Place-based approaches to renewable energy transitions tailor solutions to specific social, cultural, economic and ecological contexts inherent to particular localities.

Drawing on transformative energy justice frameworks and approaches, we argue that place-based framings and interpretations of impacts of community renewable energy projects provide the means to centre Indigenous worldviews, observations and experiences of justice associated with these projects.

This co-created study draws on interviews with knowledge holders in 14 First Nations across the Province of British Columbia (BC), Canada.

Interview participants shared experiences and observations on both the process (community engagement) and outcome (impacts and benefits) dimensions of 36 operational and planned renewable energy projects, pointing to a rich diversity of social, political, material, economic, ecological and relational impacts.

Across a wide range of project sizes and technologies, the findings indicate that deep community engagement and the collective decisions for allocation of revenues mediate the positive and transformative impacts experienced by the community.

Taken collectively, these findings show that First Nations approaches to developing projects are place-based, ensuring a wide range of impacts to the community that can collectively contribute to transformative change.

In the broader context of systematic neglect of social, environmental and justice-oriented values in public policy making, and amidst widespread failure of ‘decide-announce-defend’ approaches to achieving social acceptance for renewable energy projects, this study demonstrates what distinguishes place-based approaches in practice, and how they deliver transformative outcomes for First Nations.

Policy, project and resource allocation decisions should reflect the diverse impacts and transformative outcomes of renewable energy projects in First Nations contexts.

We conclude that embedding place-based approaches in institutional arrangements, policy and project design is critical to providing economic opportunities to First Nations without discrimination under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, alongside meeting BC’s power needs and decarbonisation goals.

Authors: Christina E Hoicka, Anna Berka, Sara Chitsaz, Kayla Klym, Adam Regier and Megan Macdonald, Impacts and place-based approaches to transformative energy justice for First Nations, 17 February 2026, IOP Publishing Ltd, Environmental Research: Energy, Volume 3, Number 1

Read the paper

First Nations co-ownership of renewable energy projects is increasingly proposed as a tangible pathway towards economic reconciliation, enabling communities to assert sovereignty over their lands and land use decision-making.

This is despite limited empirical understanding of the value of First Nations co-ownership, how and where it exists, and what its on-the-ground influence may be in advancing First Nations self-determination and economic resilience.

To address this gap, this paper offers a first-of-its-kind foundational, evidence-based knowledge of the state of play on First Nations co-ownership of large renewable energy projects.

We present an original dataset, comprising 61 projects carefully curated to establish a much-needed global baseline on the spatial and temporal trends and patterns across technology, project size, development stage and equity share.

Overall, we find evidence of growth in the number of renewable energy projects with First Nations equity over the last three decades across four jurisdictions.

Most projects in Canada (mainly wind) and New Zealand (geothermal) are operational, while many in Australia (mostly solar) and the US (transmission) are in the planning stages.

First Nations equity shares range from 3.2% to full ownership, with minority ownership the most prevalent.

Authors: Vigya Sharma, Julia Loginova, How are Indigenous groups participating in large renewable energy project co-ownership? Mapping global progress, Energy Research & Social Science, Volume 132, 2026, 104557, ISSN 2214-6296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2026.104557.

Access the paper

Australian First Nations households and communities accessing electricity through prepayment arrangements experience extremely high levels of energy insecurity. In many cases, there is an absence of consumer protections, financial hardship assistance, or debt and disconnection relief. Until recently, these arrangements have largely avoided scrutiny.

While awareness of prepayment for electricity has improved, our research is the first national project to shine a spotlight on the previously hidden experiences of First Nations households using prepayment. The research incorporates household surveys and household-level energy use data to show that frequent disconnections are impacting food security, health, wellbeing and economic participation for First Nations prepayment customers.

Australia is entering a new era of energy-driven economic development, powered by the potential of lower cost renewables. The consent for access to First Nations’ extensive land and sea estates will be needed. It is incumbent on leaders and policymakers to recognise those same communities remain at risk of being left behind; underserved by policy and regulation to pursue opportunities that would secure their own energy futures.

To overcome these structural disadvantages Australian governments must be guided by existing frameworks, including the First Nations Clean Energy Strategy and Closing the Gap targets, and take action to ensure regulators and energy retailers work together to improve the experiences of First Nations people across all key reform areas.

There is considerable scope and opportunity for existing processes to include prepayment customers, and to bring regulation, reporting requirements and policy responses for prepayment customers in line with National Energy Market rules and regulatory standards.

Energy is an essential service that must be accessible by all, regardless of billing arrangements, location or income level. This can be achieved through the application of a nationally consistent consumer protection framework and guaranteed service levels for all customer groups.

The overarching goal of this research and associated proposals for prepayment reform is to keep First Nations people connected to power. This is consistent with wider recognition of energy as an essential service and that no- one should be disconnected due to inability to afford the energy they need.

Cite: Original Power and the prepay research team (2025) The Right to Power - Keeping First Nations communities on prepayment connected. Melbourne, Australia.

Read the report

A new Network project in South Australia aims to ensure clean energy solutions are designed with communities – strengthening local leadership, improving supply resilience, and supporting self-determination in the energy transition. 

Australia’s energy transition offers an opportunity for cooperation and mutual financial benefit for investors and First Nations groups.

First Nations people, communities and groups are increasingly looking to co-design, lead and partner or own renewable energy systems. 

It is estimated that 43% of all clean energy infrastructure required to get Australia to net zero emissions by 2060 will be sited in regional and remote areas where First Nations groups and communities have rights, interests and aspirations.

Even outside these areas, First Nations groups are rights-holders and represent an integral stakeholder in Australia’s clean energy transition and have the potential to play a significant role in clean energy projects. 

International case studies and interviews with project developers and First Nations groups in Australia who have partnered on projects indicate that in addition to creating fairer energy systems, there are quantitative benefits of increased First Nations participation and inclusion across the clean energy project life-cycle.

The five significant benefits identified by this research and consultation include: 

1. Quicker project development cycle: First Nations support for clean energy projects can decrease the time taken for projects to progress through the development cycle. The development cycle is accelerated because of broader community support and prioritisation by council and planning authorities. Planning prioritisation can occur because the project has a broader community benefit and is aligned with government policy to support First Nations groups.
2. Greater access to, and potentially lower cost of, capital: Two reasons were identified for the lowering of capital costs. First, socially responsible projects, and projects that provide a demonstrable social benefit, attract broader pools of capital. Capital providers indicated that they would prioritise projects delivering broader benefit to First Nations groups over projects that simply met basic legal and planning requirements. Second, First Nations participation can result in a decreased risk profile due to the faster access to land and other components of the development cycle, resulting in greater likelihood of obtaining capital.
3. Access to, and preference amongst, offtake parties: The markets for offtake are highly competitive. Offtakers’ energy supply tenders often include First Nations involvement as a requirement or preference for clean energy projects from which energy will be purchased. Projects with greater levels of First Nations participation are more highly regarded by offtakers. 
4. Secondary market premium valuation: As a result of the benefits identified above, clean energy projects with significant First Nations participation are of higher value in the secondary market.
5. Local workforce benefits: For projects in regional and remote locations, partnering with local First Nations groups provides the opportunity for a relationship with a local workforce. These projects have the ability to optimise construction, operation and management costs by employing a local workforce and engaging with local First Nations-owned businesses. In addition to reducing costs in the construction and operation stages, local employment elevates the profile of projects, increasing attractiveness and potential for support from government programs and schemes.

Despite these benefits, investor backing of First Nations participation and inclusion in clean energy projects is currently low. For example, there are currently no operational clean energy projects in Australia with First Nations equity participation. 

Investors in clean energy projects in Australia are currently missing out on the additional value and broader economic benefits that partnering with First Nations groups can bring.

By harnessing the cultural knowledge, experience and political impact of First Nations groups, and incentivising success of the project, First Nations participation and partnership can assist project developers to realise these benefits.

Download the report

Inequalities in income, housing, and health between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians are well documented, yet differences in energy outcomes remain understudied.

While prior research has largely focused on remote areas or specific aspects, this paper provides the first national-level analysis of Indigenous households’ experiences in the energy market, measuring the existence, scale, and structural drivers of energy inequality.

Two indicators are examined: difficulties in paying energy bills on time and self-reported inability to heat homes adequately.

Across two decades and independent datasets, Indigenous households are 9–10 percentage points more likely to experience energy stress, a difference that persists after accounting for income.

Wealth emerges as the strongest explanatory factor, with housing tenure, education, and financial resilience also contributing substantially.

Objective measures—arrears, disconnections, and hardship program participation—account for around 43% of the observed gap and provide practical means of identifying households at risk of energy stress.

Energy stress is highly persistent, with households that had prior bill payment difficulties 47 percentage points more likely to encounter similar challenges again in 2023.

These findings show that energy inequality is not merely a matter of short-term affordability but reflects deeper structural dimensions of economic inequality.

Policies centred on income support alone are unlikely to eliminate these disparities. Access to modest emergency funds of only a few thousand dollars reduces the observed gap by about 73%, highlighting the potential of targeted, government-backed assistance to strengthen household resilience and prevent disconnections.

Authors: Rohan Best & Duygu Yengin & Andrew Taylor & Maneka Jayasinghe & Ruth Wallace, 2025. "Energy Inequality for Indigenous Australians: Evidence on Structural Drivers Across Two Decades," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2025-06 Classification-., University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.

Read the report

Exploring the impacts of offshore development on First Nations’ cultural heritage, this article proposes integration of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), into the regulatory and legislative offshore environment.

In the Australian context, this particularly regards administrative and regulatory reforms to overcome uncertainty arising from recent decisions in the Federal Court.

The international focus on new energy has fast-tracked many processes that sideline First Nations’ rights, hitherto understood within the onshore minerals extraction regimes.

The reforms proposed in this article recognise an international commitment to enact the principles contained in the UNDRIP and other relevant international law.

Authors: Hoskins, R.; Ogilvie, G.; Storey, M.; Hill, A. Why Are Cultural Rights over Sea Country Less Recognised than Terrestrial Ones? Heritage 2025, 8, 283. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/heritage8070283

Read the report

Thanks for use of the photo by Maël BALLAND on Unsplash

Indigenous communities across Canada continue to maintain significant influence on the long-term trajectory of that nation's clean energy transition.

Whether it is merchant transmission lines in Ontario or new large-scale hydroelectric generation in British Columbia, communities are adopting their own financing approaches to support Indigenous financial inclusion.

Some of these strategies are long-running, while others demonstrate novelty.

All approaches aim to develop financial and energy sovereignty.

In this co-produced paper (jointly prepared by Indigenous and non-Indigenous practitioners and academics), we synthesise select locally-rooted structures already in use – including many leveraged through extended experiences in both the energy transition generally and the national or community-based Indigenous economic development & energy and infrastructure units specifically.

We then spotlight national clean technology financing-supportive organisations that can help with maintaining momentum and reaching scale.

To conclude, we offer distinct areas where Indigenous communities and non-Indigenous partners can continue to creatively collaborate at every stage of the energy finance lifecycle – from very early-stage innovation all the way through to later stage refinancing of maturing assets.

The Canada-centric case study presented here may present implications and insights for other countries or territories seeking to empower Indigenous voices in their own energy transition.

Authors: Joel Krupa, Frank Busch, Derek Gladwin, Naoko Ellis, Financing clean technologies within Canada's Indigenous communities: Perspectives on sustainable energy transition from practitioners and academics, Energy, Volume 322, 2025, 134930, ISSN 0360-5442, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.134930. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544225005729)

Read paper

This study offers insights from a unique case of meso-level collective action by First Nations in British Columbia, Canada, aimed at transformative electricity institutional change.

We collate regulatory and advocacy text to characterise the range of proposed First Nation Power Authority models and their placement along a continuum of conformative to transformative energy justice.

Interviews with knowledge holders from 14 First Nations offer insight into motivations behind transformative change and how it is shaped by historical injustice alongside practical community objectives around energy security, resilience, and community development.

First Nations narratives of electricity transformation are aligned with the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP) and with goals of self-determination and incorporate relational and regional approaches.

These findings validate theoretical frameworks of transformational energy justice (Avelino et al., 2024; Elmallah et al., 2022).

Much of the groundwork has been laid by the collective and the regulator, while new legislation has opened a window of opportunity to increase Indigenous participation and control in the electricity sector.

Authors: Christina E. Hoicka, Adam Regier, Anna L. Berka, Sara Chitsaz, Kayla Klym, “Stretch and transform” for energy justice: Indigenous advocacy for institutional transformative change of electricity in British Columbia, Canada, Energy Policy, Volume 202, 2025

Read the report

Community benefit agreements (CBAs) negotiated in Canada are legally binding through contract law and set out obligations for project developers and local communities.

Also referred to as impact and benefit agreements, CBAs are common resource governance tools that are negotiated across the globe between private project developers and local, often Indigenous, communities whose land must be accessed or disturbed for major extractive resource projects.

According to the literature, CBAs have the potential to help facilitate economic and social development of Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities by providing revenue benefits, employment and training opportunities, contracting opportunities for local businesses, new community infrastructure, and impact mitigation measures.

Although CBAs are only legally required in certain regions in northern Canada in accordance with lands claim agreements, CBAs are negotiated for virtually every major extractive resource project developed in Canada and are becoming increasingly common all around the world.

Some attribute the prevalence of CBAs to private developers recognizing the right of communities to free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) as affirmed by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) while others attribute the prevalence of CBAs to project developers managing social risk and attempting to satisfy consultation and accommodation requirements to obtain approval.

While this paper's case focus is on the Canadian North, the authors hope that the theoretically-informed study finds resonance with other jurisdictions host to CBAs.

Authors: Cameron Gunton, Eric Werker, Mark A. Moore and Sean Markey, Simon Fraser University, Canada

Read the paper

Thanks for use of the photo by Jonny Rothwell