4.6.3.3 Metaphorical scales of justice 

Tensions between these two imperatives – the need for speed and for depth – support arguments for the governance of PTPs (Anderson et al., 2023). On the one hand, one might argue that since every additional tonne of GHG emissions adds to the toll in human lives, and every additional fraction of a degree of global heating multiplies threats, including the threat of ESTPs, then speed equals justice. On the other hand, if the speed of decarbonisation and the upscaling of technological change are the sole considerations, this offers carte blanche to the most powerful, dominant actors to restructure the new post-carbon economy in ways that maintain existing power, gender, and socioeconomic inequalities (Newell, Geels and Sovacool, 2022; Gabor, 2023). 

In this scenario, while tipping points in technological innovations alone could conceivably save more lives, they could also squander a unique opportunity for greater inclusivity and ‘depth’ in the redesign of society along more equitable lines (Leach and Scoones, 2006). For example, instead of an energy system composed of a massively distributed network of community-owned and managed cooperatives offering very low-cost, secure energy, we may enter a post-carbon society in which a small number of oligopolistic energy suppliers continue to command a high price and reap extortionate profits (Stone et al., 2021; Hoffman and High-Pippert, 2005). One example that demonstrates governance that respects both the need for renewables and concern over ownerships and consolidation – speed as well as depth – can be found, for example, in Denmark, where there is a minimum requirement of 20 per cent community ownership of wind power (Mey and Diesendorf, 2018).

Using metaphorical scales of justice, some might judge that a rapid transition that saves more lives (speed) outweighs the benefits of a longer struggle for energy democracy (depth) – where, for the sake of argument, these are perceived to be mutually exclusive. But these and other competing claims for justice at least deserve due consideration. Governments themselves are highly unlikely to initiate action that disrupts dominant systems of power in which they are key players. Instead, governance that encompasses other, non-state actors, beginning with social movements and civil society, would be expected to initiate these forms of political struggle (Smith et al., 2020).