The political economy of the ‘just transition’

By P. Newell, Dustin Mulvaney. 2013

1,025 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Pollution

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8ddceeabd6d7810af14d15fea9e428eb1ba00eaf

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Ronan Bolton
2. J. Barry
3. Noel Healy
4. Béla Galgóczi
5. P. Newell
6. L. Gailing
7. T. Foxon
8. G. Bridge

In Pollution

1. J. Barry
2. Noel Healy
3. P. Newell
4. L. Gailing
5. G. Bridge
6. Béla Galgóczi
7. Lucy Baker
8. P. oei

Citations in the corpus

• The political economy of coal in Poland: Drivers and barriers for a shift away from fossil fuels (2020, neutral): “…research gap in energy transitions research (Goldthau and Sovacool, 2012; Meadowcroft, 2011) and is increasingly becoming a focus of analysis (see e.g. Newell and Mulvaney (2013); Baker et al. (2014); Power et al. (2016); Kern and Markard (2016); Arent et al. (2017); Paterson and P-Laberge (2018)).”
• New energy spaces: Towards a geographical political economy of energy transition (2020, background): “…(such as those informed by Geels’ (2005) multi-level perspective (MLP)) by paying more attention to its socially contested and power-laden character (Baker et al., 2014; Geels, 2014; Lawhon and Murphy, 2012; Newell and Mulvaney, 2013; Stirling 2014; Scoones et al. 2015; Power et al., 2016).”
• Lessons from Germany’s hard coal mining phase-out: policies and transition from 1950 to 2018 (2019, background): “…early communication of phase-out plans, can ease the disruption of upcoming changes, helping coal miners to stay in the labor market and encourage new generations to choose education and employment tracks with better future perspectives (Healy & Barry, 2017; Mayer, 2018; Newell & Mulvaney, 2013).”
• Just cuts for fossil fuels? Supply-side carbon constraints and energy transition (2020, background): “A second objective is to inform debates about the spatialities of energy (Bridge, 2017; Calvert, 2016) and the difficulties of combining both ‘energy justice’ and ‘climate justice’ (Healy and Barry, 2017; Jenkins et al., 2016; Newell and Mulvaney, 2013; Weber and Cabras, 2017).”
• A socio-technical perspective on low carbon investment challenges – Insights for UK energy policy (2015, background): “Insights can be drawn here from recent contributions to the political economy of energy systems and structural change (Kuzemko and Bradshaw, 2013; Newell and Mulvaney, 2013; Bradshaw, 2010).”
• The Political Economy of Energy Transitions: The Case of South Africa (2014, background): “These help to illustrate the contested terrain of energy politics in the country and help to shed light on the difficulty and complexity of organising what have been referred to as ‘just transitions’ (Swilling and Annecke 2012; Newell and Mulvaney 2013) in highly unequal societies.”
• Intersectionality and energy transitions: A review of gender, social equity and low-carbon energy (2020, background): “via equal distribution, full recognition of rights and labour contributions, equal participation in decision-making procedures, and equal capabilities in renewable energy outcomes [26,27].”
• Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a “just transition” (2017, positive): “The challenge, Newell and Mulvaney (2013) argue, is that technological innovation and the search for new sites of capital accumulation can produce injustices in surprising and unpredictable ways, including around the development of ‘clean’ (low-carbon) technologies (Zehner, 2012).”
• A Green New Deal without growth? (2021, background): “An essential element of this vision is that labour unions should be at the negotiating table to make sure that the transition is co-created and co-shaped (Newell and Mulvaney, 2013).”
• Just transition on the ground: Challenges and opportunities for social dialogue (2020, background): “Newell and Mulvaney (2013) examine the political economy of just transition and describe its complexity: achieving zero-carbon while paying attention to issues of equity and justice; taking into account the pursuit of ‘climate justice’ for current and future generations; and also managing potential…”
• Social impacts of climate change mitigation policies and their implications for inequality (2019, background): “…just transition is now increasingly acknowledged as having a remit across the various aspects of the transition, including the distributional impacts of climate change policy more broadly (IMPACT, 2017; International Labour Organisation, 2015; Jakob & Steckel, 2014; Newell & Mulvaney, 2013).”
• Equity, climate justice and fossil fuel extraction: principles for a managed phase out (2020, background): “Rather we note that the they are generally experienced by different people, creating both winners and losers (Newell and Mulvaney 2013; Healy and Barry 2017).”