Electric citizenship: the struggle for equitable energy infrastructure
What can we learn from the politics of bold climate action in the South?
Dear folks,
I ended my last letter with question what the Green New Deal framework could do – symbolically and practically – for countries that don’t have the experience of some version of a New Deal and the ‘golden’ years of post-WWII Keynesian capitalism that followed. Rhetorically, a lot of the GND rides on reclaiming a legacy (and reforming it), while practically, it banks heavily on revitalizing the institutions that came out of it. What if that legacy isn’t there?
This is a complex question, but after asking around on Twitter, I do have some preliminary things to say about it. Conclusion so far? Figuring what resolute climate action means for the global south makes clear that what is at stake in energy transitions anywhere: citizenship.
Got here through a friend? Interested in understanding the social dimensions of clean energy transitions?
The symbolic life of energy policy
So, up first: does the GND have symbolic purchase? The short answer is no. Even in the Global North, advocates are also trying to come up with historical references that make more sense and appeal more strongly to national constituencies.
An example of this from the southern hemisphere is the Brazilian Big Push Ambiental (or: Big Push for Sustainability), an initiative co-sponsored by Economic Commission for Latin-America and the Caribbean (CEPAL). It has the same basic ingredients as GND proposals in the North: massive investments into clean energy (renewable electricity, electrified public transport, etc.) will create jobs and more evenly spread wealth, while making sure that that growth doesn’t come at the cost of environmental degradation. The term “Big Push” is the name of an economic theory dating back to the 1940s that posits developing countries can bootstrap their economic development through their own industrial policy (by, for example, investing in infrastructure). I assume it resonated among economists from Latin America who saw their economies being turned into satellites of western metropolitan centres.
The symbolic purchase of this new initiative does not derive from references to the golden years of social democracy enjoyed in the North in the days that There Was Still an Alternative, but by invoking the golden promises of modernity central to the developmental imaginary.
Being able to tap into that reservoir of hope and collective memory is crucial (if hardly decisive, given the mixed results of recent progressive climate politics in Europe and North America so far).
There is one other lesson to draw from this initiative though: while it is mostly centred on Brasil, its co-sponsorship by CEPAL means they are looking at collaboration with countries that are implementing the kind of policies that would be part of the Big Push Ambiental. Regional coalitions (not unlike that of the EU) can lend institutional support, but perhaps also help tap into that symbolic reservoir, as some alliances harken back to a time when There Was Still an Alternative for the South (such as the Non-Aligned Movement). Of course, we are living in the century of the Asian Alternative, so that may generate its own vocabularies of hope.
Institutional legacies and local action
So far for symbolic work. Up next: can GND-inspired policies do practical work? If there’s a sliding scale between revitalizing existing institutions and building out new ones, comprehensive climate programs in the South will tend towards the latter end of that scale. Often that effort will be inextricable from the fight against corruption (aka elite state capture). Both of these factors make the political program you can advocate for, and what you have to work with to begin with, different.
That difference does mean one thing though: advocates from the South have seen much more clearly that environmental issues often line up quite closely with the interests of those most marginalized. Take the South Asian People’s Action on Climate Crisis (SAPACC), “representing farmers’ organisations, trade union federations, indigenous people’s organisations, fisher groups, women’s organisations, environmental groups, and a few progressive political parties”.
Students for Climate Resilience launching their campaign in Thrissur, Kerala
Local people, organised by the Bhoomi Sena in Maharashtra against the proposed bullet train, or others fighting to protect wetlands in coastal Andhra Pradesh, may be motivated not by climate change, but by wanting to preserve control over their lands, other resources, and livelihoods.
The environment can become a powerful tool in political mobilization if is tied to the inequality of environmental effects (pollution), in political participation, and ownership.
Some of the most consequential action is therefore also going be on the local level. For various reasons, the national stage is most difficult to take. There is more – discursive, institutional – space at lower levels. However, as the Koch brothers know very well, the best strategy is a multi-level strategy. Geels had it right all along! In the meanwhile, consider the possibility that going local might be the fastest way to the rooms where it happens, as with every local campaign you build a constituency and you build, er, brand recognition for climate action.
Citizenship
Part of what makes local action powerful is that it assist people in making a claim to citizenship. This insight comes from Nikhil Anand’s work on what he calls “hydraulic citizenship” (the inspiration for the title of today’s post) – the relations of governance that arise when people from irregular settlements in Mumbai demand reliable access to safe water. Whenever there is an unfulfilled promise of the modern state (as the embodiment of the will of the people), you will see this morally charged discourse of citizenship crop up (from Mumbai slums to Paris boulevards). That is what makes claims for adequate infrastructure – which can often be addressed by the type of action we need to make our existence on this planet sustainable (pause for breath) – so powerful.
In those places where the provision of infrastructure itself is not in question, merely its shape or future, people also use the language of ‘citizenship’, even if it is more oblique. When they advocate for changes to the (energy) system, they use terms like democratization and autonomy. That is significant. We would do well to remember that in their struggle with (not always against) unresponsive incumbent institutions, people are claiming a place and a role for themselves in a country’s future.
Implications
Sustainable development thus means linking up with issues of social and political inequality. For a newer generation of ‘climate justice’ movements (as the ones from the emerging coalition in South Asia above) this link is a natural one. For some older environmental movements who worked on the environment as a single issue, this may necessitate some reorienting, which may be complicated by class differences from those most impacted by environmental degradation.
It also has implications for the kind of benevolent technocracy that tends to dominate the clean energy field in the North: ‘We come bearing the gift of clean energy. Why aren’t they happy?’. (The What does the consumer want? type question). These expressions of exasperation are evidence primarily of the social distance between those working on sustainability and those they need to get ‘on board’ – not of any indifference on the part of people per se. A page from the SAPACC book could prove revelatory. A propos, next week I’ll talk with Marielle Feenstra about how to approach energy issues from an intersectional perspective, not coincidentally inspired by experiences in the global south of combatting energy poverty.
Till then, take care, and if you’re staying at home, enjoy this soundtrack I’ll keep adding to 🙂.
Best,
Marten
Liked what you read? Want more?