Accelerating renewable energy deployment is imperative to address the climate crisis, yet projects commonly face community resistance and local cancellation. Accordingly, interest has risen in social impact assessments (SIAs) to evaluate social viability and strengthen management. However, mainstream approaches overlook upstream political economy dynamics that shape projects and drive opposition. Analyzing renewable developments in Mexico reveals how international negotiations and national policies produce rushed, large-scale projects in marginalized territories, igniting rural social struggles. While SIA practices can be enhanced, upstream policies constrain their scope to reshape misaligned projects and performance to address complex sociocultural contexts. This prompts questioning why vulnerable regions bear concentrated impacts and the need to explore alternative development pathways, despite SIAs implementation.
AidunHElkinJGoyalR, et al. (2022) Opposition to Renewable Energy Facilities in the United States. New York: Sabin Center for Climate Change Law.
2.
AitkenM (2010) Why we still don’t understand the social aspects of wind power: A critique of key assumptions within the literature. Energy Policy38(4): 1834–1841.
3.
Aledo-TurADomínguez-GómezJA (2017) Social Impact Assessment (SIA) from a multidimensional paradigmatic perspective: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Environmental Management195: 56–61.
BatelS (2020) Research on the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies: Past, present and future. Energy Research & Social Science68: 101544.
6.
BaxterJWalkerCEllisG, et al. (2020) Scale, history and justice in community wind energy: An empirical review. Energy Research & Social Science68: 101532.
7.
BoyerD (2019) Energopolitics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
8.
CarleySKoniskyDM (2020) The justice and equity implications of the clean energy transition. Nature Energy5(8): 569–577.
9.
CashmoreMRudolphDLarsenSV, et al. (2019) International experiences with opposition to wind energy siting decisions: Lessons for environmental and social appraisal. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management62(7): 1109–1132.
10.
ChasekPSDownieDLBrownJW (2018) Global Environmental Politics. London: Routledge.
11.
ColvinRMWittGBLaceyJ, et al. (2019) The community cost of consultation: Characterising the qualitative social impacts of a wind energy development that failed to proceed in Tasmania, Australia. Environmental Impact Assessment Review77: 40–48.
12.
de ConinckHCReviA (2018) IPCC SR15: Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
13.
Diario Oficial de la Federación (DOF) (2015) Manual de Subastas de Largo Plazo. México: Diario Oficial de la Federación.
14.
Diario Oficial de la Federación (DOF) (2018) Disposiciones Administrativas de Carácter General sobre la Evaluación de Impacto Social en el Sector Energético. México: Diario Oficial de la Federación.
EngelbrechtY (2022) The efficiency of social impact assessment (SIA) in south african renewable energy projects. PhD Thesis, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
17.
EstevesAMFranksDVanclayF (2012) Social impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal30(1): 34–42.
18.
FeyertagJBowieB (2021) The financial costs of mitigating social risks: Costs and effectiveness of risk mitigation strategies for emerging market investors. Overseas Development Institute, September, London.
19.
FournisYFortinMJ (2017) From social ‘acceptance’ to social ‘acceptability’ of wind energy projects: Towards a territorial perspective. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management60(1): 1–21.
HannaKMcGuiganENobleB, et al. (2019) An analysis of the state of impact assessment research for low carbon power production: Building a better understanding of information and knowledge gaps. Energy Research & Social Science50: 116–128.
23.
HealyNBarryJ (2017) Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a ‘just transition’. Energy Policy108: 451–459.
24.
HoweC (2014) Anthropocenic ecoauthority: The winds of Oaxaca. Anthropological Quarterly87(2): 381–404.
25.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014) Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
26.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2018) Summary for policymakers: Special report on global warming of 1.5 C. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
27.
KhanI (2020) Impacts of energy decentralization viewed through the lens of the energy cultures framework: Solar home systems in the developing economies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews119: 109576.
28.
KlickHSmithER (2010) Public understanding of and Intertwined with Auctions, project definitions became a core issue for local opposition groups. In the Auctions, the feasibility evaluation of the proposals required projects to be well-defined in their characteristics for deployment. For the design of the proposals, some companies resorted to consulting firms and ort for wind power in the United States. Renewable Energy35(7): 1585–1591.
29.
LarsenSVHansenAMNielsenHN (2018) The role of EIA and weak assessments of social impacts in conflicts over implementation of renewable energy policies. Energy Policy115: 43–53.
30.
LevendaAMBehrsinIDisanoF (2021) Renewable energy for whom? A global systematic review of the environmental justice implications of renewable energy technologies. Energy Research & Social Science71: 101837.
31.
LezamaJL (2010) Sociedad, medio ambiente y política ambiental, 1970–2010. In: GraizbordBLezamaJL (eds) Los Grandes Problemas De México. México: COLMEX, pp. 23–60.
32.
Llanes-SalazarR (2019) “No sólo los ejidatarios tienen derechos”. La emergencia de los derechos humanos del pueblo maya en Yucatán. Península14(1): 107–129.
33.
LuthraSManglaSKKharbRK (2015) Sustainable assessment in energy planning and management in Indian perspective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews47: 58–73.
34.
McCroneAMosienerU (2018) Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2018. Frankfurt: Frankfurt School-UNEP Centre/BNEF
35.
MartinezN (2022) Theorizing the devices of sociotechnical governance: Systemic practices, visions, and dynamics of change in Mexico’s energy transition. Energy Research & Social Science90: 102626.
36.
MartinezNKomendantovaN (2020) The effectiveness of the social impact assessment (SIA) in energy transition management: Stakeholders’ insights from renewable energy projects in Mexico. Energy Policy145: 111744.
37.
Martins-GodinhoCNobleBPoelzerG, et al. (2022) Impact assessment for renewable energy development: Analysis of impacts and mitigation practices for wind energy in western Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal41: 59–70.
38.
MekaouiAEBaños-RamírezO (2021) La transición energética mexicana en una comunidad maya: el caso de San José Tipceh, Yucatán. Región Y Sociedad33: e1417.
39.
MillerCARichterJO’LearyJ (2015) Socio-energy systems design: A policy framework for energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science6: 29–40.
OttingerG (2013) The winds of change: Environmental justice in energy transitions. Science as Culture22(2): 222–229.
44.
PhadkeR (2013) Public deliberation and the geographies of wind justice. Science as Culture22(2): 247–255.
45.
PulverS (2007) Importing environmentalism: Explaining Petroleos Mexicanos’ cooperative climate policy. Studies in Comparative International Development42: 233–255.
46.
PulverS (2013) A climate leader? The politics and practice of climate governance in Mexico. In: HeldDRogerCNagEM, et al. (eds) Climate Governance in the Developing World. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.174–195.
RandJHoenB (2017) Thirty years of North American wind energy acceptance research: What have we learned?Energy Research & Social Science29: 135–148.
49.
RobinsonMShineT (2018) Achieving a climate justice pathway to 1.5 C. Nature Climate Change8(7): 564–569.
50.
RousseauI (2017) La nueva regulación de la gestión social de los proyectos energéticos en México. Seguridad, sustentabilidad y gobernabilidad. Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Políticas Y Sociales62(230): 197–219.
SusskindLChunJGantA, et al. (2022) Sources of opposition to renewable energy projects in the United States. Energy Policy165: 112922.
53.
TemperLAvilaSDel BeneD, et al. (2020) Movements shaping climate futures: A systematic mapping of protests against fossil fuel and low-carbon energy projects. Environmental Research Letters15(12): 123004.
54.
TokeD (2002) Wind power in UK and Denmark: Can rational choice help explain different outcomes?Environmental Politics11(4): 83–100.
55.
TorresB (2013) El activismo en materia de cambio climático en la búsqueda del reposicionamiento internacional de México. Foro Internacional53: 897–932.
56.
TorresB (2019) La participación de México en la convención marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el cambio climático. Foro Internacional59(3–4): 1179–1219.
57.
UN (2018) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on Her Visit to Mexico. A/HRC/39/17/Add.2, 28 June, UN Human Rights Council, London.
58.
Van de GriftECuppenE (2022) Beyond the public in controversies: A systematic review on social opposition and renewable energy actors. Energy Research & Social Science9: 1102749.
59.
Van der HorstD (2007) NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy35(5): 2705–2714.
60.
WangSWangS (2015) Impacts of wind energy on environment: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews49: 437–443.
61.
YennetiKDayR (2015) Procedural (in) justice in the implementation of solar energy: The case of Charanaka solar park, Gujarat, India. Energy Policy86: 664–673.
