This article examines the potential adverse effects of sustainable transport transitions on justice. It is important for policy debates to consider how pro-environment policies may adversely impact social justice. We apply a broad conception of justice as comprising redistribution, representation and recognition to the transport transition in Bergen, Norway, with ambitious climate mitigation policies to be met primarily by reshaping transport. Through primary data collection and critical literature review, we identify several potential injustice effects of green transport transitions. These particularly relate to the redistributive effects of selective allocation of benefits and to less tangible processes of representation and recognition.
AnguelovskiIConnollyJJGarcia-LamarcaM, et al. (2019) New scholarly pathways on green gentrification: What does the urban ‘green turn’ mean and where is it going?Progress in Human Geography43(6): 1064–1086.
2.
AxsenJSovacoolBK (2019) The roles of users in electric, shared and automated mobility transitions. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment71: 1–21.
3.
BærenholdtJO (2013) Governmobility: The powers of mobility. Mobilities8(1): 20–34.
4.
BanisterD (2008) The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy15(2): 73–80.
5.
BarberLB (2020) Governing uneven mobilities: Walking and hierarchized circulation in Hong Kong. Journal of Transport Geography82: 102622.
6.
Bergen Municipality (2016) Green Strategy: Climate and Energy Action Plan for Bergen 2016. Bergen: Bergen Municipality.
Bergen Municipality (2019b) Folkehelseoversikt: Levekår og helse i Bergen [Public Health Overview: Living Conditions and Health in Bergen]. Bergen: Bergen Municipality.
9.
Bergen Municipality (2020)Handlings og Økonomiplan 2021-2024 for Bergen kommune [Trade and Economy Plan for Bergen Municipality]. Bergen: Bergen Municipality.
10.
BoelensLDe RooG (2014) Planning of undefined becoming: First encounters of planners beyond the plan. Planning Theory15: 42–67.
11.
BuehlerRPucherJAltshulerA (2017) Vienna’s path to sustainable transport. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation11(4): 257–271.
12.
BulkeleyHCastan BrotoVMaassenA (2013) Low-carbon transitions and the reconfiguration of urban infrastructure. Urban Studies51: 1471–1486.
13.
BurchSShawADaleA, et al. (2014) Triggering transformative change: A development path approach to climate change response in communities. Climate Policy14(4): 467–487.
14.
CampbellS (1996) Green cities, growing cities, just cities? Urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. Journal of the American Planning Association62(3): 296–312.
15.
CassNFaulconbridgeJ (2016) Commuting practices: New insights into modal shift from theories of social practice. Transport Policy45: 1–14.
16.
CastreeNLeszczynskiAStallinsJA, et al. (2021) Reconstituting geography for the 21st century. Environment and Planning F: Philosophy, Theory, Models, Methods and Practice1: 1–4.
17.
CheckerM (2011) Wiped out by the ‘greenwave’: Environmental gentrification and the paradoxical politics of urban sustainability. City & Society23(2): 210–229.
18.
ChowdhurySHadasYGonzalezVA, et al. (2018) Public transport users’ and policy makers’ perceptions of integrated public transport systems. Transport Policy61: 75–83.
19.
CresswellTUtengPT (2008) Gendered Mobilities: Towards an Holistic Understanding. Abingdon: Routledge.
20.
CreutzigFJavaidAKochN, et al. (2020) A just urban and rural road pricing for fair mobility. Nature Climate Change10(7): 591–594.
21.
DedingMFilgesTVan OmmerenJ (2009) Spatial mobility and commuting: The case of two-earner households. Journal of Regional Science49: 113–147.
EnrightT (2019) Transit justice as spatial justice: Learning from activists. Mobilities14(5): 665–680.
24.
FNB (2019) Folkeaksjonen Nei Til Mer Bompenger – Bergen valgprogram 2019-2023. Bergen: FNB.
25.
FraserN (1995) From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a ‘post-socialist’ age. New Left Review212: 68–93.
26.
GalloMMarinelliM (2020) Sustainable mobility: A review of possible actions and policies. Sustainability12(18): 7499.
27.
GuzmanLAOviedoD (2018) Accessibility, affordability and equity: Assessing ‘pro-poor’ public transport subsidies in Bogotá. Transport Policy68: 37–51.
28.
HeSYTaoSHouY, et al. (2018) Mass Transit Railway, transit-oriented development and spatial justice: The competition for prime residential locations in Hong Kong since the 1980s. Town Planning Review89(5): 467–494.
29.
HendersonJ (2013) Street Fight: The Politics of Mobility in San Francisco. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
30.
HendersonJ (2020) EVs are not the answer: A mobility justice critique of electric vehicle transitions. Annals of the American Association of Geographers110(6): 1993–2010.
31.
HendersonJGulsrudN (2019) Street Fights in Copenhagen: Bicycle and Car Politics in a Green Mobility City. London: Routledge.
32.
HillierJ (2008) Plan(e) speaking: A multiplanar theory of spatial planning. Planning Theory7: 24–50.
33.
HoffmannML (2016) Bike Lanes Are White Lanes: Bicycle Advocacy and Urban Planning. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
34.
HoldenE (2007) Achieving Sustainable Mobility: Everyday and Leisure-time Travel in the EU. Abingdon: Routledge.
JensenA (2011) Mobility, space and power: On the multiplicities of seeing mobility. Mobilities6: 255–271.
37.
JensenOB (2010) Negotiation in motion: Unpacking a geography of mobility. Space and Culture13: 389–402.
38.
KarnerALondonJRowangouldD, et al. (2020) From transportation equity to transportation justice: Within, through, and beyond the state. Journal of Planning Literature35(4): 440–459.
39.
KębłowskiWBassensD (2018) ‘All transport problems are essentially mathematical’: The uneven resonance of academic transport and mobility knowledge in Brussels. Urban Geography39(3): 413–437.
40.
KramarzTParkSJohnsonC (2021) Governing the dark side of renewable energy: A typology of global displacements. Energy Research & Social Science74: 101902.
41.
LevinsonD (2010) Equity effects of road pricing: A review. Transport Reviews30: 33–57.
42.
LucasK (2012) Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now?Transport Policy20: 105–113.
43.
McLaffertySPrestonV (2019) Who has long commutes to low-wage jobs? Gender, race, and access to work in the New York region. Urban Geography40(9): 1270–1290.
44.
ManderscheidK (2014) Criticising the solitary mobile subject: Researching relational mobilities and reflecting on mobile methods. Mobilities9(2): 188–219.
45.
MartensKGolubARobinsonG (2012) A justice-theoretic approach to the distribution of transportation benefits: Implications for transportation planning practice in the United States. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice46(4): 684–695.
46.
MattioliGRobertsCSteinbergerJK, et al. (2020) The political economy of car dependence: A systems of provision approach. Energy Research & Social Science66: 101486.
47.
MullenCMarsdenG (2016) Mobility justice in low carbon energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science18: 109–117.
48.
PereiraRHSchwanenTBanisterD (2017) Distributive justice and equity in transportation. Transport Reviews37(2): 170–191.
49.
RiceJLCohenDALongJ, et al. (2020) Contradictions of the climate-friendly city: New perspectives on eco-gentrification and housing justice. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research44(1): 145–165.
50.
RobinsonCMattioliG (2020) Double energy vulnerability: Spatial intersections of domestic and transport energy poverty in England. Energy Research & Social Science70: 101699.
51.
RooGDSilvaEA (2016) A Planner’s Encounter with Complexity. Abingdon: Routledge.
52.
SakseidPG (2019) Engasjement for eget bomiljø – En studie av stedsoppfatninger, innbyggermedvirkning og bilreduksjon på Møhlenpris [Engagement with one’s own living environment: A study of place perceptions, citizen participation and car reduction in Møhlenpris]. Master’s Thesis, University of Bergen. Available at: https://bora.uib.no/bora-xmlui/handle/1956/21056
53.
SareenSRemmeDNordholmA, et al. (2022) A mixed methods engaged study of divergent imaginaries in Bergen’s mobility transition. In: KarimiFRodiM (eds) Energy Transition in the Baltic Sea Region: Understanding Stakeholder Engagement and Community Acceptance (pp. 225–247). London: Routledge.
54.
SchwanenT (2020) Low-carbon mobility in London: A just transition?One Earth2(2): 132–134.
55.
SchwanenT (2021) Achieving just transitions to low-carbon urban mobility. Nature Energy6: 685–687.
56.
ShellerM (2018) Theorising mobility justice. Tempo Social30(2): 17–34.
57.
ShellerM (2020) Mobility justice. In: BüscherMFreudendal-PedersenMKesselringS, et al. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods and Applications for Mobilities (pp. 10–20). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
58.
SoleckiWRosenzweigCDhakalS, et al. (2018) City transformations in a 1.5 C warmer world. Nature Climate Change8(3): 177–181.
59.
SovacoolBK (2021) Who are the victims of low-carbon transitions? Towards a political ecology of climate change mitigation. Energy Research & Social Science73: 101916.
60.
SovacoolBKKesterJNoelL, et al. (2019) Energy injustice and Nordic electric mobility: Inequality, elitism, and externalities in the electrification of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) transport. Ecological Economics157: 205–217.
61.
SparrowRHowardM (2020) Make way for the wealthy? Autonomous vehicles, markets in mobility, and social justice. Mobilities15: 514–526.
62.
TønnesenAKnapskogMUtengTP, et al. (2020) The integration of active travel and public transport in Norwegian policy packages: A study on ‘access, egress and transfer’ and their positioning in two multilevel contractual agreements. Research in Transportation Business & Management40: 100546.
63.
TaylorBDKalauskasR (2010) Addressing equity in political debates over road pricing: Lessons from recent projects. Transportation Research Record2187(1): 44–52.
64.
TvinnereimEHaarstadHRødeseikeA, et al. (2020) Explaining public acceptance of congestion charging: The role of geographical variation in the Bergen case. Case Studies on Transport Policy8: 992–1001.
UrryJ (2004) The ‘system’ of automobility. Theory, Culture & Society21(4–5): 25–39.
67.
VerlinghieriESchwanenT (2020) Transport and mobility justice: Evolving discussions. Journal of Transport Geography87: 102798.
68.
ViegasJ (2001) Making urban road pricing acceptable and effective: Searching for quality and equity in urban mobility. Transport Policy8: 289–294.
69.
VitranoCLindkvistC (2021) Justice in regional transport planning through the lens of Iris Marion Young. Planning Practice & Research. Epub ahead of print 24January. DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2021.1874637.
70.
WalksA (2015) Stopping the ‘war on the car’: Neoliberalism, Fordism, and the politics of automobility in Toronto. Mobilities10(3): 402–422.
71.
WanvikTHaarstadH (2021) Populism, instability and rupture in sustainability transformations. Annals of the American Association of Geographers111(7): 2096–2111.
72.
WestskogHAmundsenHChristiansenP, et al. (2020) Urban contractual agreements as an adaptive governance strategy: Under what conditions do they work in multi-level cooperation?Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning22(4): 554–567.
