Do all roads lead to Rome? Assessing the effectiveness of governance strategies for energy justice

While the ‘promised land’ of clean, affordable, and abundant energy is in reach for some, it is but a distant dream for others. Socioeconomically disadvantaged groups often do not have the means and opportunities to enter this ‘land of milk and honey’. In response to growing awareness of this issue, the call for a more just, inclusive, and fair energy transition has found its way to policy agendas. To implement this energy justice agenda, policy-makers must decide on a governance strategy – i.e., a plan of action outlining who should do what, and how. The field of public administration offers three such strategies: rowing, steering, and serving. However, no study has yet examined the strengths and weaknesses of these different strategies in achieving energy justice, leaving policymakers without guidance on how to choose between them. To address this gap, we evaluated two initiatives for each strategy using an assessment framework with five criteria based on energy justice literature. Our analysis revealed three key patterns: (i) each strategy has its own strengths and weaknesses for realizing a just transition, (ii) there are synergies and trade-offs between the criteria, and (iii) each strategy has broad but seemingly superficial support. These findings suggest that no single strategy is perfect, and none will become perfect due to the inherent trade-offs between criteria. However, hybrid strategies that use the strengths of one strategy to offset another strategy's weaknesses could offer an effective approach to pursuing energy justice.