Based on the applied research we conduct at CREER, our proposal is founded on understanding the dilemmas related to various notions of justice within the framework of business activities in general. In particular, we aim to design methodologies and collaborative understanding frameworks for the identification of negative human rights impacts and the assignment of roles and responsibilities in a concerted manner, focused on prevention, mitigation, and remediation. 

In this specific case, the global agenda for just transitions proposes a perspective that, until now, has not necessarily been differentiated regarding the purposes of decarbonizing the economy. Decarbonization as a global commitment cannot mean leaving specific individuals and communities behind; otherwise, these would simply be new unjust transitions. 

From the perspectives of climate and environmental justice, large economies would be expected to compensate for or repair the environmental and climate impacts generated by the consumption of fossil fuels and solutions based on artificial intelligence. From an intergenerational justice perspective, it is expected that youth and future generations will be trained in emerging non-polluting economic activities (green jobs) and/or receive incentives for economic activities that currently seem less attractive, such as rural activities. From the perspective of distributive justice, it is expected that the benefits of renewable energy projects or transition minerals will be shared with communities and workers. Furthermore, "externalities" (especially those representing specific human rights violations) should be shared proportionately rather than being primarily borne by the most vulnerable. 

In general, from a procedural justice standpoint, access to information, the strategic use of said information, the rules of engagement for participation with effectiveness criteria (voice + influence), and the perception by all actors that the results achieved were due to symmetrical relationship conditions and an equitable distribution of benefits and negative impacts, are conditions that enable a truly just transition. In this case, the result is as important as the process to reach that result. 

Finally, from an energy justice perspective, we argue that energy poverty as a concept embodies multiple human rights violations; in the same sense, access to low-cost energy is an enabler of rights. Therefore, energy security remains as a key issue for developing economies where millions of people are still dispossessed from energy access. 

As a small contribution, my presentation was based on the work we have done in La Guajira, Colombia: (i) the Wayuu (indigenous peoples) are the dominant demographic and cultural force, especially in Alta and Media Guajira: approx. 400.000 (40% of the population-1M people). La Guajira is a focal point for prior consultation: intense extractive and infrastructure activity (mining, coal, gas, ports, and now wind energy); (ii) the bonanza/malanza of coal mining: large-scale commercial coal export operations from El Cerrejón (Glencore) formally began in 1985: economic and physical transformation of the territory; significant tax and export revenues for the nation at the cost of severe cultural, social, environmental, and water conflicts, especially for the Wayuu communities, who were displaced and affected by water shortages; and (iii) the potential of wind as a new bonanza/malanza: La Guajira is the crown jewel of Colombia's wind power potential, with winds that are twice the global average and sufficient technical potential to supply almost all of the country's current energy demand.  

According to a survey we conducted at the end of 2024, although the big majority of respondents said that they are not really sure about what energy transition means, they also perceive that it will cause some trouble. There is a divided territory where coal mining and/or wind energy projects are defended or contested; some see wind energy projects as new extractivism. Recently, we have been developing a Sector-Wide Human Rights Impact Assessment (SWIA) on the wind energy sector in La Guajira, where we have found (i) disinformation and barriers related to accessibility, timeliness, cultural adequacy, and the quality of information; (ii) insufficient mechanisms for non-ethnic communities to be able to understand, access information, and participate; (iii) understanding of prior consultation is limited and incorrect; it is perceived as a procedural mechanism rather than as a fundamental right; (iv) regulatory gaps in the framework governing prior consultation in Colombia hinder the effective fulfillment of State and corporate obligations; (v) institutional capacities are limited to promote and sustain mechanisms for dialogue and participation throughout the life cycle of wind projects; (vi) gaps in territorial and marine-coastal planning to define land and sea uses with a participatory and ethnic approach; and (vii) persistence of a context of deep structural inequalities and a declared unconstitutional state of affairs (energy poverty). 

At the end, as our colleagues from the Institute for Human Rights and Business-IHRB (our founder organization) have stated in recent research on the “costs of green conflict” project, preventing conflicts and effectively managing social opposition requires early investments to build meaningful and lasting relationships with communities. The costs of not investing in these measures can be severe. Early investments in trust-building and risk mitigation require time —and budget—, but they remain more cost-effective than reactive crisis management and its operational and reputational consequences.  

Thanks to the Sié Chéou-Kang Center for International Security and Diplomacy and the Carnegie Corporation of New York, we had the opportunity to learn about, listen to, and recognize developments in applied research at the workshop “Navigating the complexities of the clean energy era”, where case studies were presented on Indonesia, Peru, Colombia, China, Nigeria, Brazil, and Uruguay, covering issues such as who decides for whom, green extractivism, powering up democratic oversight for critical mineral management, illegal mining, lithium, nickel, rare earths, and wind projects.  

In the end, the general question was: what do we do with all this information?  

I am confident that an expanded community of dialogue can be consolidated around the dilemmas and practices of the clean energy era.