Restorative Justice and Post-Extractive Urban Transitions in Oil-Dependent Cities: The Case of Poza Rica, Mexico

Abstract

Oil-dependent urban regions face persistent ecological and societal issues following extraction, including land degradation and infrastructural neglect. Despite the discourse on environmental justice and extractivism, a research gap exists regarding the transition of post-extractive cities from recognizing environmental harm to implementing territorial rehabilitation strategies. This study examines Poza Rica, Mexico, a critical city in the oil industry, as a case study for restorative justice and urban transition after extraction. Utilizing a qualitative case study approach with planning documents, technical reports, environmental regulations, spatial data, and community input, the research evaluates the territorial impacts of seventy years of oil extraction and explores restoration pathways. The results indicate a landscape characterized by abandoned wells, environmental liabilities, and the integration of former extraction zones into urban areas. In the Tampico–Misantla Basin, 49.5% of wells remain inactive, with only 2.7% meeting contemporary closure standards. In Poza Rica, nearly 98% of urban growth from 1997 to 2016 occurred in regions previously linked to oil extraction. The article posits that restorative justice in post-extractive cities necessitates more than mere financial restitution. It advocates for a territorial restitution framework centred on remediation, economic transformation, and community governance, illustrating how former extraction sites can evolve into assets for urban resilience and sustainable development.

1. Introduction

Poza Rica, a city located in the state of Veracruz, Mexico (Figure 1), is a prime example of the socio-environmental contradictions associated with oil-dependent urbanisation. From the discovery of the Poza Rica 2 well in 1930 until the mid-20th century, this city served as the ‘Oil Capital of Mexico’, accounting for an average of 70% of national crude oil production between 1946 and 1956. However, this extraordinary extraction of wealth took place without a commensurate investment in urban infrastructure, environmental protection or even a long-term planning for the inevitable decline in production. Today, Poza Rica faces a profound territorial crisis linked to a landscape saturated with abandoned wells, contaminated soil and a population density of approximately 2955 inhabitants per km², living atop inactive oil infrastructure whose location and condition are often unknown even to the residents themselves [1].

The concept of ‘sacrifice zones’—territories systematically subjected to degradation to enable the extraction of resources for the benefit of distant recipients—has been gaining analytical prominence in studies of critical geography and environmental justice [3]. Poza Rica illustrates this reality well, where the metabolic demands of national industrialisation were met through the systematic subordination of local environmental health and urban quality of life. The 1925 Petroleum Law gave explicit priority to hydrocarbon extraction at the expense of all other land uses, legally sanctioning the displacement of farming communities and the imposition of industrial risks on urban populations. This legal framework established a ‘territorial injustice’ with respect to the structural denial of communities’ rights to safe and dignified living environments in favour of extractive accumulation.

As global energy transitions gather pace and oil production declines in mature basins, towns such as Poza Rica face pressing questions about their post-extractive future. How can territories burdened by the environmental debts accumulated through extraction be restored? What forms of spatial justice are appropriate for communities that drove national development but have inherited only its toxic waste? Recent studies on post-extractive transitions emphasise that moving beyond dependence on fossil fuels requires not only technological substitution, but fundamental transformations in urban governance and in the relationship between communities and their territories [4,5,6].

Latin American scholarship has developed a rich debate on environmental justice, environmental racism, sacrifice zones and neo-extractivism, showing how extractive economies produce unequal exposure to pollution, territorial dispossession, institutional neglect and socio-environmental conflict [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14].

However, less attention has been paid to how these debates can be translated into concrete territorial restoration strategies for medium-sized oil-dependent cities after production decline. The gap addressed by this article is therefore not the absence of studies on environmental injustice in Latin America, but the limited operationalisation of these debates through post-extractive urban planning, brownfield remediation and community-led governance.

This article addresses a gap in the literature on post-extractive urban transitions. Whilst many studies have thoroughly documented the unequal impacts of resource extraction, less attention has been paid to how this knowledge can be translated into practical strategies for territorial restoration in oil-dependent cities following the decline in production. This gap is thus addressed by examining the limited operationalisation of these debates through post-extractive urban planning, the regeneration of brownfield sites and community-led governance.

Accordingly, the article has three objectives: (i) to analyse how decades of oil extraction have produced territorial injustice in Poza Rica; (ii) to examine the environmental and socio-spatial liabilities associated with abandoned oil infrastructure; and (iii) to identify pathways for restorative justice through remediation, economic reconversion, and community-led governance.

The paper is guided by the following research question: How can restorative justice be operationalised as a territorial strategy in post-extractive oil cities, and what does the case of Poza Rica reveal about the role of remediation and community-led governance in that process?

Our research makes three contributions. First, it conceptualises Poza Rica as an urbanised sacrifice zone, where abandoned wells, contaminated land and residential expansion over former extraction areas express a long-term process of territorial injustice. Second, it develops the concept of metabolic repair to connect environmental justice, restorative justice, brownfield remediation, economic reconversion and participatory governance within a single analytical framework. Third, it identifies practical pathways for territorial restitution, including permanent well closure, contaminated-site remediation, public-use recovery, geothermal screening of abandoned wells and community-led monitoring.

By linking the diagnosis of extractive injustice to concrete mechanisms of territorial restoration, the article contributes to debates on post-extractive urban transitions and offers a framework for analysing other medium-sized oil cities facing similar environmental liabilities.

We argue that addressing the city’s historical debt requires three interlinked strategies: (i) the systematic remediation of abandoned and contaminated industrial sites to restore ecosystem services and public use; (ii) economic reconversion that redirects extractive infrastructure towards sustainable activities, including geothermal energy and innovation clusters; and (iii) community-led governance that places affected populations at the centre of decision-making and resource allocation.

Drawing on frameworks of restorative justice that emphasise material restitution over purely compensatory approaches [6], we demonstrate how Poza Rica’s abandoned infrastructure can be transformed from liabilities into assets for urban resilience. Figure 2 shows City Council officials talking to representatives of the local community (not visible in the image) at the site of an abandoned oil well in the Cazones neighbourhood of Poza Rica.

The analysis proceeds as follows. Section 2 develops our theoretical framework, synthesizing literatures on restorative justice, environmental justice, extractivism, post-extractive transitions, and brownfield remediation. Section 3 outlines our case study methodology and data sources. Section 4 presents the empirical analysis of Poza Rica’s territorial injustice, remediation opportunities, and restoration pathways. Section 5 discusses implications for public use recovery, governance reform, and economic reconversion. Section 6 concludes by emphasizing community mobilization as the essential driver of restorative justice in post-extractive contexts.

2. Literature Review and Analytical Framework

2.1. Environmental Justice, Environmental Racism and Neo-Extractivism in Latin America

The debate on environmental justice in Latin America is closely linked to the expansion of extractive frontiers, the persistence of colonial forms of land dispossession, and the uneven distribution of environmental harm [7,8]. In this context, environmental injustice manifests itself not only through exposure to toxic materials, but also through the concentration of risks in indigenous, afro-descendant, working-class and peripheral communities, whose capacity to influence decisions on land use is structurally and frequently limited [9,10].

The concept of environmental racism is particularly relevant for understanding these dynamics. Although it emerged in relation to struggles against the racialised siting of hazardous facilities, its use in Latin America has expanded to analyse how coloniality, class inequality and racial hierarchies shape exposure to extractive and industrial harms [11]. In oil-producing regions, these processes are often expressed through, for example, the normalisation of proximity between residential areas and multi-polluting infrastructure, the invisibilisation of chronic exposure, and the unequal recognition of the claims of affected communities [12].

The literature also shows that extractivist approaches have persisted across different political cycles in Latin America. Resource extraction is often justified in the name of energy security or public revenue, even when its costs are concentrated in specific territories. This generates what has been described as a territorial logic of sacrifice, as certain places are expected to absorb pollution, infrastructure risks and social disruption so that economic benefits can flow elsewhere [13]. In this sense, sacrifice zones are not accidental outcomes of poor planning, but spatial expressions of a broader development model that separates the production of value from the location of harm.

In Latin American oil territories, environmental injustice has also been sustained by long-standing structures of institutional silencing. State-led extractive development has often been justified through national progress and energy security, while the claims of local communities exposed to displacement, pollution and infrastructural risk have been treated as secondary or politically inconvenient [14]. Recognising this history of silencing is essential for understanding why restorative justice must include not only remediation, but also the recovery of voice, recognition and decision-making power.

These debates are particularly relevant to Poza Rica. The city’s historical role in Mexican oil production, its intense coexistence with wells and pipelines, and the persistence of abandoned infrastructure following the decline in production reflect a specifically urban form of neo-extractivist territorialisation. However, the case of Poza Rica also raises the question, less explored in the literature, of how territories historically shaped by oil extraction can move from the recognition of environmental injustice to concrete processes of remediation, restitution and post-extractive urban transformation.

2.2. Oil Urbanism, Sacrifice Zones and Territorial Injustice

Oil extraction generates environmental impacts but also produces specific urban forms. In oil-producing regions, cities often emerge as operational landscapes organised around wells, pipelines, refineries, worker housing, transport corridors and service infrastructures. These arrangements shape land-use patterns, settlement expansion and institutional priorities, frequently subordinating urban planning and environmental protection to the logistical requirements of extraction [15]. Following Hein’s conceptualisation of petroleumscapes, oil infrastructure becomes embedded not only in the physical form of cities, but also in their economies and everyday practices [16,17].

From the perspective of urban metabolism, oil cities function as nodes in wider circuits of extraction, processing and distribution. They channel energy and materials towards national and global economies, while retaining many of the environmental burdens associated with extraction, including contaminated soils, polluted water, toxic emissions, hazardous traffic and obsolete infrastructure [3].

The concept of sacrifice zones helps to interpret this spatial asymmetry. Sacrifice zones are territories where environmental degradation and social risk are normalised in the name of economic development, and national energy security. In such places, the exposure of local populations to pollution is not merely the result of isolated technical failures, but of a broader territorial order in which some communities are expected to absorb cumulative harm for the benefit of others [3]. In oil cities, this sacrifice often becomes urbanised, as residential neighbourhoods expand around or over wells, pipelines and industrial facilities.

Territorial injustice therefore refers not only to unequal exposure to environmental risks, but also to the historical production of urban space through extractive priorities. It includes the displacement or marginalisation of previous land uses, the concentration of infrastructure-related hazards in working-class or peripheral neighbourhoods, the lack of information about subsurface risks, and the persistence of abandoned facilities after production declines. These conditions frequently outlast the economic cycle that produced them, leaving cities with contaminated landscapes and institutional responsibilities that remain unresolved.

This perspective is particularly relevant for Poza Rica. The city’s historical role in Mexican oil production, its dense coexistence with wells and pipelines, and the incorporation of former extraction areas into the urban fabric illustrate how oil urbanism can produce a long-term geography of risk. Rather than treating abandoned wells (Figure 3) and contaminated sites as isolated environmental problems, they should be understood as material expressions of a wider territorial injustice generated by decades of extractive urbanisation.

2.3. Restorative Justice and Territorial Restitution

Restorative justice offers a useful framework for addressing the long-term harms produced by extractive urbanisation [19]. Unlike distributive approaches or procedural approaches, restorative justice is concerned with repairing harm and rebuilding relations between affected communities and damaged environments. In extractive contexts, this distinction is important because environmental degradation, health risks and territorial dispossession cannot be adequately addressed through compensation alone [20].

Recent debates on energy justice have extended restorative justice to fossil fuel transitions, arguing that oil, coal and gas infrastructures should be understood not only as productive assets, but also as accumulated liabilities. Abandoned wells, contaminated soils and obsolete industrial facilities embody unresolved obligations generated by past extraction [20]. Restorative justice therefore requires identifying who benefited, who was harmed, who remains exposed and what forms of repair are materially necessary.

In the context of urban development, this redress must be understood as territorial restitution, that is, the restoration of conditions that enable communities to live in their environments safely and with dignity. It also involves, in particular, the remediation of contaminated land, the restoration of public use, the reduction of environmental risk, the clarification of institutional responsibilities, and the recognition of affected communities as legitimate stakeholders in determining future land uses.

For post-extractive oil cities such as Poza Rica, restorative justice therefore shifts the debate from compensation for past extraction to the restitution of safe, accessible and socially useful territory [5,18]. This study uses territorial restitution as the material and institutional process through which spaces subordinated to oil extraction can be remediated, returned to public value and incorporated into a more just post-extractive urban transition.

2.4. Brownfield Remediation and Post-Extractive Urban Transitions

The remediation and reuse of abandoned or contaminated industrial sites are increasingly understood as questions of spatial justice, rather than merely technical or economic problems. Brownfields are not neutral vacant spaces: they often concentrate environmental risks, restrict land use, reduce access to safe public space and reproduce inequalities between neighbourhoods [21]. In post-extractive cities, these sites materialise the environmental debts of past extraction while also shaping the possibilities for future urban development.

Post-extractive transitions require more than economic diversification or technological substitution [22]. They involve the transformation of territories whose infrastructures, labour markets, institutional arrangements and environmental conditions were historically organised around resource extraction. In oil-dependent cities, abandoned wells, pipelines, refineries and petrochemical facilities may remain embedded in the urban fabric long after production has declined [23]. If they are not remediated and repurposed, they continue to produce risk and spatial fragmentation.

Brownfield remediation can contribute to territorial restitution when it restores environmental safety and enables socially valuable future uses [24]. However, remediation does not automatically produce justice. Comparative studies of industrial regeneration show that contaminated sites with higher market value are more likely to be recovered, while peripheral or low-income areas may remain polluted and underinvested [25]. Environmental clean-up may also contribute to displacement [26] if it is not accompanied by public-interest planning, anti-displacement measures and local benefit mechanisms.

For Poza Rica, brownfield remediation provides the practical bridge between restorative justice and post-extractive urban transition. The city’s abandoned wells, contaminated plots and obsolete petroleum infrastructures are potential sites through which territorial restitution could be made visible [27]. Their remediation and reuse would allow the city to move from a landscape structured by extraction to one oriented toward public use, ecological recovery [28] and economic diversification.

The concentration of inactive wells can be seen in Figure 4, which shows that a large part of the municipal area contains wells classified as inactive or in operation. This study itself outlines the relationship between urban sprawl and the location of disused oil wells. By cross-referencing INEGI and Carto Critica data with publicly available urban growth records and focusing on delimited urban growth areas and overlaying them, it is identified that more than 35% of new settlements are located less than 500 m from an inactive well. This increases the population’s exposure to potential risks of soil contamination and structural damage. The interpretation supports the need for planning policies that regulate the occupation of land near obsolete oil infrastructure.

According to the 2020 Census, the population of Poza Rica was 189,457 inhabitants. Considering the Basic Geostatistical Areas (AGEB) where these types of wells are located, we estimate that approximately 18,000 inhabitants reside within a 500 m radius of an abandoned well, with a higher concentration in neighbourhoods such as Chapultepec, Cazones, Revolución, and others. The interpretation of this figure emphasizes social and urban vulnerability, highlighting the urgency of mitigation and reconversion strategies for these spaces to reduce risks and promote alternative uses (Figure 4).

Although Poza Rica has few directly comparable international cases, its significance can be seen through a typological comparison with other post-industrial and post-extractive urban cases. These cases differ in scale, institutional capacity, land tenure systems, data availability and even the degree of community mobilisation, but they shed light on specific aspects of the Poza Rica case.

The Bicentennial Park in Mexico City demonstrates that the rehabilitation of abandoned industrial sites from the oil sector is technically feasible in the Mexican context, provided there is institutional coordination and funding available. The Los Angeles Basin illustrates the long-term risks of urban development around active and abandoned oil infrastructure. Cases such as Santa Cruz in Bolivia and Nadvirnya in Ukraine show how obsolete industrial areas can be reinterpreted as ecological, cultural or economic assets, whilst the experiences of São Paulo and Ciudad Juárez warn that rehabilitation can reproduce spatial inequality when driven primarily by land value or when contaminated peripheral areas remain neglected. Taken together, all these cases reinforce the interpretation of Poza Rica not as an isolated anomaly, but as a medium-sized oil-dependent city facing the post-extractive challenge of how to convert accumulated environmental liabilities into territorially just forms of remediation, public use and economic reconversion.

2.5. Metabolic Repair as Analytical Framework

In an effort to systematise and integrate the various approaches to the problems posed by extractivism, we propose the following table, which will help us to develop the analytical model of metabolic repair (

Table 1. Theoretical components of the metabolic repair framework and their implications for Poza Rica.

Debate	Evidence from the Literature	Implications for Poza Rica
Environmental racism	Exposure to risks stems from racial, class and geographical inequalities	Helps interpret unequal exposure in working-class neighbourhoods
Neo-extractivism	Extraction is justified by national development while costs are localised	Explains why Poza Rica’s oil wealth did not translate into urban restitution
Sacrifice zones	Certain territories absorb cumulative pollution for external benefit	Frames Poza Rica as an urbanised sacrifice zone
Brownfield remediation	Cleanup can reproduce or reduce inequality depending on governance	Connects diagnosis of injustice to restorative planning
Restorative justice	Harm requires material restitution, not only compensation	Grounds the article’s proposal for territorial restoration

).

Building on previous discussions, this article presents ‘metabolic remediation’ as a framework for analysing post-extraction urban transitions. The concept argues that extractive urbanisation transforms the interaction between territory, infrastructure, the workforce, institutions and everyday life, rather than merely creating isolated contaminated sites. In oil-dependent cities, extraction influences the urban metabolism, channelling material, energy, economic and political flows towards oil production, whilst amplifying environmental risks and social harm in specific locations.

Metabolic remediation is defined here as the reconfiguration of these territories through ecological remediation, economic reconversion and political restitution: ecological remediation addresses contamination and ecosystem degradation; economic repair redirects infrastructure and land use away from oil dependency; and political repair focuses on accountability and community engagement. Its analytical strength lies in aligning the diagnosis of territorial injustice with mechanisms for post-extractive transition, enabling a comprehensive analysis of abandoned oil infrastructure. The framework consists of three dimensions: ecological reparation, economic reparation and political reparation. Ecological reparation involves the remediation of contaminated soils and the restoration of ecosystem functions, whilst economic reparation emphasises the transition of infrastructure and land uses to non-oil activities that generate local benefits. Political reparation concerns the recognition of affected communities, the clarification of responsibilities and the promotion of participatory decision-making processes. In the context of Poza Rica, metabolic reparation serves as a lens through which to analyse the city’s transition away from extraction.

The framework highlights that this transition is neither automatic nor linear; it reveals the conflicts, responsibilities and community efforts required to transform a compromised extractive landscape into a more equitable urban environment. Consequently, the framework integrates concepts of environmental justice, racism, neo-extractivism and sacrifice zones with restorative justice and tools for remediation, reconversion and community governance. Collectively, these ideas facilitate the analysis of territorial justice and urban transition in Poza Rica, by establishing links between the production of harm, obligations of reparation and spatial strategies for achieving restoration.

3. Methodology

3.1. Case Study Selection

Poza Rica was selected as a critical case for four reasons. First, it played a central role in Mexico’s oil history, contributing a large share of national crude production during the mid-20th century, while receiving limited long-term investment in environmental protection and urban infrastructure. Second, its urban fabric now contains a dense coexistence of residential neighbourhoods, abandoned or inactive wells, pipelines and contaminated plots, making visible the spatial legacy of extraction. Third, the city represents a medium-sized oil-dependent urban area, a type of post-extractive territory that has received less attention than major metropolitan or resource-frontier cases. Fourth, Poza Rica illustrates the transition from productive centrality to environmental liability, allowing the study to examine how restorative justice can be operationalised through remediation, economic reconversion and community-led governance.

3.2. Data Collection and Analytical Procedure

This study adopts a qualitative case study [31] approach to analyse territorial injustice and the challenges of post-extractive transition in Poza Rica, Mexico. The case study methodology is particularly well-suited to investigating complex and context-dependent phenomena, in which the boundaries between the phenomenon and the context are not clearly defined [31]. Poza Rica represents a ‘critical case’ [31] of post-extractive urban transition: it is a city whose identity, economy and physical form have been profoundly shaped by oil extraction, and which now faces the environmental and social legacies of that history as production declines.

The empirical analysis was based on qualitative document analysis and spatial interpretation. Documents were selected according to three criteria: (i) their relevance to Poza Rica’s extractive legacy and post-extractive planning; (ii) their institutional or academic reliability; and (iii) their capacity to provide evidence on at least one of the study’s analytical dimensions: territorial injustice, environmental liabilities, remediation possibilities, economic reconversion or community participation.

The document analysis followed a thematic coding procedure. First, planning documents, regulatory reports, academic studies and secondary community-based sources were reviewed to identify references to oil infrastructure, urban expansion, environmental risk, abandoned or inactive wells, remediation obligations, green-space deficits, governance mechanisms and community mobilisation. Second, these references were grouped into three analytical categories derived from the framework presented in Section 2: ecological repair, economic repair and political repair. Third, the coded evidence was used to identify convergences and tensions between official planning narratives, regulatory obligations, spatial evidence and community claims.

Spatial data were used interpretively rather than as the basis for a new GIS model. Existing maps and datasets from planning documents, OURBE, CartoCrítica and other secondary sources were compared to identify the spatial relationship between urban expansion, well locations, affected neighbourhoods and areas proposed for remediation or environmental recovery. The study did not generate new primary spatial measurements; instead, it used available spatial evidence to support the qualitative interpretation of territorial exposure and post-extractive transformation opportunities.

Triangulation was carried out by comparing evidence across different source types. Claims about territorial injustice were considered stronger when they appeared across multiple sources, for example, when planning documents, spatial data and community testimonies all pointed to the coexistence of residential areas and oil infrastructure. Regulatory sources were used to interpret remediation obligations, while academic literature was used to situate the case within wider debates on environmental justice, extractivism and post-extractive transitions. Where evidence was incomplete, particularly regarding site-specific contamination levels and health impacts, this limitation is explicitly acknowledged and the analysis avoids making claims that cannot be supported by the available material.

3.3. Primary and Secondary Sources

The analysis combines documentary, spatial and regulatory data to examine Poza Rica’s extractive legacy and opportunities for territorial restoration. Primary sources include the Metropolitan Programme for the Poza Rica–Tuxpan Metropolitan Zone (PMZMPR), technical reports from the Agency for Safety, Energy and Environment (ASEA), Mexican environmental regulations, documentation related to the Bicentennial Park remediation project, and regional academic sources. Secondary sources comprise scholarly literature on environmental justice, restorative justice, extractivism and post-extractive transitions, together with media reports, community testimonies and spatial datasets on urban expansion, well locations and population density.

The study was conducted in three stages. First, we examined the historical processes through which oil extraction shaped urban development and generated territorial inequalities. Second, we analysed the current distribution of abandoned infrastructure, environmental risks and urban environmental deficits using planning documents, technical reports and spatial data. Third, we evaluated potential restoration pathways, including remediation, economic reconversion and governance reforms, drawing on planning proposals, regulatory frameworks and international precedents.

The analysis relies on triangulation across documentary, spatial and regulatory sources. Although the study does not include original ethnographic fieldwork, documented community testimonies and mobilisation efforts were incorporated to understand how residents experience and respond to the long-term consequences of oil extraction.

3.4. Limitations

The study has several limitations. Firstly, it lacks original field measurements of contamination, which makes it difficult to produce technical or cost estimates for remediation. Secondly, public data on inactive wells is incomplete and requires verification. Thirdly, the analysis of community mobilisation is based on secondary sources rather than original ethnographic research. Fourthly, the spatial analysis is based on existing maps rather than primary GIS surveys. A fifth limitation is the unavailability of quantitative data on the environment and health, as there are no systematic measurements, leading to a reliance on indirect indicators. A sixth limitation is the lack of systematic analysis of internal community differences, which requires further fieldwork and interviews. Finally, the absence of public data on contamination should be viewed as a governance issue, which restricts residents’ involvement in remediation decisions. These limitations suggest that the article serves as an interpretative case study on territorial injustice, rather than a technical assessment of remediation.

4. Case Analysis: Poza Rica’s Current Socio-Environmental Panorama, Extractive Legacy and Restoration Pathways

Before examining territorial injustice in Poza Rica, it is essential to outline its current socio-environmental context. The city features a juxtaposition of residential zones and oil infrastructure, including derelict wells and polluted land, situated within urban neighbourhoods. This engenders a climate of environmental ambiguity, with residents often living adjacent to unclear and potentially hazardous infrastructure. Despite regulatory acknowledgment of the necessity for remediation, corporate and institutional responses have been inadequate relative to the extent of the liabilities incurred. Consequently, communities endure substantial post-extractive challenges, facing environmental threats, lack of information, and inequitable involvement in territorial decisions.

4.1. Territory as the Foundation of Historical Injustice

Poza Rica’s territorial configuration embodies a profound historical injustice: the abrupt transformation of Totonac agricultural lands into an industrial extraction zone that prioritized capital accumulation over urban planning, environmental protection, and community well-being. This transformation was legally sanctioned by the 1925 Petroleum Law, which explicitly granted hydrocarbon extraction priority over all other land uses. This legal framework established the conditions for what Besil [32] terms “socio-spatial reconfiguration” driven by extractive enclaves (systematic reorganization of territory to serve extraction imperatives regardless of consequences for existing communities and ecosystems).

The discovery of the Poza Rica 2 well in 1930 catalysed “vertiginous” and disordered growth that subordinated all urban planning principles to extraction logistics. Between 1946 and 1956, the Poza Rica district sustained national development by contributing an average of 70% of Mexico’s crude oil production. Yet this extraordinary contribution generated no symmetric investment in urban infrastructure, environmental protection, or long-term planning. Instead, the wealth extracted from beneath Poza Rica flowed to Mexico City and international markets, while the city itself developed as a chaotic agglomeration of worker housing, industrial facilities, and service infrastructure with minimal attention to livability or sustainability [33].

4.1.1. Urban Development and Risk Exposure

As there is no systematic data on site-specific contamination, toxic emissions and health in Poza Rica, and given that such information is politically and institutionally sensitive in oil-producing regions, this article draws on a set of indirect but quantifiable exposure indicators to assess the extent of the environmental and socio-spatial impact. These include the proportion of inactive wells in the Tampico–Misantla Basin, the limited proportion of wells that meet modern standards for permanent closure, the population density of the urban area, the city’s expansion into former oil reserve areas, and environmental quality indicators such as tree cover and the distribution of green spaces. These indicators do not replace direct toxicological or epidemiological measurement, but they highlight the spatial normalisation of risk and provide a cautious empirical basis for interpreting Poza Rica as a post-extractive territory marked by cumulative environmental liability.

The most visible manifestation of territorial injustice is the spatial relationship between urban settlement and petroleum infrastructure. Between 1997 and 2016, Poza Rica’s urban footprint expanded by 98%, growing over former petroleum reserve areas that once buffered extraction sites from residential zones. With a population density of approximately 2955 inhabitants per km², the city has literally “swallowed” hundreds of wells that were previously isolated (Figure 5). This expansion occurred without systematic assessment of subsurface conditions or infrastructure locations, producing neighbourhoods where homes directly adjoin well valves and high-pressure pipelines [34].

Residents of colonias including La Granja, Floresta and Chapuntepec describe living atop a “time bomb,” experiencing constant vibrations from underground pipelines whose precise locations and conditions are often unknown even to the residents themselves. The key issues, described in social networks, contributing to this “time bomb” include: Fugitive Emissions and Leaks (residents experience constant fear of leaks, with reports of oil residue and dangerous fumes in the air); Lack of Maintenance (many wells are considered inactive or abandoned by PEMEX (Petróleos Mexicanos), yet they still pose environmental hazards and safety risks); Environmental and Natural Disasters (the area is susceptible to flooding from the Cazones River, which has previously inundated these neighbourhoods, dispersing oil residues and contaminating homes); Proximity to Hazards (the rapid, often unplanned expansion of the city over the last century has placed residents in direct contact with pipelines and wells).

Figure 6 shows the San Andrés Formation in the Tampico–Misantla Basin. The main source of data is the analysis by Rosales Rodríguez et al. [35], who applied advanced seismic attributes to identify lithological variations and discontinuities in the carbonate deposits. This is relevant because these geological characteristics determine the stability of the subsoil and, consequently, the safety of the population living on former oil fields within the city limits. With regard to public health, this is useful because it allows the identification of areas where hydrocarbon seepage may occur, such as in the Chapultepec neighbourhood. This facilitates soil remediation or clean-up efforts regarding the contaminant known as ‘chapopote’, enabling local authorities to strengthen their decision-making processes regarding the relocation of services, risk mitigation and land-use conversion.

This uncertainty exacerbates material risks, as residents are unable to assess their own exposure to risk or take protective measures, given that basic information on underground infrastructure remains inaccessible. As documented by Chilingar et al. [36] in their historical analysis of urban oil fields in the Los Angeles Basin, this pattern of residential development over active and abandoned oil infrastructure creates persistent risks to public health and limits future land-use options.

The implications in terms of environmental justice are significant. The working-class neighbourhoods of Poza Rica suffer concentrated exposure to oil-related risks, whilst lacking access to environmental amenities. The city’s tree cover, at 0.13 trees per inhabitant, falls far short of the recommended 0.33, and green spaces are unevenly distributed, with wealthier areas enjoying better access to parks and vegetation [37]. This pattern mirrors what Peña et al. [38] identified in Mexico City: systematic environmental inequality in which vulnerable communities face both greater exposure to risks and reduced access to environmental benefits.

4.1.2. The Operational Limbo of Infrastructure

Perhaps the most insidious dimension of territorial injustice is the vast inventory of infrastructure in operational limbo. In the Tampico–Misantla Basin, approximately 49.5% of wells are classified as “inactive,” remaining in a state of technical abandonment without undergoing legally required permanent closure procedures. Only 2.7% of wells in the region meet modern standards for permanent plugging and abandonment. These inactive wells may function as pathways for gas migration, including methane or hydrogen sulphide under certain geological and technical conditions, creating potential risks that require monitoring, permanent closure and transparent public information [39].

The available quantitative data are therefore more robust regarding infrastructural exposure than to toxicological measurements. The study identifies several indicators of chronic risk, such as the integration of former extraction sites into the urban area, the presence of inactive wells in densely populated neighbourhoods, the limited proportion of wells that meet modern standards for permanent closure, and the lack of accessible information on the condition of underground infrastructure. These indicators do not replace site-specific measurements of soil contamination, gas emissions or health effects, but they demonstrate a context of persistent exposure in which risk is spatially normalised and difficult for residents to verify or challenge. It is in this sense that the notion of ‘slow violence’ [40] is used here as a way of interpreting the long-term, low-visibility harm caused by abandoned infrastructure, institutional delays and unequal access to environmental protection.

Evans et al. [41] document similar conditions in the Los Angeles Basin, where inadequate well abandonment practices have created long-term environmental and safety hazards. Their analysis emphasizes that proper well abandonment is technically complex and expensive, requiring careful assessment of subsurface conditions, selection of appropriate plugging materials and techniques, and long-term monitoring. The high proportion of improperly abandoned wells in Poza Rica suggests systematic failure by operators and regulators to fulfil these responsibilities, effectively transferring costs and risks from corporations to communities.

4.1.3. Historical Debt and the Sense of Abandonment

There is a deeply ingrained social perception that the state ‘has left the city to its own devices’ after decades of exploitation. This perception is grounded in reality, for although Poza Rica contributed 70% of the country’s crude oil production during the critical period of industrialisation in the mid-20th century, it received minimal investment in social infrastructure.

This neglect was exacerbated by an institutional imbalance between the oil interests of the state and companies and those of local communities. The lack of accessible information on underground infrastructure, the limited participation of residents in decisions regarding land use, and the delayed response to community complaints all point to a broader history of silencing. In this context, the affected neighbourhoods were not only exposed to environmental harm but were also denied full recognition as legitimate political actors in decisions concerning the territory they inhabited.

This pattern reflects what Heynen et al. [42] identified as the need for reparations in urban extractive contexts; that is, the recognition that certain communities have been systematically exploited to generate wealth for others, and that justice requires not merely cessation of harm but active restitution. In Poza Rica, restorative justice cannot be limited to financial compensation but must involve material transformation with respect to returning to the community the right to safe, healthy territory through systematic remediation of spaces that once served exclusively industrial purposes [34]. Figure 7 shows an example of one such area already in use by the community.

This debt is material in nature, involving contaminated land, derelict infrastructure and inadequate services, but it is also political, because residents have been excluded from decisions concerning the area in which they live. As [3] emphasize, environmental justice in extractive contexts must address not only immediate environmental exposures but also the political marginalization and economic dependence that prevent communities from determining their own futures.

4.2. Deactivated Infrastructure as Restorative Opportunity

Poza Rica must fundamentally rethink its transition to a post-extractive future, transforming decommissioned infrastructure into opportunities for social reparation, in line with the principles of restorative justice [6]. Remediation (the process of reducing contaminants) is the means by which the territory can recover its ecosystem services and be returned to public use, realising the community’s right to reclaim spaces previously dominated by the extractive industry.

4.2.1. The Parque Bicentenario Precedent

The transformation of the former 18 de Marzo Refinery in Mexico City into Bicentennial Park represents the most significant precedent in Mexico for the large-scale regeneration of abandoned industrial sites in the oil sector. The site faced serious environmental problems, including soil contaminated with hydrocarbons, BTEX compounds (benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylenes) and lead sludge extending to a depth of nine metres. In 2006, the authorities approved a comprehensive plan to remediate 55 hectares and approximately three million m³ of contaminated soil [43].

The remediation employed advanced techniques adapted to different types of contamination and urban contexts. Bio-piles, engineered systems that use microorganisms to degrade heavy hydrocarbons, were used in deeply contaminated areas. Bio-ventilation, which enhances the natural biodegradation of lighter petroleum fractions through a controlled air flow, was prioritised for areas close to residential zones, as it allows for in situ treatment without massive excavations that would disrupt surrounding communities. The park opened in 2010, thereby demonstrating that the technical capacity exists to transform severely contaminated oil sites into valuable urban infrastructure.

The case is not used here as a directly transferable model for Poza Rica, since detailed comparable data on costs, timelines, land ownership and institutional arrangements are limited. Rather, it is used as a national precedent showing that petroleum-site remediation is technically feasible in Mexico when institutional coordination and funding are available. But it also offers crucial lessons for Poza Rica for other reasons: Firstly, it demonstrates that, with the right methods and sufficient resources, the large-scale remediation of land contaminated by hydrocarbons is technically feasible in the Mexican context. Secondly, it illustrates the importance of sustained political commitment, as the project required coordination between various government agencies and the maintenance of funding throughout political transitions. Thirdly, it reveals the transformative potential of remediation, as the conversion of a ‘sacrifice zone’ into a large urban park has led to significant improvements in environmental quality and the quality of life of surrounding communities, giving concrete expression to the principles of restorative justice.

4.2.2. Restoration Potential and Metropolitan Planning

For Poza Rica, restorative justice is part of the Metropolitan Program for the Poza Rica-Tuxpan Metropolitan Zone (PMZMPR). The program highlights urgent needs to improve the Urban Green Space Index, revealing a shortfall in tree density per inhabitant. This gap signifies a historical focus on extraction over urban environmental quality. The PMZMPR proposes strategic interventions aligned with restorative justice principles: Metropolitan Park Creation—a proposed park would serve as a “green lung” and recreation area, addressing environmental and social deficits, exemplifying how remediation can fulfil multiple justice aims. Wendel et al. [44] indicate that successful brownfield redevelopment integrates environmental cleanup with urban development; Degraded Space Recovery—the PMZMPR aims to rehabilitate sports fields and vacant lots, presenting opportunities for localized remediation that aligns with community priorities and builds support for larger interventions. This aligns with Habba’s [45] advocacy for adaptive strategies responsive to community needs; Ecological Reserves—the program targets areas for priority environmental restoration to create buffer zones between urban and industrial sectors, enhancing ecological services and reducing industrial exposure for residents.

This proposal underscores the potential of remediated brownfields to serve as ecological infrastructure that bolsters urban resilience [46].

4.2.3. Technical Viability for Restoration

The implementation of established remediation technologies allows for territorial restoration in Poza Rica. Thermal desorption has been effectively utilized in the Poza Rica region to treat highly contaminated soils, facilitating swift restoration of affected sites. This peripheral method includes heating up polluted ground to convert petroleum elements into vapor for cleanup, ultimately producing clean soil that is acceptable for site return. Bio-ventilation is favoured in urban areas as it permits in situ treatment without significant excavation that would disturb local residents. This technique promotes natural biodegradation by aerating contaminated subsurface zones, enhancing microbial activity for petroleum breakdown. Although less rapid than thermal desorption, bio-ventilation is less disruptive and more economical for moderately contaminated sites. The technical viability of remediation is well recognized, with political and financial challenges being the primary barriers rather than technological limitations. Determining the right remediation approach in Poza Rica is influenced by the type and seriousness of the contamination, the site’s nearness to residential areas, the urgency for action, and the funding options present. In contrast to the centralized remediation of the 18 de Marzo Refinery/Bicentennial Park, Poza Rica exhibits a more fragmented urban environmental liability distribution.

Numerous impacted areas consist of small plots, abandoned wells, or residual spaces within neighbourhoods. Consequently, remediation strategies should be tailored rather than relying on a singular large-scale approach. Permanent plugging and abandonment should be prioritized for wells adjacent to residential or public areas. In situ methods such as bioventing are more applicable in neighbourhoods where excavation would exacerbate disruption. Thermal desorption ought to be utilized solely for areas with extreme contamination because of its elevated expenses and operational requirements. Ecological restoration and phytoremediation can serve as supplementary strategies post-risk reduction, particularly in areas designated for parks or ecological reserves. Thus, the key takeaway from Bicentennial Park is that while its model is not directly replicable, petroleum-site remediation is feasible when methodologies are adjusted to contamination levels, urban context, institutional accountability, and resource availability.

As Terrazas [20] points out in his analysis of the abandoned industrial areas of Ciudad Juárez, effective remediation requires a clear attribution of responsibility to polluters, adequate public funding where those responsible cannot be identified or compelled to act, and regulatory frameworks that mandate clean-up rather than merely encouraging it. In Poza Rica, establishing these conditions requires addressing PEMEX’s historical evasion of remediation responsibilities and ensuring sustained public investment in land restoration.

To avoid presenting remediation and conversion strategies as abstract ideas,

Table 2. Indicative feasibility criteria for remediation and conversion strategies.

Strategy	Technical Feasibility	Cost Intensity	Risk Reduction Potential	Social Benefit	Timeframe	Key Condition
Permanent plugging and abandonment of inactive wells near housing/schools	High, where well data are available	High	Very high	High	Short–medium term	Clear operator responsibility and regulatory enforcement
In situ bioventing/bio-ventilation	Medium–high	Medium	Medium–high	Medium–high	Medium term	Soil permeability and continuous monitoring
Bioremediation/bio-piles for vacant or degraded plots	High	Medium	Medium–high	High if linked to public-use recovery	Medium term	Availability of treatment space and safe soil handling
Thermal desorption for severe hotspots	High	High	Very high	Medium	Short–medium term	Reserved for priority contamination hotspots
Capping/containment as interim measure	Medium	Low–medium	Medium	Medium	Short term	Long-term monitoring and land-use restrictions
Phytoremediation and ecological restoration	Medium	Low	Low–medium	High	Long term	Suitable only after urgent exposure risks are controlled
Geothermal reuse of selected abandoned wells	Uncertain/case-specific	Medium–high	Medium	Medium–high	Medium–long term	Well integrity, temperature, fluids, ownership and market demand
Reuse of Escolín or other industrial assets for innovation/logistics	Medium	High	Indirect	High	Long term	Investment, planning coordination and workforce transition

evaluates them using indicative feasibility criteria. The aim of this assessment is not to provide a comprehensive cost–benefit analysis, which would require specific data that is not publicly available, but to identify which strategies are immediately feasible and which should be treated as long-term opportunities requiring further feasibility studies.

This assessment suggests that the most viable remediation measures in the short term are those directly linked to risk reduction (namely, the permanent sealing of wells, the remediation of contaminated land near residential areas, or the regeneration of derelict public spaces). In contrast, geothermal reuse and large-scale industrial conversion should be considered promising strategies, albeit subject to certain conditions (technical analysis, investment capacity, land ownership, civil liability agreements and long-term governance).

4.2.4. From Sacrifice Zone to Social Asset

The transformation of disused infrastructure into spaces for community use, alongside ecological restoration, becomes an act of social justice. By converting abandoned infrastructure into spaces for social interaction, the state begins to settle its historical debt to a population that has lived surrounded by ‘tangible toxicity’ for decades, without enjoying the benefits of the wealth extracted from beneath their feet. In the Poza Rica context, such transformations would give a more concrete territorial expression to restorative justice, particularly if remediation priorities were defined with affected neighbourhoods.

The concept of the ‘right to the city’ ([47], as applied by [42]) is particularly appropriate for this case. The remediation and transformation of oil-contaminated wasteland into public facilities are beginning to restore this right, allowing residents to reclaim territory long monopolised by extraction and to reimagine their city’s future beyond oil.

4.3. Pathways for Restoration and Social Remuneration

Social remuneration for Poza Rica after nearly a century of petroleum extraction must be understood not as mere monetary compensation but as structural investment in health, economy, and territorial autonomy. This process requires technical strategies that transform environmental problems into social assets, guided by restorative justice principles that centre affected communities in determining appropriate remedies.

4.3.1. Mandatory Environmental Remediation and Legal Responsibility

Restorative justice demands that operators, specifically PEMEX, assume direct and objective responsibility for damage caused by extraction. According to the Agency for Safety, Energy and Environment [48], remediation is not optional but consists of mandatory measures to reduce contaminants to levels safe for human health and the environment. This regulatory framework provides a legal foundation for convincing remediation, though enforcement has historically been inadequate.

Compliance with Mexican environmental standards is essential for establishing safe cleanup levels. NOM-138-SEMARNAT/SSA1-2012 establishes maximum permissible limits for hydrocarbons in soil, while NOM-147 regulates heavy metals including lead and arsenic. These standards provide objective criteria for assessing when remediation is complete, preventing operators from claiming cleanup is adequate when contamination remains at hazardous levels.

In densely populated areas, the use of in situ technologies, such as bio-ventilation, is justified in order to minimise disruption to residents. In emergency situations or where sites are heavily saturated, ex situ thermal desorption allows for rapid remediation, albeit at higher costs and with temporary disruption. The selection of remediation technology should involve participatory processes that take into account technical effectiveness, costs, disruption to residents and timelines, ensuring community participation in territorial decisions.

Enforcement of the law poses significant challenges. Greyl et al. [15] highlight that oil companies frequently evade environmental liability through legal tactics, political influence and by exploiting legal loopholes. In Poza Rica, compelling PEMEX to fulfil its remediation responsibilities requires sustained pressure from various fronts, including community organisation, regulatory oversight, legal action and political advocacy. The framework of restorative justice underpins these initiatives, framing remediation as a legal and ethical duty rather than corporate benevolence.

4.3.2. Economic Reconversion and Energy Transition

Deactivated infrastructure represents an “underutilized opportunity” for diversifying Poza Rica’s economy and reducing dependence on crude oil. Economic reconversion strategies must address both the material infrastructure of extraction and the economic structures that have made the city dependent on petroleum-related employment:

Geothermal Potential. In the Tampico–Misantla Basin, repurposing closed wells for geothermal projects offers promising opportunities. Many wells reach depths exceeding 2000 m and encounter temperatures above 100 °C, making them potentially suitable for geothermal energy generation or industrial thermal processes. This repurposing would mitigate technical abandonment costs while generating sustainable electricity, transforming liabilities into productive assets [49].

The geothermal reuse of abandoned wells [50] should therefore be seen as a potential avenue for repurposing, rather than as an immediately available solution. Its feasibility depends on multiple technical, economic and institutional conditions. In Poza Rica, many wells may offer theoretical opportunities due to their depth and location within a mature hydrocarbon basin, but each candidate well would require a specific technical assessment before reuse could be considered (

Table 3. Key feasibility conditions for geothermal reuse of abandoned wells in Poza Rica.

Dimension	Key Issues	Implications for Poza Rica
Geothermal conditions	What are the depth, temperature gradient, permeability and fluid availability of each well?	Only wells with adequate subsurface temperature and hydraulic conditions would be technically viable.
Well integrity	Is the casing intact? Is there corrosion, leakage or structural damage?	Unsafe or degraded wells may require costly rehabilitation or should instead be permanently plugged.
Type of use	Is the well suitable for electricity generation, direct heat, industrial heat or low-temperature applications?	Direct heat or local thermal uses may be more realistic than electricity generation if temperatures are moderate.
Transformation costs	What are the costs of assessment, cleaning, re-completion, pumping equipment, surface facilities and grid or heat-network connection?	Reuse is only viable if rehabilitation costs are lower than drilling new geothermal wells or if public support is available.
Environmental benefits	Would reuse reduce abandonment risks, emissions or land-take?	Geothermal reuse could combine clean-energy production with proper well management, but only after safety verification.
Economic benefits	What local jobs, energy savings or new activities could be generated?	Benefits would depend on local demand, workforce retraining and integration with broader economic diversification.
Governance and policy	Who owns the well, who assumes liability, and which permits or incentives apply?	Clear responsibility, regulatory approval and public–private coordination are prerequisites for implementation.

).

Geothermal reuse should therefore form part of a decommissioning strategy based on careful preliminary screening. The first step would be to compile an inventory of inactive wells, classify them according to depth, temperature, integrity, location and ownership, and identify those suitable for direct-use geothermal applications or other forms of energy recovery. Wells that do not meet safety or economic criteria should be prioritised for permanent plugging and environmental remediation. Thus, geothermal reuse is not presented as a universal solution for the abandoned wells of Poza Rica, but rather as a possible avenue within a broader strategy of technical closure, environmental remediation and economic utilisation.

The Escolín Case. The Escolín Petrochemical Complex, inactive since 2007, is identified as a strategic node for comprehensive reuse planning. Proposals envision transforming it into an Innovation, Science and Technology Cluster or a Logistics Park, leveraging its strategic location and existing infrastructure to attract new industries and services that replace extractive activities. This transformation would require significant investments but could catalyse broader economic diversification.

As Ge et al. [51] demonstrate, successful transitions in petroleum-dependent cities require maintaining population stability through economic diversification and green infrastructure investment. Simply closing extractive facilities without creating alternative employment generates economic collapse and population loss, undermining any possibility of restoration. The Escolín transformation must therefore be conceived as part of a broader economic development strategy that creates viable alternatives to petroleum employment while remediating environmental damage.

4.3.3. Citizen Participation and Metropolitan Governance

Territorial restoration will only achieve legitimacy if accompanied by less hierarchical governance structures that centre affected communities in decision-making. The creation of the Metropolitan Subcommission and the Metropolitan Consultative Council (CCM) represents important institutional innovations, incorporating representatives from academia, the private sector, and civil society alongside government officials (albeit with limitations in terms of decision-making).

Social Auditing—Governance mechanisms must enable citizens to participate in risk scenario development and environmental remediation monitoring. As community mobilization in Poza Rica demonstrates, residents possess crucial knowledge about environmental conditions, infrastructure locations, and health impacts that formal assessments often miss. Institutionalizing this knowledge through participatory governance structures enhances both the effectiveness and legitimacy of restoration efforts.

Financing Instruments—The Metropolitan Program proposes creating a Metropolitan Environmental Board (JUMAP) and issuing “Green Bonds” to finance sanitation infrastructure and renewable energy projects, ensuring that restoration benefits are equitably distributed across the population. Green bonds (debt instruments specifically designated for environmental projects) have emerged as important mechanisms for financing sustainability transitions in Latin American cities. Their use in Poza Rica would signal commitment to environmental restoration while potentially attracting international investment in a post-extractive transition.

The governance reforms proposed in the PMZMPR align with scholarly emphasis on participatory approaches to post-extractive transitions. Huang et al. [5] argue that successful urban energy transitions require coordinated changes across multiple domains including governance institutions, and that top-down planning without community engagement typically fails to address local needs and priorities.

5. Discussion

5.1. Metabolic Repair Model

The framework introduced in Section 2.5 allows the Poza Rica case to be interpreted as a process of metabolic repair. Figure 8 synthesises this transition from extractive urban metabolism to regenerative territorial systems. The discussion below examines the three dimensions of this process—ecological repair, economic repair and political repair.

5.2. Ecological Remediation and Public Use Recovery

The recovery of public use of territories long monopolized by petroleum extraction represents a fundamental dimension of restorative justice in Poza Rica. However, public use recovery faces significant challenges. First, contamination levels at many sites may require years of remediation before they are safe for unrestricted public access. Interim uses during remediation, such as restricted-access ecological restoration areas, may be necessary, requiring clear communication with communities about timelines and safety considerations. Second, determining appropriate post-remediation uses requires genuine community participation rather than top-down planning. Different neighbourhoods may prioritize different uses—some may need sports facilities, others green space, still others community gardens or cultural centres—and these preferences should guide remediation planning.

Ruete et al.’s [52] analysis of the Matanza-Riachuelo River restoration in Argentina offers relevant lessons. They find that while participatory governance structures were formally established, power imbalances between government agencies, corporations, and community organizations limited communities’ actual influence over decisions. Effective participation required sustained organizing, legal advocacy, and alliance-building to ensure that community voices were not merely heard but actually shaped outcomes. For Poza Rica, this suggests that formal governance reforms must be accompanied by support for community organizing and legal capacity to ensure that participation translates into genuine power-sharing.

The risk of “green gentrification” must also be considered. As Arquillo et al. [46] note in their analysis of the Santa Cruz Refinery ecological design, remediation and greening of former industrial sites can increase property values and attract wealthier residents, potentially displacing existing communities.

To reduce the risk of green gentrification, remediation projects in Poza Rica should include anti-displacement measures from the outset. These may involve protecting affordable housing, prioritising public and community uses over speculative redevelopment, reserving local jobs in remediation and maintenance, establishing community benefit agreements, and ensuring that affected residents participate in decisions on post-remediation land uses. Where environmental improvements increase land values, part of this value should be reinvested locally in housing, infrastructure and public services.

5.3. Economic Reconversion Beyond Petroleum

Without viable alternative employment, the city faces economic collapse and population loss that would undermine any possibility of restoration. Yet economic reconversion faces formidable challenges in contexts of petroleum dependence, where decades of extraction have created path dependencies in employment, skills, infrastructure, and political–economic relationships.

García’s [53] analysis of urban sustainability and energy transition emphasizes that successful transitions require institutional capacity that may not exist in petroleum-dependent regions. Decades of petroleum dominance often produce institutional monocultures where government agencies, educational institutions, and business organizations are all oriented toward extraction, lacking capacity for economic diversification. Building this capacity, through education reform, institutional development, and attraction of new actors, is a long-term process that must begin immediately even as remediation proceeds.

5.4. Participatory Governance and Community Mobilization

Community mobilization emerges from this analysis as the essential driver of restorative justice in Poza Rica. Without sustained pressure from affected communities, neither government agencies nor PEMEX would prioritise remediation and restoration. The mobilisation of residents in the affected neighbourhoods, including Las Granjas, Ignacio de la Llave and chapultepec, manifested through street blockades, formal legal demands, and organized protests, has forced authorities to acknowledge contamination and begin addressing it.

Community mobilisation functions through four interconnected mechanisms: sociopolitical pressure and accountability (public mobilization increases visibility, compelling government and corporate responses to otherwise overlooked risks. In Poza Rica, protests and formal demands have transformed local grievances into political and legal claims for redress); empirical knowledge and risk identification (residents’ experiential knowledge of everyday risks enhances technical assessments and aids in prioritizing intervention sites); institutionalised vigilance and social auditing (community engagement can shift from protest to oversight, with citizen observatories ensuring transparency in remediation processes); identity reclamation and empowerment (mobilization serves a symbolic function, enabling residents to contest the normalization of oil-related risks and assert their role in shaping their territorial future).

Community mobilisation should not be viewed as a uniform process. Participation varies among residents due to disparities in time, resources, knowledge, connections, and employment reliance. These variations affect which perspectives are acknowledged and what priorities are integrated into decision-making. Tensions may exist between the needs for immediate risk mitigation, job security, economic reform, and long-term ecological recovery. Additionally, participatory governance risks losing credibility if consultations are superficial or if communities lack resources for sustained oversight.

The concept of “bottom-up” policy implementation [54] is particularly relevant for understanding community mobilization’s role in restorative justice. Neira argues that restorative justice policies are most effective when driven by affected communities rather than imposed by authorities, because community-driven processes ensure that restoration addresses actual harms and priorities rather than bureaucratic or political agendas. In Poza Rica, this suggests that the most effective restoration strategies will be those that emerge from community demands and organizing rather than top-down planning.

5.5. Toward Regenerative Urban Metabolism and Metabolic Justice

The integration of ecological remediation, economic restructuring, and participatory governance shows that the post-extractive transition is a fundamental change in urban systems. Restorative actions act as metabolic repair tools, enhancing ecological functions, altering material flows, and fostering fair territorial governance. This approach indicates the rise of metabolic justice, which aims to restore ecological, economic, and social balance in areas affected by extraction. In Poza Rica, this is evident through soil cleanup, infrastructure reuse, and the restoration of territorial rights for community involvement in decision-making [1]. The metabolic remediation model offers insights into post-extractive cities as evolving entities rather than mere remediation efforts.

Although this article is centred on Poza Rica rather than on a comparative research design, its findings resonate with international experiences of post-extractive and petroleum-related urban transitions. Similar to urban oilfield contexts such as Los Angeles, Poza Rica shows how abandoned or insufficiently monitored wells can remain embedded in residential areas, generating long-term uncertainty and land-use constraints.

Like other Latin American cases of contaminated industrial or riverine territories, such as the Matanza-Riachuelo basin, it also illustrates how environmental remediation depends not only on technical capacity, but on institutional accountability and sustained community pressure. At the same time, Poza Rica differs from large, bounded remediation projects such as Mexico City’s Bicentennial Park because its environmental liabilities are dispersed across neighbourhoods rather than concentrated in a single former industrial site. These comparisons suggest that Poza Rica contributes to international debates by highlighting a specifically urban and dispersed form of post-extractive territorial repair in medium-sized oil cities. The relevance of the Poza Rica case does not, therefore, lie in the replication of a single model, but in the analytical framework it provides for other oil-dependent cities.

6. Conclusions

The history of Poza Rica, from its days as the ‘Oil Capital of Mexico’ to becoming a city marked by significant environmental liabilities, neglected infrastructure and socio-spatial inequality, reveals the lasting territorial consequences of extractivist urbanisation. The case demonstrates that the decline in oil production does not automatically put an end to the effects of extractivism; on the contrary, it leaves behind contaminated soil, inactive wells, fragmented urban spaces and communities exposed to risks that continue to be recognised unevenly and addressed inadequately. In this sense, Poza Rica illustrates how extractive economies can continue to shape urban life long after their productive peak has passed.

The originality of this article lies in three interrelated contributions. First, it advances the concept of metabolic repair as a framework linking environmental justice, restorative justice and post-extractive urban transformation. Second, it provides empirical evidence from Poza Rica, a medium-sized oil-dependent city that has received limited attention in the international literature despite its extensive environmental liabilities. Third, it moves beyond the diagnosis of extractive injustice by identifying concrete pathways for territorial restitution through remediation, economic reconversion and participatory governance.

This article has argued that restorative justice in post-extractive cities cannot be reduced to financial compensation or symbolic recognition. In contexts such as that of Poza Rica, justice demands territorial restitution through the material recovery of contaminated and abandoned spaces, the restoration of environmental safety, and the return of land for socially useful purposes. Remediation is therefore not merely a technical matter, but rather a spatial and political process through which communities can begin to reclaim territories historically subordinated to fossil fuel extraction.

The analysis also demonstrates that community mobilisation is not peripheral to restorative justice, but rather one of its central conditions. Residents of affected neighbourhoods possess contextualised knowledge that is essential for identifying priorities and monitoring remediation processes. Their mobilisation challenges the historical exclusion of local communities from decisions regarding extraction, land use and environmental remediation. For restoration to be legitimate and lasting, affected populations must therefore be recognised not merely as victims of environmental damage, but as active agents in shaping the city’s post-extractive future.

The findings from Poza Rica are not intended to be statistically generalised to all post-extractive cities. Rather, they offer analytical generalisation by identifying mechanisms that may be relevant to other oil-dependent urban areas facing production decline. These include the persistence of abandoned infrastructure after extraction, the incorporation of former industrial areas into residential urbanisation, the uneven distribution of environmental risks, the gap between regulatory obligations and actual remediation, and the importance of community mobilisation in demanding accountability. The metabolic repair framework can therefore be applied comparatively to other post-extractive cities, while being adapted to their specific institutional, ecological and socio-economic contexts.

Based on this case, three types of recommendations are suggested:

i. Governments should establish and regularly review a public register of inactive wells, provide information on risks to communities, enforce remediation obligations, and integrate the remediation of contaminated sites into urban planning and climate strategies.

ii. Companies, particularly PEMEX, should fund well capping, soil restoration and ongoing environmental monitoring; define responsibility for abandoned assets; and collaborate with public authorities and residents regarding the safe use of land following remediation.

iii. Communities should be empowered in local environmental monitoring, documenting risks, participating in the prioritisation of remediation, and forming alliances with academic institutions, civil society and experts, thereby facilitating restorative justice through accountability and community-led restitution efforts.

Future research should focus on environmental monitoring, impacts on public health, the feasibility of remediation and community engagement. These areas would strengthen the present case study with even more robust evidence for policy-making.

Poza Rica offers insights for other oil-dependent cities in Latin America, suggesting that the transition to a post-extractive future requires the resolution of environmental liabilities through accountability and community governance. Ultimately, the future depends on transforming abandoned sites into sustainable urban environments, rather than leaving them as toxic legacies.