Reframing Just Transition: Why Nigeria and Africa Demand Inclusion, Equity, and Action at the Bonn Climate Talks

Bonn

As delegates gather in Bonn, Germany, for the 62nd session of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Subsidiary Bodies (SB 62), the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has strongly urged global negotiators not to dilute the foundational goals of the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP). Through a statement released by Comrade Echezona Asuzu, National Coordinator of the NLC’s Climate Change, Green Jobs and Just Transition Programme, the NLC reminded the global community that a genuine Just Transition must prioritize decent work, protect labour rights, and guarantee fair compensation and support for workers affected by environmental damage or job displacement.

The NLC’s position reflects the broader anxieties of the Global South, especially African nations, that climate negotiations risk becoming rhetorical exercises unless they are grounded in equity, social justice, and practical implementation tools. The message to the world is clear: a Just Transition must not be stripped of its soul.

The Bonn Conference and the Road to COP30

SB 62, which runs from June 16 to 26, 2025, serves as a crucial technical and strategic prelude to COP30, the landmark global climate summit scheduled to hold in Belém, Brazil later this year. While much of the focus has been on shaping the scope and architecture of the JTWP, the first week of negotiations has already revealed deep divisions between developed and developing countries over how Just Transition should be defined, implemented, and funded.

For background, the concept of a Just Transition gained significant traction during COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt in 2022. Alongside the historic establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund, aimed at compensating vulnerable countries for the irreversible effects of climate change, the Just Transition Work Programme was launched to ensure the decarbonisation process protects and empowers workers, families, and communities, particularly in fossil fuel-dependent economies.

By COP28 in Dubai, the JTWP had been formally adopted, with a vision to integrate social safeguards, promote decent work, and deliver climate actions aligned with the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” (CBDR-RC). This core principle acknowledges that while climate change is a shared threat, not all countries have equal historical responsibility or capacity to respond.

Africa’s Broader Vision for Just Transition

At SB62, African countries have united around a bold, inclusive interpretation of Just Transition—one that extends beyond energy policy to encompass job creation, poverty reduction, education, and social protections. Represented through blocs like the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), the G77+China, and the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), African voices have emphasized that Just Transition must be a socio-economic transformation, not merely a technocratic energy transition.

Specifically, African negotiators are advocating for:

  • A Global Just Transition Framework, as proposed by the AGN, to guide implementation, facilitate knowledge sharing, and match transition needs with adequate financing and technical support.

  • Targeted support mechanisms to address Africa’s unique vulnerabilities—such as energy poverty, informal economies, and debt burdens—especially among LDCs.

  • Worker inclusion, echoing the NLC’s demand that trade unions, labour organizations, and affected communities must be at the heart of decision-making.

In sharp contrast, developed nations, especially members of the European Union and the UK, have narrowly framed Just Transition as a tool for advancing mitigation goals—particularly the 1.5°C climate threshold—often without committing to the systemic financial support or institutional infrastructure that vulnerable countries need.

The Working Class and Climate Justice

The NLC’s statement powerfully contextualizes Just Transition as a product of decades-long advocacy by global workers’ federations and organized civil society. It cites the Paris Agreement’s 10th preambular paragraph, which explicitly recognizes “the imperatives of a just transition of the workforce and the creation of decent work and quality jobs.”

Yet, as the negotiations in Bonn reveal, many of the same worker-centered principles are now being sidelined. At a time when climate change is already displacing jobs, threatening food security, and straining energy systems, omitting workers and trade unions from the JTWP architecture risks undermining the very populations most affected by the climate crisis.

This concern is echoed by Teresa Anderson, ActionAid’s global lead on climate justice. She notes that while there is momentum around Just Transition, the lack of real financial commitment from rich nations leaves poorer countries paying the price for environmental damage they did not cause.

“Instead of being in conflict with people’s daily needs,” Anderson asserts, “Just Transition should deliver job security, affordable food, and energy access.”

Climate Justice Requires More Than Rhetoric

The first week of SB62 has been shaped by debates over scope, responsibility, and institutional design. Developed nations have hesitated to commit to grant-based financing or formal institutional mechanisms. Meanwhile, the Global South—particularly Africa—is demanding that words be matched with action.

Nigeria, through the NLC, is pushing this conversation even further. It is not enough to talk about just transition as a theory; there must be clear strategies to mainstream labour issues, safeguard workers, and rebuild livelihoods. These include:

  • Reskilling and retraining for workers in carbon-intensive sectors.

  • Blended financing options with single-digit interest rates for just transition projects.

  • Compensation for workplace pollution and climate-related damages.

  • Inclusion of unions and civil society in policy development and implementation.

The NLC warns that to fail in this regard is to indulge in greenwashing—superficial climate action without genuine commitment to justice, fairness, and shared prosperity.

Nigeria’s Opportunity and Responsibility

Nigeria, as Africa’s most populous nation and one of its largest economies, holds a unique position. We face both immense risks and transformative opportunities in the climate transition. With millions of jobs linked to oil and gas, agriculture, and informal work, a haphazard or externally-imposed transition would be devastating. However, a people-centred, well-planned transition could lift millions out of poverty, stimulate innovation, and build long-term resilience.

But this requires strong leadership—at home and abroad. Nigeria must:

  • Continue aligning with other African states to demand a comprehensive, well-financed JTWP.

  • Elevate labour unions and civil society in national climate policy-making.

  • Push for language in climate treaties that protects workers and communities.

  • Ensure that the 2030 transition goals are accompanied by job creation, not job losses.

Looking Ahead to COP30

As the world prepares for COP30 in Brazil, the outcomes of SB62 will shape whether that summit results in real progress—or more delays. The time for vague pledges is over. The climate emergency is no longer abstract. For the Global South, climate change is already disrupting daily life, forcing hard trade-offs between development and sustainability.

That is why the NLC’s demand for a bold, inclusive Just Transition Work Programme is not only justified but necessary. The global climate process must return to its roots—ensuring that people, not just emissions, are at the centre of climate solutions.

Final Thoughts

If the world fails to embed justice and labour rights into its climate agenda, then the transition we achieve will not be “just” at all—it will be lopsided, exclusionary, and unsustainable. Nigeria, along with other Global South countries, must insist that the JTWP be a vehicle for climate justice, economic equity, and social inclusion.

Anything less would be a betrayal—not just of global agreements, but of the workers, families, and future generations whose lives depend on getting this transition right.

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Trending Posts