After years of development, the global push to transition to low-carbon energy sources has finally institutionalised the just and inclusive principles. This is reflected in their recent adoption by the Asia-Pacific Cooperation (APEC), the G20, the International Energy Agency (IEA), and ASEAN, among others. In essence, the just and inclusive principles recognise the importance of a people-centred approach in transitioning to low-carbon sources and pay special attention to issues such as the wellbeing of workers affected by reduced use of fossil fuels, and of communities disproportionately
affected by renewable energy infrastructure development.

The just and inclusive principles thus bring to fore the governance and justice dimensions of efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) on Affordable and Clean Energy (Goal 7). As the global community prepares for the comprehensive review of the 2030 SDG this year, there is a pressing need to assess whether the existing indicators have adequately captured the political, social, and environmental aspects of low-carbon energy transitions.

Revisiting Goal 7 Indicators
Since its inception in 2015, the indicators of Goal 7 of the 2030 SDGs that aims to “ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” have generally embodied a technocratic understanding of progress. This is evidenced in the formulation of its quantitative indicators that measure changes in the number of populations with electricity access, renewable energy share, among others. While the use of technocratic metrics in global governance frameworks such as SDGs is justified, an overreliance on them can potentially produce sanitised representations of progress that obscure underlying tensions and governance failures unfolding on the ground.

Given that Goal 7 inherently encapsulates an aspiration to transition to low-carbon energy sources, the recent global adoption of the just and inclusive principles reveals a critical gap in its current indicators. The transition to low-carbon energy sources is not merely a technical undertaking and goes beyond making deliberate policy choices and investments in favour of renewable energy sources. Instead, it is a systemic trans-formation that intersects with entrenched societal realities marked by conflicting interests, power asymmetries, and the marginalisation of certain groups in the context of infrastructure-led development.

Renewable Energy Contestation in Southeast Asia
Hydro dam and geothermal projects in Southeast Asia are a case in point. Both sources are considered renewable. While their further expansion will undoubtedly count towards energy transition progress, records of backlash driven by socio-economic and environmental grievances abound. In Indonesia, residents of Poco Leok in East Nusa Tenggara Province and Padarincang, Serang, Banten Province, have mounted oppositions to proposed geothermal power projects, raising concerns about adverse impacts on the quality of land and water resources. In Thailand, a string of protests and legal challenges have been launched against various hydro dam projects in areas such as Pak Beng, Nam Choan, Xayaburi, and Yuam/Salween water. In Malaysia, an indigenous community filed a lawsuit against a hydro project in Ulu Geruntum, Perak State.

The underlying drivers fuelling such resistance – strong state-business ties, weak regulatory enforcement, fragmented mandates across different government agencies, inadequate participatory mechanisms in decision-making, and poor compensation packages – are not confined to hydro dam and geothermal projects. These governance failures are increasingly surfacing in other supposedly less disruptive renewable energy projects like solar and wind. In Indonesia, village residents in Guluk-guluk, Sumenep, Madura, East Java Province, protested against the plan to build solar power projects, citing environmental degradation and a lack of direct benefits to local residents. In Vietnam, fishermen in Bac Lieu Province have expressed concerns over disruption of income caused by the installation of wind power infrastructure in the area.

Similar tensions are observed in the critical mineral mining sector, which forms the backbone of low-carbon energy transition agenda. In June this year, protests flared up against nickel mining activities in Indonesia’s world-famous UNESCO-site Raja Ampat in Southwest Papua Province.

Way Forward
At this juncture, it is evident that Goal 7 of SDG cannot be assessed solely by electricity access rates or renewable energy shares. Considering the complexity of low-carbon energy transitions, this year’s SDG indicator framework review provides a timely space to incorporate justice-oriented dimensions that capture the realities of governance failures, social conflicts, and structural exclusions, on the ground. Doing so will not only reflect more accurately the progress of Goal 7, but also ensure that the governance mechanisms of global energy transitions are accountable to the communities and places most affected by energy transition agenda. Failure to capture these justice-oriented dimensions risks perpetuating contestation and undermining the legitimacy of transition pathways in the years to come.