A scalar environmental justice analysis of local arguments for and against a low-carbon “Energy Coast” in Suffolk, England

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Highlights the scalar mismatch in energy transition debates, useful for environmental justice and transition studies.

🏢実務担当者:Illustrates how local opposition and support for energy projects are framed, informing stakeholder engagement strategies.

🏛政策担当者:Suggests that national energy policies need to address global consumption drivers and local justice concerns simultaneously.

Enabled by ecologically unequal exchange, overconsumption by wealthy states and populations is a key driver of unevenly experienced climate and environmental crises. Whilst most states seek to reduce emissions, many, such as the United Kingdom (UK), ignore capitalist growth imperatives and overconsumption and instead centre supply-side policies such as low-carbon energy production. The county of Suffolk, England, has become a ground zero for low-carbon energy projects with Sizewell C nuclear power station, offshore wind, and National Grid infrastructure comprising an “Energy Coast” spatial imaginary. Our ethnographic research captures the dominant perspectives amongst diverse actors and identifies arguments for and against the Energy Coast. We pay particular attention to those arguments that depend on justice claims and undertake a scalar environmental justice analysis with a focus on global scales. Overall, we find a territorially bounded political response, in which local concerns and national security are centred. Amongst supporters, pro-economic growth and energy security discourses prevailed, while those who opposed emphasised harms to existing industries, local environment, and amenities. Many perspectives depended on justice claims, but most were limited to a few select dimensions (e.g., social justice, ecological impacts) at local and national scales. Whilst these arguments remain convincing and politically useful for local actors, they obscure the underlying drivers and unequal impacts of climate and environmental harms globally. We argue that such political subjectivities, many of which were shared by supporters and opponents, are symptomatic of deeply rooted ideologies of economic growth and spatial imaginaries of energy transition that are confined to nation states.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2026.104770first seen 2026-07-27 05:03:13