IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p783-d203040.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Energy Justice and Canada’s National Energy Board: A Critical Analysis of the Line 9 Pipeline Decision

Author

Listed:
  • Carol Hunsberger

    (Department of Geography, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5C2, Canada)

  • Sâkihitowin Awâsis

    (Department of Geography, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5C2, Canada)

Abstract

This paper investigates the values and priorities reflected in a Canadian pipeline review: The National Energy Board (NEB) decision on Line 9. Theories of energy justice guided analysis of evidence presented at NEB hearings, the NEB’s explanation of its decision, and a Supreme Court challenge. We find that several aspects of energy justice were weak in the NEB process. First, a project-specific scope obstructed the pursuit of equity within and between generations: the pipeline’s contributions to climate change, impacts of the oil sands, and cumulative encroachment on Indigenous lands were excluded from review. Second, the NEB created a hierarchy of knowledge: it considered evidence of potential spill impacts as hypothetical while accepting as fact the proponent’s claim that it could prevent and manage spills. Third, recognition of diversity remained elusive: Indigenous nations’ dissatisfaction with the process challenged the NEB’s interpretation of meaningful consultation and procedural fairness. To address the challenges of climate change and reconciliation between Indigenous and settler nations, it is crucial to identify which kinds of evidence decision-makers recognize as valid and which they exclude. Ideas from energy justice can help support actions to improve the public acceptability of energy decisions, as well as to foster greater Indigenous autonomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Carol Hunsberger & Sâkihitowin Awâsis, 2019. "Energy Justice and Canada’s National Energy Board: A Critical Analysis of the Line 9 Pipeline Decision," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:783-:d:203040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/783/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/783/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    2. Heffron, Raphael J. & McCauley, Darren, 2014. "Achieving sustainable supply chains through energy justice," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 435-437.
    3. McCauley, Darren & Heffron, Raphael, 2018. "Just transition: Integrating climate, energy and environmental justice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-7.
    4. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Dworkin, Michael H., 2015. "Energy justice: Conceptual insights and practical applications," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 435-444.
    5. Bouzarovski, Stefan & Simcock, Neil, 2017. "Spatializing energy justice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 640-648.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jayapalan, C. & Ganesh, L.S., 2019. "Environmentalists and their conflicts with Energy Justice – Concept of “Power-Environ” in the Athirappilly HEPP in Kerala," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 215-229.
    2. Shan Zhou & Douglas S. Noonan, 2019. "Justice Implications of Clean Energy Policies and Programs in the United States: A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Milchram, Christine & Hillerbrand, Rafaela & van de Kaa, Geerten & Doorn, Neelke & Künneke, Rolf, 2018. "Energy Justice and Smart Grid Systems: Evidence from the Netherlands and the United Kingdom," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 1244-1259.
    4. Capaccioli, Andrea & Poderi, Giacomo & Bettega, Mela & D'Andrea, Vincenzo, 2017. "Exploring participatory energy budgeting as a policy instrument to foster energy justice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 621-630.
    5. Lacey-Barnacle, M. & Bird, C.M., 2018. "Intermediating energy justice? The role of intermediaries in the civic energy sector in a time of austerity," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 71-81.
    6. Liljenfeldt, Johanna & Pettersson, Örjan, 2017. "Distributional justice in Swedish wind power development – An odds ratio analysis of windmill localization and local residents’ socio-economic characteristics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 648-657.
    7. Mundaca, Luis & Busch, Henner & Schwer, Sophie, 2018. "‘Successful’ low-carbon energy transitions at the community level? An energy justice perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 292-303.
    8. Lonergan, Katherine Emma & Suter, Nicolas & Sansavini, Giovanni, 2023. "Energy systems modelling for just transitions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    9. O'Sullivan, Kate & Golubchikov, Oleg & Mehmood, Abid, 2020. "Uneven energy transitions: Understanding continued energy peripheralization in rural communities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    10. Castán Broto, Vanesa & Baptista, Idalina & Kirshner, Joshua & Smith, Shaun & Neves Alves, Susana, 2018. "Energy justice and sustainability transitions in Mozambique," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 645-655.
    11. Fang, Ming & Njangang, Henri & Padhan, Hemachandra & Simo, Colette & Yan, Cheng, 2023. "Social media and energy justice: A global evidence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    12. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    13. Radtke, Jörg & Scherhaufer, Patrick, 2022. "A social science perspective on conflicts in the energy transition: An introduction to the special issue," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    14. Mouter, Niek & de Geest, Auke & Doorn, Neelke, 2018. "A values-based approach to energy controversies: Value-sensitive design applied to the Groningen gas controversy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 639-648.
    15. Frate, Cláudio Albuquerque & Brannstrom, Christian & de Morais, Marcus Vinícius Girão & Caldeira-Pires, Armando de Azevedo, 2019. "Procedural and distributive justice inform subjectivity regarding wind power: A case from Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 185-195.
    16. Jenny von Platten & Karl de Fine Licht & Mikael Mangold & Kristina Mjörnell, 2021. "Renovating on Unequal Premises: A Normative Framework for a Just Renovation Wave in Swedish Multifamily Housing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-32, September.
    17. Shengqing Xu & Tao Wang, 2017. "On energy equity and China’s policy choices," Energy & Environment, , vol. 28(3), pages 288-301, May.
    18. Calver, Philippa & Simcock, Neil, 2021. "Demand response and energy justice: A critical overview of ethical risks and opportunities within digital, decentralised, and decarbonised futures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    19. Weko, Silvia & Goldthau, Andreas, 2022. "Bridging the low-carbon technology gap? Assessing energy initiatives for the Global South," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    20. Radtke, Jörg & Ohlhorst, Dörte, 2021. "Community Energy in Germany – Bowling Alone in Elite Clubs?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:783-:d:203040. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.