Ren and colleagues establish energy justice as a problem of definition, measurement and institutional translation. Their iconic contribution is the comparison of distributive, procedural and recognitional concerns with the quantitative instruments used to assess burdens and benefits across energy systems. The theoretical advance lies in demonstrating that equity cannot be represented by a single inequality statistic: Gini coefficients, entropy indices, energy burdens and access measures disclose different structures and may conceal distinct populations. Methodologically, the review moves across government definitions, planning models, market operations and policy instruments, tracing how ethical commitments enter technical decision environments. Its conceptual operation is metric critique: measurement is treated not as neutral description but as a selective construction of injustice. The wider bridge connects energy systems engineering, political philosophy, public policy and operations research. By showing how renewable transitions, electrification and market reform redistribute both opportunity and exposure, the work clarifies that decarbonisation can reproduce inequality unless justice is built into planning criteria, institutional procedures and operational models.