The transformation of our energy system towards renewable sources is particularly visible in rural areas, where large wind and solar parks are being built that are crucial to the success of the energy transition. However, for the people living there, this development is much more than a technical process. It encounters existing tensions surrounding land use, social inequality, and political alienation, often acting as a catalyst that exacerbates and reshapes these conflicts.

A recent article has now taken a closer look at these processes and linked them to a central demand: instead of viewing the energy transition in isolation, stakeholders should develop a comprehensive overall concept for rural areas. This concept should focus on the needs of residents and aim not only to ensure a sustainable energy supply, but also to create equitable land use, affordable housing, a good social infrastructure, and sustainable livelihoods.

Professor Matthias Naumann, Chair of Human Geography at Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg (JMU), and his colleague David Rudolph, Senior Researcher at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) in Roskilde, authored this article. In their paper published in the international journal “The Professional Geographer”, they call for a holistic “right to land”.

“The expansion of renewable energies requires huge areas of land – a scarce commodity in rural areas”, says Matthias Naumann. Accordingly, the energy transition is leading to increased competition for land. Land for wind turbines and solar panels competes directly with agriculture, the need for affordable housing, and the ideas of tourism managers.

This competition for land can lead to new injustices. The article describes a phenomenon in which supraregional and global investors are acquiring land on a large scale for energy projects. “While this is being done in the name of climate protection, local communities can fall behind when traditional agricultural uses are displaced or the local population hardly benefits from the added value”, argue the scientists.

However, these conflicts over land are not only material in nature – they have profound social consequences for the population. Accordingly, the energy transition can either alleviate or exacerbate existing social inequalities in rural areas. “Its success is therefore measured not only in megawatts, but also in social fairness”, says Matthias Naumann.

In fact, the effects of the energy transition on factors such as poverty and social participation are ambivalent. On the one hand, there is positive potential:

• New sources of income for landowners and municipalities.
• Local value creation when contracts are awarded to regional companies.
• Citizen energy cooperatives that enable local people to become producers themselves and become less dependent on large energy companies.

On the other hand, there are considerable risks:

• Rising energy costs can overwhelm low-income households.
• Especially in remote areas where people are dependent on cars, rising fuel costs exacerbate poverty.
• Regions that have previously relied on fossil fuels are threatened with job losses.

In their article, the two geographers therefore conclude that without targeted political measures, structurally weak regions with little financial power and low social cohesion could be particularly affected by the negative consequences, while others benefit. These social upheavals then create a breeding ground for political exploitation.

“Major transformation processes often generate uncertainty and fears among the population”, explains David Rudolph. This conflict can become fertile ground for political polarization, as the researchers' analysis shows.

Right-wing populist movements deliberately address the concerns of the rural population and exploit the energy transition for their own purposes. Their rhetoric often portrays the transformation as a project imposed by “urban elites” that threatens rural lifestyles. At the same time, they fuel a nostalgic longing for the “old” fossil-fuel-based economies.

According to the article, these conflicts are less a reaction to individual wind turbines and more a symptom of profound structural crises: the feeling of being “left behind” in the globalized economy, exacerbated by infrastructure decline and migration.

The researchers therefore advocate a fundamentally new perspective. Instead of viewing the energy transition in isolation, they call for a holistic “right to the countryside.” This approach combines and expands existing demands such as the right to energy, the right to housing, and the right to mobility into a comprehensive overall concept for rural areas, placing the needs of residents at the center.

To achieve this, policymakers must look beyond the energy sector and intelligently link the transformation with other areas such as agricultural, transport, and housing policy. According to the two scientists, the central question for future research and political action is how such a comprehensive “right to the countryside” can be implemented in concrete terms to shape a just and sustainable future for rural areas.