ANALYTICAL MODEL

This section will elaborate on how I intend to use the theoretical framework in combination with the gathered information to answer the research questions. The environmental and climate justice principles largely build upon many of the elements from the overarching principles of justice and participation, and thus fit well within the framework.

The planning and decision-making of RE projects is interpreted as consisting of different phases. First, the political-administrative phase consists of enactment based on national renewable energy policies, such as the REA policy. This phase involves the broader regulative framework of the policies and may include general project decisions about technology and capacity. Second, this determines the planning and decision-making in the procurement phase. After being procured, this is where most decisions are taken, and the particular projects are planned, proposed and possibly chosen in the auctions. This is done by the private sector. Third, the implementation phase consists of construction and

compensation. This is where the outcomes of the project eventually occur. This phase is also likely to indicate whether the planning and decision-making processes have been just and inclusive. Notably, this analysis will not focus on public inclusion in the politics or policy formulations in the first phase. The countries are rather presumed to be representative democracies (see chapter 5.1.1).

As discussed in previous sections, there are different types and degrees of inclusion. Inclusive political processes may imply consultation with the affected parties, or more empowered forms of participation. The type often reflects the political context in the country. In transitioning developing countries, this is interesting – and complex – because recently

“introduced” principles for public behaviour is not necessarily entrenched. For instance, there

may be inconsistency between the institutional aspect of participation and the activity itself (Heller, 2012:652). In this study, public inclusion will be understood as different kinds and degrees of public participation and involvement in political processes, such as those presented above. Public hearings are the main participatory activity found in the empirical material.

In the context of this study, public inclusion can be connected to different fields. First, it can be seen in relation to project development, and how citizens are involved in the planning and decision-making of such processes. Second, it is related to the field of environmental

governance and sustainable development, since the RE projects lies within the societal

transition towards renewable energy, and how people are included in the political processes of such transitions. Third, it is connected to development, as the RE projects come with specific developmental objectives – be it broader national development goals, socioeconomic

development of the affected communities or other types of development. Fourth, it is also connected to rights, equality and justice, because participation in decision-making that affect peoples’ lives is perceived as a political, environmental and human right.

Inclusion may be understood by both distributive and procedural means. On one hand, as a procedural activity, such as different types of participation. On the other, included as in being distributed with access and opportunities, or with outcomes. The degree of participation can hence be understood as a grade between procedural inclusion and distributive inclusion, whereas the more leaning towards procedural, the higher degree of actual participation. These are however interconnected. A higher degree of distribution may provide for more just

participation, but not necessarily imply that the activity is undertaken to a high extent. The ideal outcome would require a combination of both. Again, procedural justice is not necessarily synonymous with the highest possible degree of participation and power – the procedure may be perceived as just and legitimate, even in the form of “tokenism”. The analytical model below (Figure 1) is based on the chosen theoretical framework of procedural and distributive justice, public participation and the principles of environmental and climate justice. It reflects how the concepts are understood and intended to be applied in the analysis and serve as the basis for the discussion (chapter 8 and 9). Further I will explain the elements and how these are connected, in relation to what I want to study.

Figure 1: Analytical model based on my own interpretation and systematisation of the connection between the theoretical concepts of public participation and procedural and distributive justice.

The Procedural justice dimension considers participatory aspects related to the process of planning and decision-making of the RE projects. This is the main focus of the analysis. The distributional justice dimension considers both the distribution of opportunities and access – in which might be understood as a precondition to the extent of inclusion in the process – and the distribution of outcomes, as the results of the process and the project itself. Due to the limits of the study, I will not focus considerably on the latter in my analysis. This part will mostly serve as additional contextual information contributing to explain the processes.

Inclusive planning and decision-making (1) is treated as an aspect of procedural justice and is further divided into different degrees of public inclusion, consistent with those presented above (chapter 3.2). Some of these also serve as overarching categories in the analysis (see chapter 4.3.1.1), because they are anticipated to indicate the extent to which the locals are involved. This is further interpreted to both be in need of, and foster, equal opportunities and access to resources (2) (in this model, subject to the dimension of distributive justice), as this

PROCEDURAL JUSTICE DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

1. Inclusive planning and decision-making

2. Equal opportunities and access to resources

3. Participation and Power distribution

5. Distribution of costs and benefits 4. Capability of power and

influence

LEGITIMATE AND JUST PROCESSES

is viewed as prerequisites for the ability to participate. This is usually dependent upon the broader political, economic and social context of the society in which the process operates, and whether institutions exist to facilitate this. It serves as important background information that will help explain the patterns of interest. Furthermore, this is presumed to influence the pattern of participation and power distribution (3) and indicate the extent of inclusion in planning and decision-making processes within the countries. In particular, to determine what type of participation is enabled amongst local communities. This is closely related to, and often contingent upon the power distribution in the different phases of planning and decision-making in the RE projects – that is, the mandates and authorities. Opportunities to participate, access to resources and the power distribution is further assumed to determine the local inhabitants’ capability of power and influence (4), as well as the extent to this influence, that they need to actually be able to affect the processes. All the above factors are anticipated to have considerable effects on the consequences of the project and its processes, and the share of costs and benefits (5) for the local communities. Impacts, and the majority versus minority aspect, serve as supporting information related to this. Finally, these dimensions and aspects are together perceived as determining the legitimacy and fairness of the planning and

decision-making processes of the RE projects.

The idea is, that by securing all these aspects of both the procedural and distributive

dimensions, one will reach legitimate and just planning and decision-making processes. By ensuring that the process is fair and inclusive, the acceptance of the outcomes is likely to be improved as well (Knudsen et.al., 2015:300; Gross, 2007). Opposite to this, is the anticipation that, if the procedures are perceived as unjust, the outcomes are likely to be unjust. The study will use these normative theoretical concepts to explore the participation in the planning and decision-making processes. Furthermore, whether the organisation of the REA systems or other political-institutional factors influence the possibility to realise the values of

participation and justice.