Introduction

The global urgency to achieve net-zero emissions has magnified the need for just and equitable approaches to energy transition. Nations increasingly recognize that success in energy transitions hinges on integrating justice elements into policies and programs. This ensures that transitions do not exacerbate past and present socio-economic inequalities and furthermore serve as an opportunity to improve conditions of those who must bear the burden of transition. Climate finance, a critical enabler of these transitions, must likewise incorporate justice measures to achieve its intended purpose. Among these mechanisms, Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs or Partnerships) stand out, offering potential solutions to tackle inequality while helping nations progress toward a sustainable energy future.

Socio-economic inequalities—such as income disparities, uneven access to education, technology and resources, and systemic racial, ethnic or gender biases, often deeply embedded in decision making—create significant barriers to achieving a just energy transition. Left unaddressed, these inequalities could result in a green economy that benefits only some while leaving others behind. Worse, grievances from real or perceived unequal distribution of benefits and burdens can fuel political polarization and mass protests and obfuscate the very transition benefits that climate finance can bring about. One study found that political backlash to climate policies only occurs when inequality is at a high level. Ensuring successful energy transition should build in opportunities to rectify inequalities at the individual, community and societal levels.

Climate finance, involving international, domestic, and private sector funds, to the tune of more than US$2 trillion in 2024, support renewable energy projects, infrastructure development, and mitigation and adaptation strategies. Climate finance typically seeks to avoid doing environmental and social harms, but they can do more to address unequal access to resources and opportunity gaps faced by individuals, communities and society at large. 

Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs)

First announced for the benefit of South Africa at COP 26, JETPs were conceived as a new country platform to support developing countries meet and exceed their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) commitments under the Paris Agreement. These Partnerships involve collaborative and flexible arrangements between developing nations and donor countries (International Partners Group or IPG) as well as multilateral development banks (MDBs) and others to help accelerate the beneficiary country’s net-zero targets, with an ambition to catalyze significant private investment. 

Some human rights organizations hail JETPs as an unique climate financing instrument with an explicit people and rights focus. Indeed, these JETPs have the potential to address multiple connected themes, from energy transition, industrial and infrastructure policies, labor relations, SME and women’s participation, energy access, broader ownership of energy resources to social security and protection.

South Africa’s JETP aims to shift the nation’s 85% reliance on coal for energy production. In addition to addressing workers’ needs in the sectors being phased out, it promotes economic diversification and transformation, empowering workers, women, marginalized communities, and black owned businesses, protects communities most vulnerable to climate change, and places stakeholder participation and co-leadership at the center of decision making. It was initially supported by an IPG consisting of France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Union, later joined by Denmark and the Netherlands, with the total commitments of US$11.6 billion. 

Subsequently three other JETPs emerged in Indonesia (2022); Vietnam (2022); and Senegal (2023). 

In Indonesia, US$10 billion JETP funds are expected to catalyze another US$10 billion in private funds for renewable projects (the JETP portfolio site shows over US$1 billion in projects).Vietnam’s JETP expects to mobilize funds from public and private sources for phasing out coal and introducing renewables. And Senegal’s JETP plans to reach its goal of sourcing 40% of the country’s energy from renewables by 2030, while closing the energy access gap. 

Not surprisingly, South Africa’s JETP implementation ranks ahead of others. Not only is it the oldest of the four JETPs but it is also surrounded by layers of national climate and sectoral transition strategies and masterplans (electricity, EVs, green hydrogen, etc.). It is aligned with the nation’s National Development Plan (2012) and the NDC, and complemented by the 2022 Just Transition Framework, an output of the Presidential Climate Commission. And the JETP is nestled in South Africa’s already expansive national human rights legislative framework, including the Black Economic Empowerment laws. This enabling environment offers a unique setting in which JETP implementation and investment can proceed. 

Notwithstanding these promising prospects, challenges remain. According to one source, the hasty closure of coal-fired power plants has led to significant social and economic impacts, exacerbated by tensions with trade unions and limited stakeholder consultation. Civil society organizations wonder why the Partnership does not promote green public transportation.

In fact, criticisms of JETPs are just as numerous as their virtues. The common complaints include failing to involve CSOs early enough, falling short on the human rights and justice component of the Partnership, not defining how the private sector should contribute to the ‘justice’ element as well as insufficient grant components, bulging national debt concerns and lukewarm commitments to phase out fossil fuels, including gas. 

The Governance of JETPs

The governance arrangements that enable JETPs appear to be informal – beneficiary countries establish their own platform, a secretariat or steering committee, and plans, with input from the IPG. Due to a relatively small group of actors involved, they can potentially accelerate the pace of transition. Some see these types of arrangements as a new alternative to failed multilateral climate funding agreements and mechanisms. At the same time, JETPs have also been criticized for delays, lack of coordination and the constant need for strong political backing, among others.

In terms of normative frameworks and standards that govern JETP projects, presumably local laws will apply. If and when the MDBs participate, they are bound by the Just Transition High-Level Principles, committing to financing and policy strategies supporting a just transition that promotes economic diversification and inclusion. Of course, the MDBs must apply their own environmental and social safeguard policies to projects they finance. It is notable that the CSOs from JETP countries published the Principles for a Fair JETP, though they hardly seem to have any standing among the participating countries.

Although JETPs were originally hailed as an accountability mechanism to enable states to meet their decarbonization goals, how they discharge their accountability to stakeholders and address disputes in project implementation and stakeholder grievances remains to be seen. So far there are no specific grievance mechanisms dedicated to JETPs. Human rights and environmental disputes related to energy transition are going through litigation in the courts around the world, according to the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre’s Just Transition Tracking Tool. The Tool has chronicled about 95 cases worldwide, though none of the tracked cases appear to relate to JETPs since implementation has only just begun. It is possible that complaints related to transition in regional, national and city-level human rights institutions and mechanisms will also trend upward, though no such global data seems to be available yet.

Recent headwind and the Road Ahead

Even before the withdrawal of support by the United States for JETPs and climate finance at the beginning of 2025, a waning enthusiasm for JETPs could be felt. For instance, India scrapped its JETP plans, and no new partnership came about in 2024. Senegal’s 2024 Presidential transition threw doubt on the JETP but the new President eventually managed to save the Partnership. 

The current situation underscores the fragility of multilateral and diplomatic cooperation in addressing climate change and the need for sustained commitment from donor countries and MDBs. On the other hand, JETPs have not fallen apart yet, and the remaining donor countries seem to be committed to supporting them, while the door is open wide for new donors. Despite the flaws on paper and implementation headaches, developing countries can benefit from more JETPs.

What should be done to help sustain the JETP momentum and help the Partnership transition to the next phase while addressing the shortcomings evident in the first generation JETPs? First, putting pressure on the IPG, MDBs, the G7, the G20, among others, can only help. MDBs should embrace the relationship between inequality and climate policies and help countries avoid upheavals and delays. Second, key insights and lessons from the JETPs’ integration of justice elements into transition pathways should be collected and disseminated. Peer learning will be crucial for the present and future participating countries and instrumental in the refining of the JETP model. These learning activities are particularly important since the JETPs operate without a central command center that coordinates them. Private enterprises will also benefit from understanding how the justice dimension of the transition applies to them, starting with the responsibility to respect human rights. Last but not least, participating countries, MDBs and CSOs must all steer JETPs toward the path of climate justice, and help countries embed justice and equity considerations in energy transition. 

The transition to a green economy is not merely an environmental imperative but also a socio-economic opportunity to address longstanding inequalities. By providing targeted financial support and engaging in and disseminating best practices, JETPs can help ensure that the energy transition benefits everyone.