Rethinking a Just Energy Transition and Development

I. INTRODUCTION

The Philippines faces a climate crisis despite contributing very little to global emissions. While the global narrative is that renewable energy is important for climate action, the challenge is ensuring that the transition is just, sustainable, and beneficial to communities.”

The Philippines contributes less than 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Despite this, it is one of the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world.

The country is frequently affected by:

• ○  Typhoons
• ○  Floods
• ○  Landslides
• ○  Droughts
• ○  Earthquakes and volcanic activity

As of last month, August 2026, the Philippines experienced prolonged and heavy rainfall associated with the Southwest Monsoon (Habagat), compounded in several areas by the effects of recent tropical cyclones and other weather disturbances. The prolonged rainfall resulted in widespread flooding, landslides, riverbank erosion, road and bridge failures, damage to houses and public facilities, disruption of transportation, and the isolation of communities. By August 31, the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) reported that more than 8.1 million people had been affected. Infrastructure damage had reached approximately ₱6.16 billion, while agricultural damage was estimated at ₱2.32 billion. The OCD also reported 724 flooded areas in Ilocos, Central Luzon, Metro Manila and CALABARZON. The situation demonstrates that the impacts of prolonged rainfall extend well beyond flooding itself, affecting transportation networks, settlements, agriculture, public services and other critical infrastructure.

The report highlights that disaster impacts were intensified by exposure, land-use practices, environmental degradation, settlement patterns, and infrastructure vulnerability. It emphasizes the need to move beyond conventional emergency response toward community-based disaster risk reduction, ecosystem protection, nature-based solutions, resilient infrastructure, early warning, and stronger community preparedness and response capacity.

The most affected communities of the effect of climate change and environmental destruction are Indigenous People, Farmers, Fisherfolks, Coastal and law income communities, urban poor, students and minimum wage earners, workers and ordinary people.

Climate change intensifies hydrometeorological hazards, leading to stronger typhoons, floods, droughts, and heat waves. Marginalized communities, who are most exposed to these risks, require adaptation support, not just mitigation measures.

Without adequate safeguards, large-scale renewable energy (RE) projects risk deepening the vulnerabilities of the very communities they are meant to protect. For instance, converting agricultural lands for a solar farm can displace farmers, while the construction of a large dam can dispossess Indigenous Peoples of their ancestral lands, deforestation, disrupting traditional livelihoods and food sources, and wind turbines are penetrating to our forest and coastal communities that directly destroying local eco-systems.

Furthermore, the upstream material demands for these projects—particularly the need for critical minerals—are fueling the expansion of both land-based and offshore mining and probably will push the idea to open the Deep Sea Mining in the Philippines. This expansion directly destroys ecosystems like forests and mangroves that act as carbon sinks, contributing to climate change and threatening the livelihood and health of both upland and coastal communities. This highlights the critical need to balance global climate action with local sustainability.

II. APPROVED CLIMATE MITIGATION PROJECTS

As of March 2026, there are a total of 1373 approved Climate Mitigation Projects and the top 3 contributors are Solar, Hydropower and Wind Turbine.

And if you can imagine how much raw material needs to be extracted to produce all of these technologies and build these projects, we also need to consider the fact that many of the materials—including steel—are still produced using coal. This means that even technologies considered “clean” require significant amounts of energy and resources throughout their supply chains.

One example is the MTerra Solar Project, which spans two provinces in Luzon—Nueva Ecija and Bulacan—covering approximately 3,500 hectares. The project is designed to generate 3,500 MW of solar power, supported by a 4,500 MWh Battery Energy Storage System (BESS).

Although the MTerra Solar Project will generate “clean electricity,” its material footprint is enormous. It requires large quantities of raw materials and minerals, with millions of tons of ore potentially needing to be extracted, processed, transported, and manufactured before the project can even begin operating. These processes also carry a significant embedded carbon footprint, including CO2 emissions generated throughout the extraction, processing, manufacturing, and construction stages.

And this is only one project serving the Philippines’ energy demand. At the same time, the Philippines is also becoming an important part of the global supply chain for critical minerals, particularly nickel, which is increasingly demanded for batteries and other technologies associated with the global energy transition.

This is why we need to look beyond the “clean energy” label. The rapid expansion of the mining industry in the Philippines and other countries is likely to intensify as demand for renewable energy technologies, batteries, and critical minerals continues to grow. Without strong social and ecological safeguards, many places in the Global South—including the Philippines—risk becoming sacrifice zones for the global energy transition.

III. THE JUST ENERGY FRAMEWORK

I recognise the importance of a Just Energy Transition. However, we assert that the current framing is insufficient if it remains limited to energy systems alone. A transition focused only on shifting energy sources risks becoming a technocratic and extractive “green shift”—replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy while reproducing the same structures of inequality, ecological destruction, and centralized control.

For this reason, we should advance a critical clarification, A true Just Energy Transition must evolve into a Just Ecological Transition.

This means the transition must be ecocentric, biocentric, regenerative, decolonial, community-led, and grounded in ecological limits—not only a shift in energy systems, but a transformation of how society relates to energy, land, economy, governance, and life itself.

IV. CLIMATE CRISIS, HISTORICAL RESPONSIBILITY, AND THE FAILURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT MODEL

Climate change is only a symptom of a deeper ecological problem. The current ecological crisis is not accidental. It is a direct outcome of the dominant development model pursued by industrialized countries, often referred to as “First World Countries or Economies”. This model is built on continued economic expansion, high energy and endless consumption, endless industrial expansion that all leads to large-scale and massive extractions.

The result of this model is now globally evident: Climate Change, biodiversity collapse, pollution and ecological overshoot. Climate change is not a separate issue, it is a manifestation of a failed development paradigm.

There is also Climate Injustice and unequal responsibility.

Industrialized countries have contributed the majority of historical and cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. In contrast, countries like the Philippines and many other nations in the Global South have contributed minimally to the crisis.

Yet the impacts are profoundly unequal:

• ●  Intensifying typhoons and flooding
• ●  Sea level rise and coastal erosion
• ●  Drought, food insecurity, and livelihood collapse
• ●  Displacement of vulnerable communitiesThis represents a clear climate injustice, Those least responsible for the crisis are bearing its most severe consequences.

V. THE POLICY PROBLEM: REDUCTION WITHOUT TRANSFORMATION IS INSUFFICIENT

A common policy response is:

• ●  High-emitting countries must reduce emissions
• ●  Developing countries must be allowed to “develop”We should challenge the limits of this framing.While emissions reduction is necessary, this approach is insufficient because it fails to address a deeper structural contradiction:What if “development” itself is defined by the same extractive and high-carbon model that caused the crisis?If Global South countries are expected to replicate industrial pathways of the Global North, then the crisis is not resolved, it is reproduced in new geographies.This creates a false solution:

• ●  emissions are reduced in one place
• ●  while extraction and ecological harm expand elsewhereThe result is not justice, but redistribution of ecological destruction.

And this we can say that the problem is the “DEVELOPMENT MODEL ITSELF” The ecological crisis forces a direct political question:

Is the problem simply who emits more, or the very definition of development being pursued globally?

The current dominant development logic equates progress with, endless GDP Growth, Industrial Expansion, Increasing energy consumptions and large-scale extraction and this model is not fundamentally and will never be compatible with ecological limits.

Therefore, Climate policy that does not question the growth-based development paradigms will continue to reproduce ecological crises and social injustice.

The current situation in the Philippines is one of the clearest examples of this crisis. Climate Mitigation projects are often designed and implemented at a large scale, reinforcing the country’s extractive and mining industries. In practice, many of these projects lead to displacement, loss of livelihoods, environmental degradation, human rights violations, violence, and increasing threats to food security and biodiversity.

All of this is happening because most of the RE projects are designed around a large-scale, centralized model that continues to sustain the same industries responsible for ecological and social justice.

VI. SACRIFICE ZONE

The Global South becomes particularly important in the global chain supply and demand. Many countries and communities in the Global South are positioned as sources of the land, minerals, energy, labor, and other resources needed to sustain this global economic system and this is the reason why it is becoming the sacrifice zone. From nickel mining in Palawan and Zambales in the Philippines, to nickel extraction and processing in Sulawesi and North Maluku in Indonesia, cobalt and copper mining around Kolwezi in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and lithium extraction in parts of Chile and Argentina, communities and ecosystems are increasingly bearing the environmental and social costs of supplying the materials needed for batteries, electric vehicles, renewable energy infrastructure, and other technologies.

For example:

1. Philippines–PalawanandZambales:Nickelminingisexpandingpartly because nickel is an important material for batteries and energy storage.

Amnesty International documented deforestation, environmental damage, impacts on livelihoods and water, and human-rights concerns affecting Indigenous and rural communities in these areas.

2. Indonesia–Sulawesi,particularlyMorowaliandNorthMaluku:Indonesiais the world’s largest nickel producer, and rapid expansion of nickel mining and processing has generated significant environmental and social impacts. Nickel production is also heavily dependent on coal-fired power, creating a contradiction within the “clean energy” supply chain.

3. DemocraticRepublicoftheCongo–Lualaba/Kolwezi:Theexpansionof cobalt and copper mining, driven partly by demand for rechargeable batteries, has been associated with forced evictions, loss of homes and farmland, and serious human-rights abuses.

4. ChileandArgentina–lithiumregions:Lithiumextractionforbatteriesis concentrated in parts of the Andes, where concerns include pressure on water resources, ecosystems, agriculture, and Indigenous communities

A current example of this emerging dynamic is the Pax Silica initiative, launched by the United States in December 2025. Pax Silica seeks to build a secure supply chain stretching from critical minerals and energy inputs to advanced manufacturing, semiconductors, artificial intelligence infrastructure, and logistics. The initiative connects access to natural resources with the expansion of high-technology industries and global supply-chain security.

The Philippines joined Pax Silica in April 2026, and the United States and the Philippines subsequently announced plans for a 4,000-acre industrial zone within the Luzon Economic Corridor, described as an AI-focused industrial acceleration hub. The initiative therefore provides a concrete example of how the push for technological development, industrial expansion, critical minerals, energy, and infrastructure are increasingly being brought together.

From this perspective, the question is not simply how to secure the minerals needed for the energy and technology transition, but whether the development model driving this demand can continue indefinitely on a finite planet—and who ultimately bears the social and ecological costs of sustaining it.

Satellite image showing deforested areas where nickel is being mined near the settlement of Santa Cruz, Zambales, The Philippines. 19 February 2024.

VII. DECOLONIZATION

I can still remember, when I visited a Mangyan Tribe community in the island of Mindoro and asked what development or progress looks like to them. They simply answered that development means having a healthy forest or mountains, healthy lands and clean rivers. Because for them, those are not only simple resources, it is their home, school, playground, market, pharmacy and library of knowledge.

This one is the reason why I advocate decolonizing the idea of development and progress, especially here in the Philippines. Perhaps we can start imagining that sustainable development doesn’t mean having endless GDP growth, extractive industries and endless consumption. Perhaps true development is regenerative and based on ecological health and on the happiness of the community living in its ecological limit

And for me decolonization is not about simply going back to a so-called “primitive way of life”. It is all about connecting, remembering, learning and practicing those indigenous ways of knowing, living and relating to the world and recognizing their principles within them that can be our guide in our lives and system today.

This can mean building alternative and local economies and autonomous systems that strengthen local capacities rather than creating dependence on centralized systems. It means rethinking how we produce, consume, govern, and care for one another.

Most importantly, we need to deeply remember how we relate to the land, rivers, oceans, other living organisms and even the non-living elements that make life possible.

From these deeper relationships, we can begin to imagine different ways of organizing society, and use that knowledge as a tool to dismantle the dominant culture and systems that are destroying our communities, ecosystems and our one and only home: this planet.

So we should see that just energy transition is not only about changing the source of energy we use. It is about transforming our way of life, moving toward a regenerative, resilient, and biocentric society that recognizes the interconnectedness of people, communities and each organism in the living world.

Reference:
Awarded Biomass Projects: https://legacy.doe.gov.ph/renewable-energy/awardedbiomass
Awarded Geothermal Projects: https://legacy.doe.gov.ph/renewable-energy/awardedgeothermal
Awarded Hydropower Projects:https://legacy.doe.gov.ph/renewable-energy/awardedhydropower
Awarded Ocean Energy Projects: https://legacy.doe.gov.ph/renewable-energy/awardedocean
Awarded Solar Projects: https://legacy.doe.gov.ph/renewable-energy/awardedsolar
Awarded Wind Projects: https://legacy.doe.gov.ph/renewable-energy/awardedwind
MTerra Solar:
https://www.terra-solar.com.ph/mterra-solar-phase-1-begins-commercial-operations/
Flood in the Philippines:
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2092143/list-flooded-roads-in-metro-manila-on-august-6
Mining in the Philippines:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/01/philippines-nickel-mining-projects-appr oved-despite-inadequate-consultation-and-serious-risks-to-communities-health-and-environment/
Palawan & Zambales:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa35/8607/2024/en/
Indonesia:
https://www.wri.org/technical-perspectives/nickels-climate-cost-and-indonesias-push-cleaner-production
Democratic Republic of the Congo – Lualaba/Kolwezi:
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/latest/dr-congo-huge-expansion-cobalt-and-copper-mining-wrecking-lives-new-report/
Chile and Argentina:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.24356
Pax Silica Initiative:
https://boi.gov.ph/discussion-on-pax-silica-and-the-ai-native-industrial-acceleration-hub/ https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1273139 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/WHOSTP-2025-Wins.pdf

Author: Jassim Guila
Blue Earth Defense / Mutual Aid Disaster Relief – Search and Rescue September 2026
Contact: jassimbed@protonmail.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EM-A1uvArs&t=149s

Photo: An open pit nickel mine in Palawan, Philippines. Source: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/01/philippines-nickel-mining-projects -approved-despite-inadequate-consultation-and-serious-risks-to-communities-heal th-and-environment/