Supply-side climate policy and fossil fuels in developing countries: a neo-Gramscian perspective.

This article examines the perspectives of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) on climate change mitigation and fossil fuel supply within the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC). Achieving the temperature targets of the Paris Agreement requires leaving fossil fuels underground (LFFU), which presents challenges for LMICs due to their significant fossil fuel reserves. This dilemma raises equity concerns as these countries must balance climate action with their Right to Development (RtD). Against this background, through a content analysis of documents submitted to the UNFCCC and triangulation with ownership structures of extraction projects, this paper explores how ten LMICs define their roles in addressing climate change and LFFU, with a focus on mitigation policies and the energy sector. Drawing on Gramscian concepts such as hegemony, common sense, historical bloc, war of position, passive revolution, and trasformismo, this paper presents a non-exhaustive neo-Gramscian perspective for the analysis of supply-side climate policy in developing countries. The analysis reveals that LMICs' development paths have been characterized by fossil fuel expansion, energy addition, and carbon lock-in, grounded on energy security reasons, export dependencies, or equity and responsibility. From these findings, the paper argues that the global energy transition can be interpreted as a passive revolution: the fossil historical bloc, through the interdependencies between states, national oil companies, and fossil capital, maintains its hegemonic position by aligning material, organizational, and discursive resources around fossil fuels, with the RtD serving as a discursive tool to perpetuate fossil dominance in energy systems, agreeing to the legitimate demands for development. One of the trasformist tactics deployed is the bridge narrative of gas, which accommodates and neutralizes the challenge posed by renewables. Nonetheless, there are opportunities for Southern leadership to contest the bloc with potential counter-hegemony. This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on supply-side mitigation policies and distributive justice issues in the North–South context, focusing on the need and potential for an inclusive and just energy transformation. There are avenues of research to analyse how the challengers' war of position will bear fruit in coalition building and the establishment of a new, just, and inclusive common sense. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]