S. 2008. ‘Korean Environmental Thought and Practice: A Case Study of the Indramang Community’,Environmental Ethics 30: 115-134.
Lee, S. and Zusman, E. 2019. Ch. 29 Participatory climate governance in Southeast Asia: lessons learned fromgender-responsive climate mitigation’ in Jafry, T. Routledge Handbook of Climate Justice.
Lee, J and Woo, J. 2020. Green New Deal Policy of South Korea: Policy Innovation for a Sustainability
Transition. Sustainability 12, 10191; doi:10.3390/su122310191
Martinez-Alier, J., Temper, L., Del Bene, D., Scheidel, A. 2016. ‘Is there a global environmental justice
movement?’, The Journal of Peasant Studies 43(3): 731–755.
McCauley, D., Heffron, R.J., Pavlenko, M., Rehner, R., and Holmes, R. 2016. ‘Energy justice in the Arctic:
implications for energy infrastructural development in the Arctic’. Energy Research & Social Science 16(1):141–146.
McCauley, D., Ramasar, V., Heffron R., Sovacool, B., Mebratu, D., and Mundaca, L. 2019. ‘Energy justice in thetransition to low carbon energy systems: Exploring key themes in interdisciplinary research’, Applied Energy
233: 916–921.
Mckinnon, H., Stockman, L., Kretzmann, S., Scott, A., and Turnbull, D. 2016. The Sky's Limit: why the Paris
Climate Goals Require a Managed Decline of Fossil Fuel Production. Oil Change International.
Meikle, M., Wilson, J. and Jafry, T. 2016. ‘Climate justice: between Mammon and Mother Earth’, International
Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management 8(4): 488–504.
Menton, M., Larrea, C., Martinex-Alier, J. Peak, M., Temper, L., and Walter, M. 2020. ‘Environmental justice andthe SDGs: from synergies to gaps and contradictions’, Sustainability Science 15: 1621-1636.
Newell, P. and Mulvaney, D. 2013. ‘The political economy of the just transition’, The Geographical Journal
doi:10.1111/geoj.12008

18

O’Brien, K.L. and Leichenko, R.M. 2000. ‘Double exposure: assessing the impacts of climate change within thecontext of economic globalization’, Global Environmental Change, Part A: Human and Policy Dimensions 10:
221-232.
O’Neill, D. 2020. ‘Beyond green growth’, Nature Sustainability 3(4): 260–261.
Olsen, L. 2009. The Employment Effects of Climate Change and Climate Change Responses: A Role forInternational Labour Standards?, GURN Discussion Paper No.12. ILO.
Parks, B.C. and Roberts, J.T. 2006. ‘Globalization, vulnerability to climate change, and perceived injustice’,
Society and Natural Resources 19(4): 337-355.
Pellow, D. and Park, L. 2002. The Silicon Valley of dreams: environmental injustice, immigrant workers, andthe high-tech global economy. New York University Press.
Perez-Guerrero, M. 1982. ‘Role of energy in the life of mankind: lifestyles and distributive justice’, Studies inEnvironmental Science 16:551–564
Perry, C., 1982. ‘Coal Production and Socioeconomic Development in Southern Appalachia: The Case of
Eastern Kentucky’, Social Indicators Research 11(2): 192–205.
Ramcilovic-Suominen, S. 2022. ‘Envisioning just transformations in and beyond the EU bioeconomy:
inspirations from decolonial environmental justice and degrowth’, Sustainability Science
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01091-5.
Reyes, O. 2015. Towards a Just Transition. Working Paper Draft. Institute for Policy Studies.
Saha, D. and Muro, M. 2016. Growth, Carbon, and Trump: State Progress and Drift on Economic Growth andEmissions ‘Decoupling’. Brookings Institution.
Scheidel, A. and Sorman, A. 2012. ‘Energy transitions and the global land rush: Ultimate drivers and persistent consequences’, Global Environmental Change 22(3): 588–595.
Schlosberg, D. 2013. ‘Theorising environmental justice: the expanding sphere of a discourse’, Environmental
Politics 22(1): 37–55.
Schröder, P. 2020. Promoting a Just Transition to an Inclusive Circular Economy. Research Paper. Chatham
House.
Sikor, T. and Newell, P. 2014. ‘Globalizing environmental justice?’, Geoforum 54: 151–157.

19

Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition. 2009. Towards a just and sustainable solar energy industry, White Paper.
Smith, A. and Stirling, A. 2010. ‘The politics of social-ecological resilience and sustainable socio-technicaltransitions’, Ecology and Society 15(1): 11.
Snell, D. 2018. ‘Just transition? Conceptual challenges meet stark reality in a ‘transitioning’ coal region inAustralia’, Globalizations 15: 550-564.
Sovacool, B. et al. 2019. ‘Decarbonization and its discontents: a critical energy justice perspective on four lowcarbon transitions’, Climate Change 155: 581-619.
Temper, L. 2018. ‘Globalizing environmental justice: radical and transformative movements past and present’in Holifield, R. eds. The Routledge handbook of environmental justice. Routledge, London.
Temper, L. 2019. ‘Blocking pipelines, unsettling environmental justice: from rights of nature to responsibility
to territory’, Local Environment 24(2): 94–112.
The Nation Thailand. July 11, 2022. https://www.nationthailand.com/business/40014209
Trade Union Development Cooperation Network (TUDCN). 2019. The Contribution of Social Dialogue to the2030 Agenda: Promoting a Just Transition towards sustainable economies and societies for all. TUDCN.
Toumbourou, T., Muhdar, M., Werner, T., & Bebbington, A. (2020). Political ecologies of the post-mining
landscape: Activism, resistance, and legal struggles over Kalimantan's coal mines. Energy Research & Social
Science, 65, 101476.
Tubiello, F., Rosenzweig, C., Conchedda, G., Karl, K., Gütschow, J., Xueyao, P., Obli-Laryea, G., Wanner, N., Qiu,
S., De Barros, J., Flammini, A., Mencos-Contreras, E., Souza, L., Quadrelli, R., Heiðarsdóttir, H., Benoit, P., Hayek,
M., and David Sandalow, D. 2021. ‘Greenhouse gas emissions from food systems: building the evidence base’,Environmental Research 16: 065007.
United Nations (UN). 2021. Theme Report on Enabling SDGs Through Inclusive, Just Energy Transitions:
Towards the Achievement of SDG7 and Net-Zero Emissions.
UN University. 2012. Transition Town Fujino Goes for Local Energy Independence.
https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/transition-town-fujino-goes-for-local-energy-independence
Walker, G. 2009. ‘Globalizing environmental justice’, Global Social Policy 9(3): 355–382.
Weinberg, A. 1985. ‘Immortal Energy Systems and Intergenerational Justice’, Energy Policy 13: 51-59.

20

Zehner, O. 2012. Green illusions: the dirty secrets of clean energy and the future of environmentalism,
University of Nebraska Press: London.
藤野電力. 2021. Fujino Energy. https://fujino.pw/aboutus대한민국정책브리핑. 2021 June. 2050 탄소중립위원회, 민관 함께 탄소중립시대 첫 걸음 떼다.

https://www.korea.kr/news/contributePolicyView.do?newsId=148888316

21

The authors would like to thank Eric Zusman
for his valuable comments on this paper.

Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
Integrated Sustainability Centre
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa, 240-0115, Japanwww.iges.or.jp

The views expressed in this working paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily
represent IGES>©2013 Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. All rights reserved.