Surveying just transition pathways in global climate policy
Faus Onbargi, Alexia / Daniele MalerbaExternal Publications (2026)
in: Climate Policy, first published 27.02.2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2026.2623367
Open access
Just Transitions (JT) toward sustainable, equitable, and low-carbon futures have become a central focus of global climate policy, exemplified by initiatives such as Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JET-Ps) and the UNFCCC Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP). For some actors, JT is understood in sectoral terms, focusing on energy transitions. Others emphasise more transformative approaches grounded in global structural reform and climate justice. Although existing scholarship has mapped JT framings in the literature, across national climate policy and non-academic frameworks, no study has yet examined how individuals shaping global climate policy themselves understand and prioritise JT. Approximately 130 Blue Zone-accredited attendees (i.e. those with access to the formal negotiations) were surveyed at COP28 in Dubai, including party delegates, policy-makers, civil society representatives and others. The survey was structured around five JT typologies – from least to most transformative – drawn from existing literature, as well two novel typologies: one centered on energy, another on sustainable development. Results indicate a strong preference for approaches extending beyond energy to encompass broader sustainable development concerns, with policy coherence identified as a crucial governance principle. Respondents also favour more transformative policies around global structural reform and climate finance for lower-income countries, while the most prioritized justice dimension is accountability and responsibility for climate change. The results also show differences in preferences between participants from high- and lower-income countries, with the latter favouring more transformative notions of JT. However, overall, JT preferences straddle multiple typologies, suggesting that policy mixes delivering broader sustainable development outcomes could provide an effective and politically viable way to reconcile competing views. By exploring the perspectives of those shaping global climate policy, the paper enriches scholarly discussions on JT framings, while offering guidance and directions for the ongoing JTWP negotiations amidst the latest COP30 decision to establish a global just transition mechanism.
Further IDOS experts
-
Aleksandrova, Mariya
Climate risk governance
-
Altenburg, Tilman
Economic Geography
-
Asimeng, Emmanuel Theodore
Urban Planning, Sustainability
-
Baumann, Max-Otto
Political Science
-
Brandi, Clara
Economy and Political Science
-
Dippel, Beatrice
Comparatist
-
Donnelly, Aiveen
Politcal Science
-
Ekoh, Susan S.
Environmental Research
-
El-Haddad, Amirah
Economy
-
Fuhrmann-Riebel, Hanna
Economy
-
Goedeking, Nicholas
Comparative Political Economy
-
Hackenesch, Christine
Political Science
-
Hagenström, Paul
International Relations
-
Hilbrich, Sören
Economy
-
Janus, Heiner
Political Science
-
Kativu, Saymore Ngonidzashe
Geography
-
Keijzer, Niels
Social Science
-
Koch, Svea
Social Science
-
Lehmann, Ina
Political Science
-
Loewe, Markus
Economy
-
Mathis, Okka Lou
Political Scientist
-
Never, Babette
Political Scientist
-
Pegels, Anna
Economist
-
Rodríguez de Francisco, Jean Carlo
Ecological economics
-
Schwachula, Anna
Sociology
-
Sommer, Christoph
Economist
-
Sowa, Alina
Economics
-
Srigiri, Srinivasa Reddy
Agricultural Economist
-
Strohmaier, Rita
Economy
-
Stöcker, Alexander
Economics
-
Vogel, Johanna
International Cultural Economy
-
Vogel, Tim
Economy
-
von Haaren, Paula
Development Economics
-
Wagner, Niklas
Climate & Knowledge Sociology
-
Wehrmann, Dorothea
Sociology
-
Yi, HyunAh
Energy and Environmental Policy
-
Zintl, Tina
Political Scientist