Unpacking Just Transition Narratives in European Coal Regions

In recent years, the public discourse on the phase-out of carbon-intensive technologies and practices has come to In recent years, the public discourse on the phase-out of carbon-intensive technologies and practices has come to a near consensus that a “just transition” is required. Yet, this term seems to have as many meanings as there are stakeholders using it. While enabling a constructive discourse, the variety of meanings underneath the surface of the just transition paradigm may also conceal conflict. While some actors employ versions of the just transition narrative to accelerate a transformation away from fossil fuels, others might employ seemingly similar narratives to delay the transformation by stipulating that only a slow transition can be just. To shed light on the varieties of “just transition” and its strategic employment we employ a policy narrative analysis (Jones et al. 2014) to study and compare the political discourse in four European coal+ regions: Ida-Virumaa (Estonia, oil shale), the Rhenish mining region (Germany, lignite), Silesia (Poland, hard coal) and Western Macedonia (Greece, lignite). Specifically, we will be addressing the following research questions: Which narratives are characterising the political discourse around just transition? Which (in)justices are being invoked? Which patterns, similarities or differences are recognizable between regions? We found that hopeful narratives describing structural change as an opportunity to reinvent the region are prevalent in all regions. Strong narratives of resistance only prevail in Silesia and Ida Virumaa where a phase-out decision has not yet been adopted. In terms of injustices, we find surprisingly little evidence that injustices related to the immediate effects of the transformation (e.g. lay-offs and compensation for workers and companies) play an important role. Instead, the aspects related to the historical injustices produced by the legacy industrial system prevail. And perhaps most importantly, questions about access and allocation of the opportunities of the imminent transition are key and should be addressed more explicitly.