Research

Research on energy transition politics has paid relatively little attention to the role of labor unions. Labor unions, especially in the fossil fuel industry, are assumed to align with utilities and fossil fuel industries in rejecting the energy transition, since these incumbent actors provide union jobs. However, as evidenced in some U.S. states, labor-environment collaboration can happen during clean energy policymaking, leading to legislation that jointly represents both labor and environmental justice concerns. This paper compares labor-environment interactions during clean energy policymaking in Illinois and New York, states with similar labor and environmental groups but divergent legislative outcomes. In Illinois, labor and environment groups collaborated on comprehensive energy legislation with multiple justice provisions, the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act (CEJA). In New York, such collaboration did not emerge, and the resulting climate and clean energy policy failed to address labor groups’ justice concerns. We examine what factors explain collaboration between labor and environment groups during policy-making for justice in the energy transition. We find that supportive gubernatorial leadership, coalitional resources, and structural dependencies such as the energy mix can foster fossil fuel labor and environment collaboration, especially over just transition provisions. Our analysis provides evidence to challenge existing literature that views labor as an incumbent contributing to a more nuanced understanding of interest group behaviour in the energy transition. Additionally, our findings also create actionable insights for environment and labor groups on how the two can collaborate strategically to develop more support for an energy transition that addresses both their justice needs. 

Electric vehicles (EVs) play a crucial role in mitigating climate change but despite their importance, EVs are increasingly criticized for negative impacts associated with the production of their batteries. Batteries contain critical minerals, and mining for these minerals has created environmental and human rights issues (RAID, 2021). In response, technological solutions that are costly to implement have started to emerge, raising the question of who should bear the costs of implementing these solutions and how policies enforcing these solutions should be designed (OECD, 2021). 

Some recent research that explores these questions assumes that if EV consumers are aware of these concerns and demand EVs that are sustainably produced (i.e., without negative impacts), automakers and battery manufacturers will readily change their production processes (Cao et al., 2023; Zhao et al., 2025). However, none of this work directly examines EV consumers. I address this gap by examining the relationship between EV consumers and the negative impacts associated with EV production. Using a survey of 500 US recent EV buyers and a discrete choice experiment (DCE), I thus answer the following research questions: a) What is EV consumers’ awareness about the negative impacts of mining for EV batteries, and b) how much are they willing to pay for EVs with batteries that contain sustainably sourced critical minerals? 

The energy transition is expected to create a sixfold increase in demand for critical minerals by 2040 (IEA, 2021). If left unaddressed, this increase in demand will lead to a corresponding impact on mining communities and threaten a consistent supply of critical minerals necessary for an uninterrupted energy transition (Barbanell, 2023). Thus, this research addresses this urgent concern by providing empirical insights about EV consumers’ role in sustainable EV supply chains, informing policy solutions and cost-sharing mechanisms to encourage sustainable EV production.