MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410009012 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/add27d

Distributional justice and rapid green energy transitions: citizen experiences in Kenya

2025· article· en· W4410009012 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Gore, Lauren M. MacLean, Jennifer N. Brass, Elizabeth Baldwin, Winnie Mitullah, Alesha Porisky

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEconomic JusticeEnergy (signal processing)Citizen scienceEnvironmental justicePolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental sciencePhysicsQuantum mechanicsAstronomyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A global movement promotes and supports the concept of just energy transitions. Advocates endorse the combined goals of universal, affordable access to electricity, and the use of clean, renewable sources of energy. In the Global South and particularly Africa, international organizations are promoting these rapid green energy transitions with financing and encouraging private sector investment and innovation. What remains unclear is how rapid green energy transitions are experienced by citizens, especially the poor in the Global South. Are the transitions just or equitably shared across populations? Kenya is an important country for assessing this question. Kenya is expected to achieve SDG 7, ‘sustainable energy access for all’, by 2030, one of the few African countries to reach this milestone. Kenya’s achievements, however, mask significant tensions surrounding its rapid energy transition. This paper reveals a mismatch between national and global narratives about access to electricity compared to local-level citizen experiences. The paper argues that the current transition aims for but is not achieving distributional justice. While there are many valuable lessons to take from Kenya’s experience, there are also significant concerns as the poor are carrying a heavy burden of the transition. Our analysis is based on focus groups, qualitative interviews, and survey data. The paper concludes by reflecting on the lessons from this critical case about the relationship between the global promotion of just energy transitions and African citizen needs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207