Our key takeaway: The ILO Just Transition Guidelines, the Silesia Declaration and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights all provide reference points on what is included within a just transition, defined in the recent Wilton Park-IHRB Dialogues report as “a whole-of-society approach to decarbonisation that respects human rights while promoting sustainable development, the eradication of poverty, and the creation of decent work and quality jobs.” However, as the term is proliferating in its use, so too are misconceptions and misapplications of it. This is not a case of: oh well, at least we are advancing. This is dangerous, given the urgency of the transition ahead. The Wilton Park-IHRB Dialogues report underscores the risks that just transition messaging be used to delay and slow progress on fossil fuel phase out and other mitigation measures, as well as to overlook the transformative potential of this concept. The report suggests four key elements for the ‘just’ in just transition: (1) risks and impacts, (2) opportunities and benefits, (3) agency and accountability, and (4) transformational systems change. The report underscores the importance of the UN Guiding Principles - as the internationally agreed standard that already exists - as key to informing company’s risk management processes. Indeed: “No wheels need to be reinvented, and failure to embrace this normative framework only risks delaying climate progress and the practical implementation of otherwise well-intended mitigation, adaptation, and resilience commitments.”
Wilton Park and The Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB) published its report ‘Just Transitions Dialogue: Exploring the Need for International Rules Based on Local Realities (January 2023).’ The report captures the outcomes of the Wilton Park dialogue that took place in October 2022, bringing together IHRB-Wilton Park Just Transitions Dialogue brought together 55 experts, policy makers, and practitioners drawn from key transition countries, international organisations, businesses, finance, philanthropy, trade unions, and civil society:
- Risks in misuse and misapplication of the just transition concept: The concept of just transition is “a whole-of-society approach to decarbonisation that respects human rights while promoting sustainable development, the eradication of poverty, and the creation of decent work and quality jobs.” After describing the term and its evolution over time, the report emphasizes the risks in the misuse and misapplication of the just transition concept. “Broad uptake of the just transition concept is not only welcome but essential to managing the social disruption that is inevitable in such wide-scale systems changes. But there is also a growing and serious risk that just transition language is increasingly misused and misapplied, intentionally and unintentionally, without sufficient clarity or accountability. With social disruption now one of the greatest inhibitors to climate action, just transition-related messaging could be improperly used to delay and slow progress on fossil fuel phase out and other mitigation measures. Equally, there is a danger that the transformative potential of this concept could be lost entirely; that the “justice element” becomes little more than a box-ticking exercise, with different definitions depending on location, sector, and actor, or none at all. If “JT” and “JETPs” are to avoid going the way of “CSR” and “ESG”, then it is urgent that some form of quality control over the “J” element emerges soon.”
- Four key elements for the just in just transition: The dialogue identified four elements which seek “to catalogue the broad themes that would be essential to the quality and effectiveness of any intervention claiming to be a ‘just’ transition.” These four elements are (1) risks and impacts, (2) opportunities and benefits, (3) agency and accountability, and (4) transformational systems change. Element 1 entails “that the inevitable risks and impacts for workers, communities, indigenous peoples, and consumers should be actively identified, prevented, mitigated, and remedied by the economic actors involved through ongoing human rights due diligence and remedy mechanisms.” Element 2 entails “that workers, communities, and consumers most affected by the coming national and sectoral transitions should be able to clearly see the benefits and opportunities for them in order to build bottom-up support for the necessary disruptions ahead.” Element 3 entails “that the agency of potentially affected groups in transition decision making is essential to minimising the risks and maximising the benefits, and requiring the intentional construction of accountability mechanisms to them in transition planning, processes, and outcomes (Element 3).” And Element 4 is “fundamentally, that the just transition is one which fully embraces the transformational systems change that mass decarbonisation offers for meaningful sustainable development globally.”
- The UNGPs as a cornerstone: When it comes to risks and impacts, the report makes clear that “[a]n internationally agreed standard already exists that should inform these risk management processes: the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).” However, “the UNGPs are not yet a mainstream tool within the climate action agenda. Just transition initiatives should incorporate this key normative framework so as to effectively guide the risk prevention imperatives at play in every transition context. No wheels need to be reinvented, and failure to embrace this normative framework only risks delaying climate progress and the practical implementation of otherwise well-intended mitigation, adaptation, and resilience commitments.” The human rights framework is also key to the opportunities and benefits of just transition: “The human rights framework can be a key tool for designing truly just transitions, helping policy makers navigate the risks, opportunities, and tradeoffs in a principles-based, consistent, legitimate, and accountable way. Too often human rights and the core baseline conditions for dignity are positioned as ‘benefits’ and ‘opportunities’ in the transition context. Conversely, when understood as the basic conditions required for people to be able to negotiate opportunities and access benefits, the human rights framework can help unlock the potential for truly transformational transition planning. As such, in addition to ensuring respect for human rights to minimise the risks and impacts transitions can pose to people (see Element 1 above), governments and companies should also embed the fulfillment of human rights more deliberately into their transition plans and models.”
