The Political Economy of Just Energy Transition in Southeast Asia: A Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis of the Influence of Energy Titans on Community Rights and the Achievement of Sustainable Development Goals — A Case Study of Thailand
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study pursued three objectives: (1) to examine the fit between empirical data and a structural equation model of energy capital influence, green acceleration and procedural injustice on community rights conflicts; (2) to analyse the direct effect of energy capital influence on those conflicts; and (3) to analyse its indirect effects through the two mediators. Framed within Southeast Asia and examined through a Thai case, data were collected with a 48-item five-point scale aggregated into 16 indicators under four latent constructs, from 630 stakeholders across renewableenergy project areas in three provinces, using disproportionate stratified sampling with cluster and purposive sampling, and analysed with two-step CB-SEM. For objective 1 the model fitted well (χ²/df = 1.101, CFI = 0.998, TLI = 0.997, RMSEA = 0.013, SRMR = 0.048), with composite reliability of 0.777–0.879, AVE of 0.538–0.603, and discriminant validity satisfied under both Fornell-Larcker and HTMT. For objective 2, energy capital influence had a positive direct effect (β = 0.206). For objective 3, significant indirect effects ran through green acceleration (β = 0.068) and procedural
injustice (β = 0.067), totalling 0.136, with a total effect of 0.342 and 17.9% of variance explained. Nested model comparison confirmed partial mediation. Energy capital
influence is associated with community rights conflicts both directly and through procedural mechanisms. As the data are cross-sectional and perception-based, causal interpretation should remain cautious.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
ภาษาไทย
กรีนพีซ ประเทศไทย. (2568). ‘ปลดระวางถ่านหิน เคารพสิทธิมนุษยชน’ คำเรียกร้องถึง SCG ในวันที่พลังงานฟอสซิลเป็นเรื่องล้าหลัง. https://www.greenpeace.org/thailand/story/53658/conclusion-northen-coal-mining-event/
คณะกรรมการสิทธิมนุษยชนแห่งชาติ. (2568, 26 กันยายน). กสม. ตรวจสอบการขอตั้งโรงไฟฟ้าขยะ 7 แห่งในภาคตะวันออก ระบุมีการปดกั้นการมีสวนรวมของประชาชน แนะ สผ. ทบทวนให้โรงไฟฟ้าทุกขนาดต้องจัดทำ EIA (ข่าวเด่นประจำสัปดาห์ ครั้งที่ 33/2568). https://www.nhrc.or.th/th/south/nhrc-southern-region-news/16084
คนางค์ คันธมธุรพจน์, กานดา ปิยจันทร์, และ สุวิทย์ วิบุลผลประเสริฐ. (2561). ข้อเสนอแนะจากผู้มีส่วนได้เสียต่อกระบวนการมีส่วนร่วมของประชาชนในโครงการหรือกิจการที่อาจก่อให้เกิดผลกระทบต่อชุมชนอย่างรุนแรงทั้งทางด้านคุณภาพสิ่งแวดล้อม ทรัพยากรธรรมชาติ และสุขภาพ. Veridian E-Journal, Silpakorn University (สาขามนุษยศาสตร์ สังคมศาสตร์ และศิลปะ), 11(3), 363–382.
ไทยพีบีเอส. (2560, 2 กุมภาพันธ). ศาลสั่งเพิกถอนมติ ส.ป.ก. ให้เอกชนเช่าที่ดิน 39 ไร่ สร้างกังหันลม. https://www.thaipbs.or.th/news/content/259971
ธีรพัฒน์ อังศชุ วาล, จอมขวัญ โยธาสมุทร, คนางค์ คันธมธุรพจน์, ศรวณีย์ อวนศรี, และอารยา ญาณ พิบูลย์ฺ. (2567). “ทุกนโยบายห่วงใยสุขภาพ” (Health in All Policies: HiAP) และการทำให้เป็นรูปธรรมผ่านพระราชบัญญัติสุขภาพแห่งชาติ พ.ศ. 2550. รัฐศาสตร์นิเทศ, 10(1), 63–116.
สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย. (2568ก). CfD คลายปมค่าไฟแพง ทางเลือกใหม่ในยุคเปลี่ยนผ่านพลังงาน. https://tdri.or.th/2025/02/cfd-new-alternative-energy-transitionarticle/
สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย. (2568ข). เส้นทางพลังงานสะอาดไทย วิ่งอย่างไรให้ทันโลก.https://tdri.or.th/2025/06/thailand-clean-energy-path-article/
English
Aung, T. S., Fischer, T. B., & Luan, S. (2020). Evaluating environmental impact assessment (EIA) in the countries along the belt and road initiatives: System effectiveness and the compatibility with the Chinese EIA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 81, 106361.
Avila, S. (2018). Environmental justice and the expanding geography of wind power conflicts. Sustainability Science, 13(3), 599–616.
Baker, L. (2015). The evolving role of finance in South Africa’s renewable energy sector. Geoforum, 64, 146–156.
Biermann, F., Kanie, N., & Kim, R. E. (2017). Global governance by goal-setting: The novel approach of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26, 26–31.
Burke, M. J., & Stephens, J. C. (2018). Political power and renewable energy futures: A critical review. Energy Research & Social Science, 35, 78–93.
Carley, S., & Konisky, D. M. (2020). The justice and equity implications of the clean energy transition. Nature Energy, 5(8), 569–577.
Delina, L. L. (2018). Can energy democracy thrive in a non-democracy? Frontiers in Environmental Science, 6, Article 5.
Dunlap, A. (2019). Renewing destruction: Wind energy development, conflict and resistance in a Latin American context. Rowman & Littlefield International.
Fairhead, J., Leach, M., & Scoones, I. (2012). Green grabbing: A new appropriation of nature? The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39(2), 237–261.
Fast, S. (2013). Social acceptance of renewable energy: Trends, concepts, and geographies. Geography Compass, 7(12), 853–866.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Gross, C. (2007). Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2727–2736.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.
Hess, D. J. (2014). Sustainability transitions: A political coalition perspective. Research Policy, 43(2), 278–283.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
Jenkins, K., McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H., & Rehner, R. (2016). Energy justice: A conceptual review. Energy Research & Social Science, 11, 174–182.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149.
Marquardt, J. (2014). A struggle of multi-level governance: Promoting renewable energy in Indonesia. Energy Procedia, 58, 87–94.
Middleton, C. (2022). The political ecology of large hydropower dams in the Mekong Basin: A comprehensive review. Water Alternatives, 15(2), 251–289.
Newell, P., & Johnstone, P. (2018). The political economy of incumbency. In J. Skovgaard & H. van Asselt (Eds.), The politics of fossil fuel subsidies and their reform (pp. 66–80). Cambridge University Press.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Rovinelli, R. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1977). On the use of content specialists in the assessment of criterion-referenced test item validity. Dutch Journal of Educational Research, 2, 49–60.
Scheidel, A., Del Bene, D., Liu, J., Navas, G., Mingorría, S., Demaria, F., Avila, S., Roy, B., Ertör, I., Temper, L., & Martinez-Alier, J. (2020). Environmental conflicts and defenders: A global overview. Global Environmental Change, 63, 102104.
Simcock, N. (2016). Procedural justice and the implementation of community wind energy projects: A case study from South Yorkshire, UK. Land Use Policy, 59, 467–477.
Simpson, A., & Smits, M. (2018). Transitions to energy and climate security in Southeast Asia? Civil society encounters with illiberalism in Thailand and Myanmar. Society & Natural Resources, 31(5), 580–598.
Sirasoontorn, P., & Quiggin, J. (2007). The political economy of privatization in the Thai electricity industry. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 12(3), 403–419.
Sovacool, B. K. (2021). Who are the victims of low-carbon transitions? Towards a political ecology of climate change mitigation. Energy Research & Social Science, 73, 101916.
Sovacool, B. K., Bell, S. E., Daggett, C., Labuski, C., Lennon, M., Naylor, L., Klinger, J., Leonard, K., & Firestone, J. (2023). Pluralizing energy justice: Incorporating feminist, anti-racist, Indigenous, and postcolonial perspectives. Energy
Research & Social Science, 97, 102996.
Sovacool, B. K., Turnheim, B., Hook, A., Brock, A., & Martiskainen, M. (2021). Dispossessed by decarbonisation: Reducing vulnerability, injustice, and inequality in the lived experience of low-carbon pathways. World Development, 137, 105116.
Stigler, G. J. (1971). The theory of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2(1), 3–21.
Temper, L., Avila, S., Del Bene, D., Gobby, J., Kosoy, N., Le Billon, P., Martinez-Alier, J., Perkins, P., Roy, B., Scheidel, A., & Walter, M. (2020). Movements shaping climate futures: A systematic mapping of protests against fossil fuel and lowcarbon energy projects. Environmental Research Letters, 15(12), 123004.
Walker, G. (2012). Environmental justice: Concepts, evidence and politics. Routledge.
Yenneti, K., & Day, R. (2015). Procedural (in)justice in the implementation of solar energy: The case of Charanaka solar park, Gujarat, India. Energy Policy, 86, 664–673.
Zografos, C., & Robbins, P. (2020). Green sacrifice zones, or why a Green New Deal cannot ignore the cost shifts of just transitions. One Earth, 3(5), 543–546.