Energy Governance, Environmental Justice and Legal Pluralism in the Global South

Energy governance in the Global South is shaped by the interaction of multiple legal, social, and normative orders such as customary and informal governance systems, creating complex challenges for the pursuit of sustainable development and environmental justice (Sovacool 2016; Heffron and McCauley 2017). While contemporary energy and environmental regimes increasingly emphasise equity, participation, and sustainability, regulatory outcomes in many resources dependent economies continue to reproduce environmental harm and social inequality (Newell and Mulvaney 2013; Knox 2018). This article examines the relationship between energy law, environmental justice, and legal pluralism, arguing that formal regulatory frameworks alone are insufficient to address entrenched distributive, procedural and recognitional injustices (Schlosberg 2007; Griffiths 1986).
Drawing on environmental justice theory and legal pluralism, the article conceptualises energy governance as a socially embedded legal process rather than a purely technocratic or state centred exercise (Schlosberg 2007; Griffiths 1986; Tamanaha 2008). Using a qualitative doctrinal and socio-legal methodology, it analyses international legal instruments, domestic energy and environmental legislation, judicial decisions, and policy frameworks alongside socio-legal scholarship (Sands et al. 2018; Banakar and Travers 2005). The analysis demonstrates how plural normative orders, including customary land tenure systems, community governance practices, and informal dispute resolution mechanisms, profoundly shape the interpretation, legitimacy, and implementation of energy law in practice (Merry 1988; Tamanaha 2008; Benda Beckmann and Turner 2018).
Through focused illustrative examples drawn from resource dependent regions in the Global South, the article shows how failure to engage legal plurality contributes to distributive, procedural, and recognitional injustices in energy development (Ebeku 2006; Walker 2012). It concludes that recognising and constructively engaging legal pluralism is essential for designing energy governance frameworks capable of supporting equitable, legitimate, and sustainable energy transitions (Heffron and McCauley 2017; UNDP 2020).

Energy law; Environmental justice

1. Banakar, R. and Travers, M. (2005). Theory and Method in Socio-Legal Research. Oxford: Hart. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Baker, L. (2016). Solar power in India: Governance, land and conflicts. Energy Policy, 92, 16–25. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Benda-Beckmann, F. von and Turner, B. (2018). Legal Pluralism and Development. Cambridge: CUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Boyle, A. and Shelton, D. (2012). International Environmental Law. Oxford: OUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bradbrook, A. (2010). ‘The development of international environmental law for climate change’. Sustainable Development Law & Policy, 10(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bullard, R. (1990). Dumping in Dixie. Boulder: Westview. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cotterrell, R. (2018). Sociological Jurisprudence. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Ebeku, K. (2006). ‘Oil and the Niger Delta people’. Journal of African Law, 50(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of Justice. Cambridge: Polity. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Griffiths, J. (1986). ‘What is legal pluralism?’. Journal of Legal Pluralism, 24. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Heffron, R. and McCauley, D. (2017). ‘The concept of energy justice’. Energy Policy, 101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. IEA (2021). World Energy Outlook. Paris: IEA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Knox, J. (2018). Human Rights and the Environment. Cambridge: CUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Levien, M. (2018). Dispossession without Development: Land Grabs in Neoliberal India. Oxford: OUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. McCrudden, C. (2006). ‘Legal research and the social sciences’ Law Quarterly Review, 122. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. McHarg, A. and Mitchell, C. (2016). ‘Energy justice’. Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 34(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Merry, S. (1988). ‘Legal pluralism’. Law & Society Review, 22(5). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Newell, P. and Mulvaney, D. (2013). ‘The political economy of energy justice’. Energy Policy, 59. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Ocheje, P. (2007). ‘In the public interest’. Journal of African Law, 51(2). OECD (2017). Environmental Governance. Paris: OECD. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Samuel, B. C. N. (2025). The Importance of Fixing the Tax System for Gender and Racial Justice: An Analysis of the United States System of Taxation. Beijing Law Review, 16, 570-590. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Sands, P. et al. (2018). Principles of International Environmental Law. Cambridge: CUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Santos, B. de Sousa (2002). Toward a New Legal Common Sense. London: Butterworths. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Schlosberg, D. (2007). Defining Environmental Justice. Oxford: OUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford: OUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Sovacool, B. (2016). ‘Energy justice’. Energy Policy, 98. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Sovacool, B. and Dworkin, M. (2015). Global Energy Justice. Cambridge: CUP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Tamanaha, B. (2008). ‘Understanding legal pluralism’. Sydney Law Review, 30. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. UNDP (2020). Energy and Human Development. New York: UNDP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. UNEP (2019). Environmental Rule of Law. Nairobi: UNEP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Walker, G. (2012). Environmental Justice. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. World Bank (2017). Environmental and Social Framework. Washington DC. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Yenneti, K., Day, R. and Golubchikov, O. (2016). ‘Spatial justice and the land politics of renewables: Dispossessing vulnerable communities through solar energy development in India’. Geoforum, 76, 90–99. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Conflict of Law in the Safeguarding of Malaysian Intangible Cultural Heritage: A Way Forward
• Alternative Dispute Resolution in India: A Brief Overview Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. - William E. Gladstone
• The Role of Museums in Safeguarding Cultural Heritage Rights: Balancing Access and Repatriation
• An Evaluation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Significance and Application in Nigeria
• The Role of International Law in Shaping National Immigration Policies.