The Just Energy Transition Partnership with South Africa: Towards a spatially just transition?

Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) are new plurilateral agreements motivated by both climate policy and geostrategic considerations. Fossil-dependent Global South countries willing to pursue low-carbon transitions receive support along the way, while donor countries bind these partners closely to them. Beyond climate and energy objectives, the "J" in JETP signals that these partnerships are aimed at cushioning social consequences and enabling an inclusive and participatory transition. Studying the JETP with South Africa, however, reveals that while all partners involved subscribe to the idea of a just energy transition, they do not share the same conception of justice. The partnership is embedded in a context of climate urgency, inequality, energy poverty, controversies around foreign debt, and challenges through corruption in the country. Against the background of diverse justice priorities, this contribution asks: How and where are various notions of spatial justice brought into interaction in public reasoning about the Just Energy Transition Partnership in South Africa? Spatiality comes into play not only along the Global North/ Global South dimension, but also in terms of infrastructure-related justice debates or unequal subnational transition impacts. South African regions with concentrated coal mining, for instance, must fundamentally transform their economy, while other regions will profit from favorable renewable energy conditions or hydrogen infrastructures. Thus, the calls for just distribution, recognition, and procedures depend on and shape the spatial context that they address. Based on 14 qualitative expert interviews with policy makers, public servants, civil society, and trade unions in South Africa, a spectrum of spatial justice claims is developed and discussed that transcends the boundaries of energy, climate justice and just transition discourses. The study finds that there is a vivid and controversial debate about the JETP within the South African society. Advocates emphasize the potential to overcome both electricity crisis and coal dependency and to move towards a just society, while opponents criticize the high level of debt and suspect that the partnership is merely based on the selfish interests of the donor countries. Whether participation opportunities are sufficient is another bone of contention. Overall, the study shows that the contextual conditions in South Africa are highly specific and that the success of the JETP will continue to be measured by the extent to which it can fulfill its claim to deliver on a genuinely justice-focused transition approach.