All but one of South Africa’s nine provinces, including coal-dependent Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, and Free State, have limited or no plans to support communities and local workers through a green transition, meaning poorer groups could be left behind, new analysis has shown.
South Africa was the first country to sign a multi-billion-dollar Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) with rich countries in 2021, aimed at supporting an economy-wide transition away from coal towards clean energy in a way that supports communities and workers who now rely on the fossil fuel industry as well as women, youth and children.
That makes the country a point of reference for how to achieve a green transition that is socially and economically fair. So far it has created a national just energy transition investment plan, signed its Climate Change Act into law, and launched a just energy transition funding platform to connect grant funders with projects to help workers acquire new skills or develop communities in innovative ways.
But a new report by international research group Net Zero Tracker and South South North, a South Africa-based non-profit, said eight provinces — Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng, Free State, Limpopo, Northern Cape, Eastern Cape and North West — are lagging behind on just transition in their local climate plans despite coal dependence in some provinces as well as high unemployment in the others.
The analysis – which reviewed 32 government entities at national, provincial and city level, plus 18 major corporations in South Africa – highlighted significant opportunities to support poorer regions that are reliant on coal production and coal power and those least-prepared to deal with a shift away from high-carbon energy.
The rich province of Western Cape was the only one leading in climate action, with a comprehensive net zero target and extensive just transition considerations integrated into regional policies. Other regions that either have net zero or emissions reduction targets are KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, and Gauteng despite lagging in just transition.
Out of the 11 cities reviewed in the analysis, only the two biggest – Cape Town and Johannesburg – had robust just transition considerations. The others were found to have minimal or no just transition focus.
The researchers said there is a need for more structured plans in coal-reliant provinces especially to support workers at mines and power plants fired by the polluting fuel.
Blessing Manale, acting executive director of South Africa’s Presidential Climate Commission (PCC), told Climate Home “there is a disjoint between national and local policies “, despite the country’s strong climate commitments and its aim to ensure that the risks and opportunities in the transition are “equitably shared”, with affected workers able to pursue sustainable livelihoods in the future.
Samson Mbewe, the paper’s lead author from South South North, told Climate Home that “without such integration, poorer provinces risk being excluded from the socio-economic benefits of decarbonisation, exacerbating existing inequalities.”
In a 2023 Climate Home article, coal workers in Ermelo, a community in Mpumalanga, said they felt left out of the country’s energy transition. With 80% of the community’s 80,000 residents employed by state-owned energy and transport companies, residents fear their livelihoods will be gone when the Camden coal power station in the area goes offline by 2030.
Mbewe said Mpumalanga faces a significant risk of job losses and community destabilisation without robust just transition measures to help workers find new sources of income, such as retraining, social support and investment in alternative industries. “Women and informal workers in these regions are particularly vulnerable, as they often lack access to social safety nets and alternative employment opportunities,” he said.
Local governments struggling
Manale of the Presidential Climate Commission said climate action in South Africa is “stymied by governance, resource and capacity issues” that impact the state in general. But, he added, local government authorities face the biggest challenges in implementing effective climate policies, including “capacity constraints, corruption and structural failures, variable political-will and mixed messaging”, as set out in a report by his body on the state of climate action.
There is a need to bolster political will across government tiers, as well as “aligning local initiatives with national directives” to improve climate responses, he added. Stronger monitoring, evaluation and learning processes could help track the effectiveness of policy implementation and its contribution to achieving climate and just transition goals, he suggested.
He called for investment in, and commitment to, a just transition – including at the local level – to ensure that South Africa’s decarbonisation and adaptation goals are met.
“Local governments must appreciate the circumstances of people who are most vulnerable to climate change and ensure that their needs and aspirations are factored into decision-making guided by the principles of equity and redress and sustainability,” Manale said.
Operating coal mines, with bigger circles meaning bigger mines (Screenshot/Global Energy Monitor)
The new report also found that the climate plans of some global brands – including Apple, Amazon and Google as well as some automakers – in South Africa show limited engagement with just transition commitments, especially with having specific plans to support communities and vulnerable groups.
Mbewe said the three tech giants did not reference just transition principles in their Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) frameworks and “their strategies lack plans for supporting local communities”. These multinationals “often overlook the critical role they play in fostering equitable transitions within host countries”, he added.
The oversight may be because multinationals headquartered in developed countries tend to follow their parent-company climate policies without adapting them for the different regions they work in or taking into account “key considerations” such as tackling poverty or advancing sustainable development in a way that reduces inequality in the Global South, Mbewe said.
Camilla Hyslop, data lead at Net Zero Tracker, said the fact that corporate plans “lack detail on how they will work on the ground here in South Africa” sometimes results in companies entirely overlooking the need for a low-carbon transition – “just or otherwise”.
Brazil appoints veteran climate diplomat André Corrêa do Lago as COP30 president
Amazon spokesperson Margaret Callahan disagreed with the analysis in the report, telling Climate Home the e-commerce company is engaging in just transition work across South Africa. Ongoing projects include community water replenishment, an Amazon Web Services Skills Center in the country, and financial support for South African companies via a “Climate Gender Equity Fund” launched in partnership with the U.S. Agency for International Development.
“This report omits these projects and is not an accurate depiction of our work in the region,” Callahan added.
Apple and Google did not respond to a request for comment.
Manale of the PCC said some companies may be neglecting just transition in their plans because “at present South Africa does not have any mandatory ESG standards, nor are there regulations”. However, a sustainability disclosures module was introduced in 2024 that allows companies to “voluntarily” report sustainability data according to international standards, he noted.
Mbewe called for better coordination to ensure that foreign firms align with South African climate policies, as well as a stronger focus on multinationals’ just transition principles requiring them to consult more broadly and disclose their resulting strategies and commitments.
(Reporting by Vivian Chime; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post Coal-reliant South African provinces falling behind on just transition appeared first on Climate Home News.
Coal-reliant South African provinces falling behind on just transition
Climate Change
A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won
The case shows that climate change is a fundamental human rights violation—and the victory of Bonaire, a Dutch territory, could open the door for similar lawsuits globally.
From our collaborating partner Living on Earth, public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by Paloma Beltran with Greenpeace Netherlands campaigner Eefje de Kroon.
A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won
Climate Change
Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit
SYDNEY, Saturday 28 February 2026 — Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US announce they will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court following a North Dakota District Court judgment today awarding Energy Transfer (ET) USD $345 million.

ET’s SLAPP suit remains a blatant attempt to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Greenpeace International will also continue to seek damages for ET’s bullying lawsuits under EU anti-SLAPP legislation in the Netherlands.
Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International Executive Director said: “Energy Transfer’s attempts to silence us are failing. Greenpeace International will continue to resist intimidation tactics. We will not be silenced. We will only get louder, joining our voices to those of our allies all around the world against the corporate polluters and billionaire oligarchs who prioritise profits over people and the planet.
“With hard-won freedoms under threat and the climate crisis accelerating, the stakes of this legal fight couldn’t be higher. Through appeals in the US and Greenpeace International’s groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, we are exploring every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for multiple abusive lawsuits and show all power-hungry bullies that their attacks will only result in a stronger people-powered movement.”
The Court’s final judgment today rejects some of the jury verdict delivered in March 2025, but still awards hundreds of millions of dollars to ET without a sound basis in law. The Greenpeace defendants will continue to press their arguments that the US Constitution does not allow liability here, that ET did not present evidence to support its claims, that the Court admitted inflammatory and irrelevant evidence at trial and excluded other evidence supporting the defense, and that the jury pool in Mandan could not be impartial.[1][2]
ET’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the US organisations Greenpeace USA (Greenpeace Inc.) and Greenpeace Fund are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent.[3] Greenpeace International, which is based in the Netherlands, is pursuing justice in Europe, with a suit against ET under Dutch law and the European Union’s new anti-SLAPP directive, a landmark test of the new legislation which could help set a powerful precedent against corporate bullying.[4]
Kate Smolski, Program Director at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This is part of a worrying trend globally: fossil fuel corporations are increasingly using litigation to attack and silence ordinary people and groups using the law to challenge their polluting operations — and we’re not immune to these tactics here in Australia.
“Rulings like this have a chilling effect on democracy and public interest litigation — we must unite against these silencing tactics as bad for Australians and bad for our democracy. Our movement is stronger than any corporate bully, and grows even stronger when under attack.”
Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years.[3] A couple of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024.
-ENDS-
Images available in Greenpeace Media Library
Notes:
[1] The judgment entered by North Dakota District Court Judge Gion follows a jury verdict finding Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million on March 19, 2025. Judge Gion subsequently threw out several items from the jury’s verdict, reducing the total damages to approximately US$345 million.
[2] Public statements from the independent Trial Monitoring Committee
[3] Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.
[4] Greenpeace International sent a Notice of Liability to Energy Transfer on 23 July 2024, informing the pipeline giant of Greenpeace International’s intention to bring an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against the company in a Dutch Court. After Energy Transfer declined to accept liability on multiple occasions (September 2024, December 2024), Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive on 11 February 2025 by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. The case was officially registered in the docket of the Court of Amsterdam on 2 July, 2025. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, abusive lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. The next hearing in the Court of Amsterdam is scheduled for 16 April, 2026.
Media contact:
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Climate Change
Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump
The Trump administration’s relentless rollback of public health and environmental protections has allowed widespread toxic exposures to flourish, warn experts who helped implement safeguards now under assault.
In a new report that outlines a dozen high-risk pollutants given new life thanks to weakened, delayed or rescinded regulations, the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group of hundreds of former Environmental Protection Agency staff, warns that the EPA under President Donald Trump has abandoned the agency’s core mission of protecting people and the environment from preventable toxic exposures.
Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
