The Dark Side of the Battery Boom – Procedural Injustice in the Green Transition: Lessons from Hungary’s Battery Industry
Jenő Zsolt Farkas, András Donát Kovács and György Csomós
Across the globe, governments are racing to build the industries that will power a low-carbon future. European post-2008 “reindustrialization” strategies have prioritized technologically advanced and “green” sectors—particularly electric vehicles and lithium-ion batteries—to rebuild manufacturing capacity and reduce supply-chain risks. However, the rapid siting and scaling of large industrial plants in post-industrial societies frequently trigger public concerns about environmental, health, and social impacts, as well as about the fairness of decision-making processes.
Hungary as a Case
Hungary has become one of Europe’s most ambitious hubs for the lithium-ion battery industry. Factories are rising at an unprecedented pace, fueled by the government’s drive to reindustrialize and position the country as a central player in the global electric vehicle (EV) revolution. By 2024, around 40 battery-related firms were operating or planning facilities in the country. Yet, behind this rapid expansion lies a troubling question: are local communities being sidelined in the rush for green growth? The paradox is striking: factories meant to symbolize a clean energy future are instead generating distrust and resistance.
What did the Hungarian media reveal about the battery boom?
A media analysis of articles published between 2010 and 2024 identified recurring themes:
- Permitting at speed: Approvals were frequently fast-tracked, with some projects classified in ways that avoided full environmental impact assessments (EIAs). Disclosure about inspections and follow-up were often limited.
- Late participation windows: Public consultation typically began only at the permitting stage—sometimes after construction had started. Online-only hearings further reduced the quality of deliberation.
- Local governments underinformed: Municipalities often lacked timely data from central authorities, constraining their ability to communicate with residents.
- Legal dead ends: Efforts to launch local or national referenda were unsuccessful. Court procedures were slow and yielded limited remedies.
- Environmental risks: High water demand, potential emissions of solvents and metals, and the absence of real-time monitoring raised concerns. Incident information often relied on self-reporting.
- Social tensions: Rapid, unregulated expansion of worker housing strained local infrastructure and stirs unease in host communities.
What did stakeholders say?
Semi-structured interviews with civil society experts and sectoral professionals provided additional insights:
- Alignment with climate goals but concerns about scale: While most stakeholders supported e-mobility as a climate strategy, they questioned whether Hungary’s expansion is proportionate to local water and land resources.
- Procedural shortcuts breed distrust: “Priority investment” classifications and compressed decision-making timelines were seen as bypassing meaningful early engagement.
- Institutions playing catch-up: Reorganized environmental agencies struggled to set and enforce sector-specific regulations. Complaint and appeal processes were often unclear or ineffective.
- Signs of learning: Some improvements—such as stricter exposure limits and enhanced monitoring at select sites—were noted, although implementation remained uneven.
- Limited access to remedies: Legal and administrative routes for challenging decisions or raising concerns were slow, costly, and often inaccessible to affected communities.
Core dilemmas — the trade-offs shaping legitimacy
The speed of national industrial policy often conflicts with meaningful local participation. Fast-tracked procedures reduce opportunities for input, while pressure to attract investment limits transparency. Centralized decision-making can undermine local stewardship, particularly where environmental and social impacts are concentrated. Moreover, there is a temporal gap: plants are operational long before monitoring, enforcement, and data infrastructure are adequately developed. Finally, national standards may not align with site-specific risks. If procedural credibility fails to keep pace with industrial expansion, social legitimacy remains fragile—potentially increasing investment risk and prompting costly future corrections.
What can be done?
While no single solution can address all concerns, several measures could strengthen procedural justice and public trust:
- Engage earlier and more substantively: Participation should begin well before permitting, through structured, multi-phase consultation processes.
- Improve information access: Environmental and technical data must be timely, understandable, and proactively published.
- Ensure institutional independence: EIAs and risk assessments should be conducted—or independently validated—by politically neutral bodies.
- Provide clear remedies: Complaint and appeal mechanisms must be accessible, transparent, and effective for communities and CSOs.
- Adapt regulation dynamically: Environmental thresholds should evolve with changing sectoral risks, supported by real-time data and periodic review.
- Strengthen governance capacity: A well-resourced, authoritative environmental agency is essential for coordinated oversight and enforcement.
Conclusion — building legitimacy alongside industry
The Hungarian case is a cautionary tale for countries pursuing the green transition: industrial policy cannot ignore the democratic process. When industrial development outpaces governance, communities are left reacting rather than shaping outcomes. Without genuine public participation, independent oversight, and trust-building, even climate-friendly investments are seen as threats rather than opportunities to build a more sustainable future.
To ensure public trust and minimize conflict, investment in physical infrastructure must be matched by investment in democratic procedures. Transparent governance, early engagement, and adaptive regulation are not obstacles to industrial success—they are prerequisites for its long-term stability and legitimacy.
György Csomós, András Donát Kovács, Jenő Zsolt Farkas:
A systematic analysis of different forms of procedural injustice associated with reindustrialization in Hungary:
A case study on the lithium-ion battery industry
Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 521, 2025
