@@ -996,15 +996,15 @@ The colored curves in Figure 5 represent constant average household energy footp
# Conclusions
To achieve the aggregated final energy targeted in the different 1.5°C compatible scenarios, the energy footprint needs to be reduced in all European countries, as well as almost all expenditure groups. The carbon intensity of energy services needs to be reduced across all expenditure groups. The focus in the lower deciles should be on efficiency improvements, and on absolute reductions in energy consumption in the upper deciles. Even under our bold assumption that the energy and emission efficiencies of all expenditure deciles converge, and demand develops as in the 1.5°C scenarios, our results show that a drastic reduction in the inequality of energy footprints is needed to secure decent living standards for all Europeans.
To achieve the aggregated final energy targeted in the different 1.5°C compatible scenarios, the energy footprint needs to be reduced in all European countries, as well as almost all expenditure groups. The carbon intensity of energy services needs to be reduced across all expenditure groups. The focus in the lower deciles should be on efficiency improvements, and on absolute reductions in energy consumption in the upper deciles [@alfredsson_why_2018 @royston_invisible_2018]. Even under our bold assumption that the energy and emission efficiencies of all expenditure deciles converge, and demand develops as in the 1.5°C scenarios, our results show that a drastic reduction in the inequality of energy footprints is needed to secure decent living standards for all Europeans.
This illustrates an immense political challenge: ensuring a decent standard of living for all at the targeted final energy level of the minimum demand scenarios (between around 15 to 53 household GJ per adult equivalent [@grubler_low_2018 @millward-hopkins_providing_2020], down from an average of `r energy_pae_mean` household GJ/ae) requires a fundamental reorganization of almost all areas of life and economy. It seems hard to imagine how, for example, the living space per capita can be reduced from about 40m² to 15m², or the number of private cars can be reduced from X to X which are the assumption behind the [xxx] scenario. However, each increase in the minimum energy required for a decent life also increases the need to redistribute the energy footprint between countries and expenditure groups, i.e. to reduce energy inequality ever more drastically. Achieving this seems at least as difficult politically. This shows that, in addition to measures to reduce average energy consumption and emissions, instruments to reduce inequality in energy consumption must be developed to ensure a just transition that "leaves no one behind", as the European Green Deal promises [@european_commission_communication_2019].
Particularly in the coming phase of necessary restructuring of the European economy, a social protection mechanism of whatever kind assuring a decent life will play a central role. However, the current organization of the eurozone offers little monetary or fiscal leeway to EU member states, especially the less wealthy where this would be particularly important, to strengthen or introduce such measures. At the European level, implementation fails due to the lack of a common economic policy, as well as the fact that the European Central Bank (ECB) (unlike other central banks) only has a mandate to stabilize prices, but not to provide full employment or other effective means of social protection for European citizens [ref]. At least in the eurozone, there is a great need for action to increase the scope for national and/or EU-wide policy making; both to ensure the social protection of citizens and to enable the necessary investments to restructure infrastructure and the economy.
Strong progressive carbon pricing could have a positive distributional effect besides its effect on absolute emission reduction [ref: MCC/Edenhofer]. In addition, other distribution instruments such as wealth and inheritance taxes, more progressive income taxes, will have to be discussed in order to reduce the large differences in purchasing power within and between the countries of Europe, at least as long as expenditure remains coupled to environmental footprints [@piketty_carbon_2015].
Strong progressive carbon pricing could have a positive distributional effect besides its effect on absolute emission reduction [ref: MCC/Edenhofer]. In addition, other distribution and transfer instruments such as wealth and inheritance taxes, or more progressive income taxes, will have to be discussed in order to reduce the large differences in purchasing power within and between the countries of Europe [@piketty_carbon_2015 @gough_recomposing_2017], at least as long as expenditure remains coupled to environmental footprints.
Our study highlights the challenges largely implicit in the 1.5°C scenarios with respect to securing a decent standard of living for all, and provides further evidence that achieving this dual objective likely requires a shift in the current policy focus on growth in favor of decreasing environmental impacts and increasing social equity (Haberl, 2020, D’Alessandro 2020). Although our empirical investigation is limited to countries in Europe, we contend that our main conclusions apply in a similar or stronger form to the global achievement of climate and equity goals [@hubacek_poverty_2017 @woodward_incrementum_2015], as articulated in the sustainable development goals.
Our study highlights the challenges largely implicit in the 1.5°C scenarios with respect to securing a decent standard of living for all, and provides further evidence that achieving this dual objective likely requires a shift in the current policy focus on growth in favor of decreasing environmental impacts and increasing social equity [@haberl_systematic_2020] ref: D’Alessandro 2020]. Although our empirical investigation is limited to countries in Europe, we contend that our main conclusions apply in a similar or stronger form to the global achievement of climate and equity goals [@hubacek_poverty_2017 @woodward_incrementum_2015 @sovacool_dispossessed_2021 @hubacek_global_2017 @kartha_carbon_2020], as articulated in the sustainable development goals.
abstract={This study examines the justice and equity implications of four low-carbon transitions, and it reveals the “lived experiences” of decarbonisation as manifested across Africa and Europe. Based on extensive, original mixed methods empirical research – including expert interviews, focus groups, internet forums, community interviews, and extended site visits and naturalistic observation – it asks: How are four specific decarbonisation pathways linked to negative impacts within specific communities? Relatedly, what vulnerabilities do these transitions exacerbate in these communities? Lastly, how can such vulnerabilities be better addressed with policy? The paper documents a troublesome cohabitation between French wineries and nuclear power, the negative effects on labor groups and workers in Eastern Germany by a transition to solar energy, the stark embodied externalities in electronic waste (e-waste) flows from smart meters accumulating in Ghana, and the precarious exploitation of children involved in cobalt mining for electric vehicle batteries in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The aims and objectives of the study are threefold: (1) to showcase how four very different vulnerable communities have been affected by the negative impacts of decarbonisation; (2) to reveal tensions and tradeoffs between European transitions and local and global justice concerns; and (3) to inform energy and climate policy. In identifying these objectives, our goal is not to stop or slow down all low-carbon transitions. Rather, the study suggests that the research and policy communities ought to account for, and seek to minimize, a broader range of social and environmental sustainability risks. Sustainability transitions and decarbonisation pathways must become more egalitarian, fair, and just.},
language={en},
urldate={2020-09-21},
journal={World Development},
author={Sovacool, Benjamin K. and Turnheim, Bruno and Hook, Andrew and Brock, Andrea and Martiskainen, Mari},
month=jan,
year={2021},
keywords={Poverty, Energy justice, Energy transitions, ingram\_paper, Nuclear energy, Renewable electricity},
pages={105116},
file={ScienceDirect Full Text PDF:/home/jaccard/.mozilla/firefox/67kb6jd5.default/zotero/storage/RTCL3WXN/Sovacool et al. - 2021 - Dispossessed by decarbonisation Reducing vulnerab.pdf:application/pdf;ScienceDirect Snapshot:/home/jaccard/.mozilla/firefox/67kb6jd5.default/zotero/storage/CIGG8RT3/S0305750X20302436.html:text/html}
}
@techreport{eurostat_eu_2020,
title={{EU} {Quality} {Report} of the {Household} {Budget} {Survey} 2015 {Wave}},
