Decision: Systematised assessment of energy injustice in sub-Saharan Africa — R1/PR14
Résumé fourni par la source
The objective of this study was to develop a framework to support the identification of root causes of energy injustice in sub-Saharan Africa. Currently, existing literature identifies specific energy injustices on the continent; however, it fails to delve into root causes of these inequalities. Additionally, a paper that synthesises these injustices to understand prevailing challenges is absent. This study, therefore, filled this gap by conducting a systematised literature review to identify dominant themes of energy injustice in sub-Saharan Africa. The identified themes were found along the entire energy value chain, from mining of critical minerals used in technology manufacturing to the disposal of energy technologies. Injustices were also identified in cross-cutting issues, including community engagement, project financing and power dynamics between donors and countries on the continent. A framework titled “Energy Injustice in Stakeholder Interactions” was developed to encapsulate these injustices and support the identification of root causes of energy injustice. This framework demonstrated the flow of injustices across stakeholders and, in doing so, provided multiple perspectives of energy injustice. Further, it included the constraints these stakeholders faced in executing their mandates, thereby limiting energy justice. Lastly, it demonstrates trade-offs that must be considered in the quest for energy justice. Thus, framework, therefore, provides critical information on points of intervention for actors working towards restorative justice.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Decision: Systematised assessment of energy injustice in sub-Saharan Africa — R1/PR14
- Date Crossref
- 14/04/2026
- Éditeur
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Type
- peer-review
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.