Across the world, communities on the front line of the energy transition are bearing the brunt of mineral extractions by losing their lands and livelihood to mining activities and renewable developments. To avoid this harm, governments and investors must include front-line communities in decision making rather than tokenistic consultation.
As world leaders meet for COP30 in Brazil, new research published by the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) ‘Struggles for justice in the energy transition: Voices from the front lines’ reveals that the green energy transition is far from ‘just’ or inclusive. The transition risks repeating harms already inflicted by fossil fuel industries such as unequal distribution of benefits, unfair compensations, environmental destruction and pollution, and loss of land and livelihoods.
Professor John Gaventa, Research Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies said:
“New green projects must not do more harm than good for the communities who live every day with the social and environmental impacts of energy transitions, often based on the political decisions made far away from their lives.
“Throughout history, local people have organised and resisted to defend their lands and rights. Policies imposed on them by governments or corporations, without their involvement and perspectives, will likely be perceived once again as simply old wine in new bottles. There can be no just and equitable transition unless the voices and experiences of those on the front lines are included.”
This new research brings together the voices of communities and workers from across the globe living closest to mines, oil fields, and large-scale renewable developments. From the UK and US, to Nigeria, Chile and Brazil, the territories of these communities are directly affected by oil and coal exploitation and the extraction of critical minerals, often without their informed consultation or consent. Where people still have little or no access to electricity, face pollution and environmental destruction, or are forced off their land to make way for new ‘green’ projects, many experience the energy transition as just another episode of unjust and extractive development.
In Brazil, the same development promises used to justify gemstone and iron ore mining are now used to promote lithium extraction. In Colombia, dominant fossil-fuel narratives still claim that there is no future without oil, even as new renewable projects displace communities.
This pattern is not limited to the global South. In northern England, government plans for reviving mining towns rely heavily on attracting foreign investment for renewables, mirroring older extractive models. In Appalachia in the USA, top-down transition policies continue to reinforce corporate control while ignoring local struggles for justice. Despite living in energy poverty and extreme deprivation, these communities remain the least heard.
The risk of neglecting communities or tokenistic consultation, often intended to accelerate clean energy projects, will obstruct the much-needed transition. When governments or companies sideline communities, fail to seek consent, or threaten livelihoods and ecosystems, communities organise and attempt to resist. In some instances, this locally led resistance has led to the cancellation and delay of green energy projects.
The research identifies four strategies that can help make transitions fairer and more inclusive:
- Amplify the voices of those most affected;
- Create spaces where communities can take part in planning and policy;
- Build alliances that connect local struggles with national and global movements;
- And shape policies that reflect the hopes and rights of people on the ground.
For a truly just transition, researchers call on governments, policymakers and donors to involve front line communities and their meaningful participation to ensure the protection of rights and land. We need to centre life, interdependence, and justice for a truly transformative transition to green energy.