Socially Just and Politically Robust Decarbonisation: A Knowledge Base and Toolkit for Policymakers - JUSTDECARB

Climate change mitigation needs urgently to be scaled up, yet attempts to introduce even modest climate policies in many European countries are accused of having unjust distributional effects, prompting aggrieved groups to mobilize politically to block or weaken those policies. Greater knowledge is needed about how low-carbon transitions can be structured so that they are not only socially just, but are also perceived to be so by key stakeholders, thus enhancing the transition’s political robustness. The JUSTDECARB project has brought together social science and humanities researchers from four disciplines (philosophy, political science, economics, and law) across four countries (Austria, Czech Republic, Norway, and UK) in pursuit of two overarching project objectives: 1. To fill critical gaps in the knowledge base relating to socially just and politically robust decarbonization (the scientific objective). 2. To develop a ‘toolkit’ to help European policymakers steer transition processes in a socially just and politically robust direction (the policy objective). The final product is a 72-page report titled “Just and robust transitions to net zero – A framework to guide national policy” published both in print and for download. It was launched at a breakfast seminar in Oslo on 27th October 2023. The Norwegian contribution to JUSTDECARB’s scientific objective focuses on opposition to decarbonization policies and polarization of climate change politics. We include two comparative case studies and two survey-based studies. The first case study features Norway and the UK, focusing on climate activist campaigns that have politicized petroleum production and caused more controversy around demands to reduce and eventually phase out oil and gas extraction. This is becoming a very polarized policy field where tensions are strong both among policymakers, organized interest groups, and the general public. The second case study compares just transition perspectives related to coal phase-out in carbon locked-in cities in the Czech Republic. For both case studies, we conduct expert interviews and text analysis of documents such as government assessments, white papers, reports, and policy statements found in archives, databases, and records of public statements. The first survey-based study focuses on road tolls, another polarizing policy met with strong opposition from the public. Using data of around 2,000 Norwegians, we explore what characterizes opponents of road tolls. Key findings are that attitudes relating to climate change, the environment, and right-wing populism are strongly related to opposition to road tolls. Lack of alternative transport modes is not a strong predictor, while owning a car does predict increased opposition. The final study extends the scope to eight different polices - covering increasing prices, expanding renewable energy production and limiting petroleum production. Here we find that Norwegians sort into two distinct camps: those who are positive or relatively neutral toward all policies, except hydropower, versus those who strongly oppose the price-based policies and restrictions on oil extraction while being a bit more divided for the remaining policies. The study provides nuanced characteristics of supporters and opponents. A strong age gradient is driven particularly by support among those under thirty and opposition from people in their fifties. Income is a weak predictor of policy attitudes, while there are divides between rural and urban residents as well as between those with university degrees and those with technical or vocational education. In both survey-analyses, we find that views on immigration are among the strongest predictors of attitudes to climate policy. These results are discussed in light of recent literature indicating that opposition to climate policies forms part of a larger attitudinal complex signaling resistance against societal changes generally, and are linked to right-wing populist attitudes.

The scientific objective will be pursued via two research themes. The first theme aims to fill critical knowledge gaps concerning the philosophy, politics and economics of transitional “winners” and “losers”, pertaining to processes of decarbonisation, via novel, singledisciplinary research projects. One such project will use philosophical methods to clarify the conceptual and normative issues at the heart of the “social justice” dimension of decarbonisation. The second project will use methods from micro-econometrics and labour economics to better understand the difference in skill requirements between high-carbon and zero-carbon jobs, and the implications of these skill differences for the design of climate policies and complementary labour market measures. The third project will focus on political polarisation and the political behaviour of winners and losers from decarbonisation. Using both large-n survey and small-n comparative case-study methods, this third project will study how and why opposition to climate policy develops, with a view to improving the political robustness of climate policies. Building on this work, and adding wider insights from philosophy, political science, and law, our second research theme aims to develop frameworks for evaluating the justice and robustness of, respectively: processes of public engagement applicable to the design and implementation of climate policy; and substantive climate policies, including redistributive measures. These aims will be pursued through two interdisciplinary, applied research projects. Finally, to fulfil JUSTDECARB’s policy objective, the project team, in consultation with policymakers and civil society stakeholders, will develop a “toolkit for policymakers” int the form of a report that describes the recommended steps for policymakers to take, and methods to use, as they seek to steer transition processes in a socially just and politically robust direction across the key phases of the policy cycle.