Can Civic Participation Deliver Fair Energy Transitions in Nigeria and South Africa?

The report finds that energy transitions in Nigeria and South Africa can only be truly “just” if public participation moves beyond token consultation to real influence over decisions, power, and resources. While South Africa has made more progress than Nigeria in inclusive planning, both countries still struggle to translate participation into fair outcomes without sustained co-production between governments and citizens.

Produced by the UNDP Global Policy Centre for Governance in collaboration with UNDP offices in Nigeria and South Africa, and funded by the Ford Foundation, this report explores a central question facing climate policy today: can public participation actually deliver fairer, more just energy transitions? Using Nigeria and South Africa as case studies, the report argues that shifting from fossil fuels to cleaner energy is not just a technical challenge, but a deeply social and political one. Energy decisions impact jobs, land, prices, health, and livelihoods, and without meaningful public involvement, transitions risk reinforcing existing inequalities rather than addressing them.

The report starts from a broad idea of justice. It states that a “just energy transition” is not only about sharing economic benefits and costs fairly, but also about who gets a voice in decision-making and whose experiences and histories are recognized. Participation, therefore, is not a side issue; it is central to whether energy transitions are seen as legitimate and whether people support them.

How the Study Looks at Participation and Justice

To understand how participation works in practice, the researchers developed a three-step framework. First, they examined the formal institutions that governments use to involve citizens and non-state actors in energy planning. Second, they looked at how these institutions actually function in reality, identifying gaps between official rules and lived experience. Third, they assessed whether public demands for justice are reflected in national energy transition plans.

The study draws on policy documents, laws, and academic research, as well as interviews with government officials, civil society groups, community representatives, labour unions, and experts. Rather than imposing a fixed definition of justice, the report centres on what different groups themselves say a “just transition” should mean in their own contexts.

Nigeria: Ambitious Plans, Limited Inclusion

Nigeria’s Energy Transition Plan sets out a pathway to net-zero emissions by 2060, backed by a massive investment vision of nearly USD 1.9 trillion. On paper, the plan signals progress, with references to consultation and inclusive governance. In practice, however, participation has been narrow.

The report finds that energy planning in Nigeria has been dominated by federal officials, technical experts, and international consultants. Civil society organisations, women, youth, and especially communities in oil-producing regions have had limited influence. Consultations have often taken place after key decisions were made and have focused more on informing participants than listening to them.

As a result, Nigeria’s approach is described as a “Strategic Policy Circle,” where a small group shapes policy. While the plan addresses some economic issues, such as expanding renewable energy and protecting natural gas as a transition fuel, it largely neglects procedural justice and recognition. Longstanding demands for environmental clean-up in the Niger Delta, permanent platforms for public engagement, transparent financing, and benefit-sharing for host communities remain weakly addressed.

South Africa: Broader Participation, Ongoing Challenges

South Africa’s energy transition takes place in a very different historical context, shaped by apartheid-era inequality and heavy reliance on coal. Recognising this, the government has explicitly framed its transition as “just,” embedding social justice principles in climate and energy policy.

The Presidential Climate Commission plays a central role. It brings together government, business, labour unions, civil society, youth, academics, and traditional leaders, and led wide-ranging consultations to develop the Just Energy Transition Investment Plan. Compared to Nigeria, participation has been broader and more visible, earning South Africa the label of an “Open Policy Lab.”

However, the report also highlights limitations. Well-organised and well-resourced actors, such as major unions and industry groups, have more influence than poorer communities, informal workers, women, and youth. Participation is strongest during planning, but weakens during implementation and monitoring. Even so, South Africa’s plan reflects a wider set of public demands, including action on energy poverty, skills development, and gender inclusion.

From Participation to Co-Production

The report concludes that participation alone is not enough. Laws, councils, and consultations matter, but they do not automatically lead to justice. Informal factors such as power imbalances, trust, political will, and access to information often determine whose voices truly count.

To address this, the authors call for a shift toward “co-production.” This means governments and citizens working together throughout the entire policy cycle, from planning to implementation and oversight. Co-production can help democratise knowledge, reduce inequality, strengthen accountability, and build public trust. Without it, just energy transitions risk remaining promises on paper rather than realities experienced by people on the ground.