Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Jens Schippl
(ITAS at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT))
Christine Milchram (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology)
Send message to Convenors
- Chair:
-
Christine Milchram
(Karlsruhe Institute of Technology)
- Format:
- Traditional Open Panel
- Location:
- NU-4B17
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 17 July, -
Time zone: Europe/Amsterdam
Short Abstract:
In this session, we invite contributions that address the potentials and limitations of Nussbaum's capability approach (and related approaches) for improving normative orientation and clarity in the context of just and sustainable transitions/transformations
Long Abstract:
In sustainability transformations of sociotechnical systems such as the energy or mobility system, the last decade has brought some progress related to the implementation of low-carbon technologies like renewable electricity generation or electric mobility. However, more ambitious targets and related actions are called for to mitigate or solve grand challenges such as climate change, air pollution, or waste of space. At the same time, there has been a growing awareness in research and practice alike, that transformations to more sustainable societies can only be successful when they are inclusive and just, or at least, that perceived injustices will face controversies and rejection. In many cases, issues of social justice are implicitly or explicitly linked with low levels of support of or resistance against policy measures, which seem promising in terms of sustainable development. One reason for this is that change in complex sociotechnical systems is usually confronted with conflicting goals, at least in certain phases of the transformation processes. Against this backdrop, it is not astonishing that there is growing interest in aspects of social compatibility and justice.
Here over the past years, the capability approach (CA) was increasingly discussed as a normative framework to deal with such value conflicts and as a normative underpinning for sustainability considerations. In this session, we invite contributions that look at potentials and/or limits of Nussbaum’s Capability-Approach (and related approaches) to improve normative orientation and clarity in context of just and sustainable transformations. We would like to investigate in how far Nussbaum’s CA can help to deal adequately with competing values or foster transformations towards a more sustainable future in other ways. The organisers intend to include presentations on the applications of the CA in the mobility and in the energy sector. However, contributions from other fields of application are welcomed as well.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Wednesday 17 July, 2024, -Paper short abstract:
This paper shows how Martha Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach can widen existing approaches to assess social and ethical impacts in transport planning, using a case study on urban traffic calming and reduction of parking spaces.
Paper long abstract:
In evaluations of mobility innovations and policies, technical and economic parameters have long been in the foreground. “Sustainability" is a goal for transport development, but is usually limited to the reduction of emissions, energy consumption and waste of space. In contrast, social and further ethical impacts of transport infrastructure have received less attention.
Accessibility is currently proposed as a concept to assess social and ethical impacts in transport planning. Currently, however, accessibility implies a rather narrow focus on a small range of social aspects, like access to job opportunities.
In this context, the Capabilities Approach (CA) has been suggested as a more comprehensive approach. It provides a normative framework for evaluating social arrangements based on the freedoms that people need to realize a good life. It puts emphasis on how infrastructures and related services contribute to people’s opportunities and wellbeing.
In this contribution, we show that Martha Nussbaum’s ‘central capabilities’ provide a normative guidance for developing more specific transport-related indicators. The CA widens impact assessment from people’s mobility and accessibility to include other direct and indirect impacts of transport measures on, e.g., health, safety, and the environment.
To apply the CA, we need a better understanding of the interrelations between mobility infrastructures and central capabilities and more clarity on the appropriate spatial and administrative level of application. Taking a specific example (urban traffic calming and reduction of parking spaces), we investigate how the CA can be used successfully for sustainable mobility planning.
Paper short abstract:
This paper examines the capabilities approach applied to participatory energy planning in First Nations communities in remote, northern Australia. It offers insights into how capabilities approaches can be explicitly embedded low carbon energy programs to center well-being rather than technology.
Paper long abstract:
Sustainable energy transitions brings together two important normative goals: energy system decarbonisation and universal energy access, mobilizing significant policy and financial resources to deploy energy technologies and infrastructure. This technology-centric framing does not necessarily deliver on its intended well-being benefits and risks reproducing existing inequities. In this context, capabilities theory offers important tools to critically engage beyond technology deployment to focus on wider justices concerns e.g. the role of energy in securing Nussbaum’s core capabilities and to ensure all are included by focusing on individuals as a unit of evaluation. However, to date, there is limited analysis interrogating how capabilities theory might be explicitly embedded in energy interventions. Further, some scholar’s question capabilities theory’s individualistic and universal approach to well-being particularly in non-western or collectivist cultures. This paper responds to these critiques by presenting analysis of participatory energy planning in First Nations communities in remote, northern Australia. I draw on ethnographic data through the lens of capabilities theory to investigate how capabilities are deliberatively prioritized in energy system design and operation, in order to support Indigenous relational ways of being with community and land. By examining the capabilities theories in use, this paper expands existing energy-capabilities theoretical frameworks. While focusing on Indigenous and off-grid experiences of the energy transition, this paper offers insights into how low carbon energy programs can deliberatively engage with technical, financial and environment limits while centering well-being. It will be of interest to scholars of energy poverty in particular but also scholars of energy over-consumption.
Paper short abstract:
Empowering underrepresented groups and enabling approaches to public participation are vital for just energy transition. In Amsterdam New-West, we show that enabling and capabilities approaches are needed to address procedural, recognition, and restorative justice alongside distributive justice
Paper long abstract:
This research seeks to delve into the nuanced challenges surrounding justice and inclusion within the energy transition context. By giving a voice to underrepresented groups, our research has the potential to unravel diverse perspectives and experiences which in turn can shape both science and policy practices and inform more inclusive and equitable strategies for the energy transition in Amsterdam Nieuw-West. This research explores the following question: How can the inclusion of residents with migration backgrounds in public participation contribute to a just energy transition in Amsterdam?
The active involvement of residents with migration backgrounds in public participation is vital for a truly just energy transition in Amsterdam New-West. While a distributive justice focus has prevailed, our findings highlight its insufficiency in addressing procedural and recognition injustices. The absence of justice in terms of recognition, coupled with the inadequacy of restorative justice, serves as significant barriers hindering people's capacity and willingness to engage in the energy transition. Instances of racism, Islamophobia, and public scandals, such as the childcare benefit scandal, further contribute to a pervasive lack of trust in public authorities and institutions. Historical encounters with tokenistic and extractive practices in participation within policy and scientific realms also result in participation fatigue and a fundamental erosion of trust. To achieve a genuinely just energy transition, enabling and capabilities approaches are needed to address procedural, recognition, and restorative aspects alongside distributive justice. This involves fostering community-led projects, adopting participatory approaches for capacity building, dismantling systemic barriers, acknowledging the political nature of challenges.