False benevolence of climate justice — billions for COP, crumbs for communities

The climate justice industry perpetuates historical inequalities by sidelining surrounding communities from decision-making and economic benefits. As COP conferences convene in Antalya, Türkiye, marginalized residents of Theunissen, South Africa's Free State, remain marginalized and excluded. The international system mobilizes billions to address the suffering of these communities while failing to grant them meaningful power over developments near their homes.

While global gatherings discuss inclusion, participation, and leaving no one behind, surrounding communities in places like Theunissen face persistent poverty and exclusion. They struggle to secure influence over renewable energy projects, despite the transition being celebrated at climate conferences. The Sonvanger Solar Power Plant near Theunissen exemplifies this contradiction, with communities demanding community development agreements for transparent decision-making and benefit sharing.

However, the project's commitment to community participation and inclusive decision-making remains an elusive promise. The private, commercial nature of the project seems to exempt it from the community-benefit requirements applicable to government-funded projects. This raises a troubling question: does justice cease to be relevant when renewable energy benefits private commercial customers instead of engaging in government procurement programmes?

The consequences of this "false benevolence economy" are evident in South Africa's Just Energy Transition—a narrative where investment thrives, infrastructure expands, and profits accumulate, while surrounding communities engage in negotiations for minimal benefits from economic activity taking place in their midst. The technology may change from mining to solar generation, but the underlying power distribution remains alarmingly familiar.

The annual COP spectacle, where climate justice advocates travel across continents ostensibly to defend marginalized communities' interests, becomes increasingly difficult to ignore. These advocates attend panels on community empowerment, participate in dialogues on inclusive transitions, and return with renewed declarations about grassroots participation. Yet, their accountability and the true impact of mobilized funding remain questionable.

The modern development industry has successfully promoted the idea that consultation, even when divorced from meaningful power transfer, can produce more just outcomes. Endless funding is spent on stakeholder mapping, community dialogues, participatory assessments, capacity building, social safeguards, and consultation frameworks. Consultants are hired, workshops are convened, reports are produced, and communities are invited to explain their suffering to institutions that have already determined their future boundaries.