Contesting fossil extractivism: Practices of deactivation in Milan and Civitavecchia, Italy

• Introduces the concept of deactivation as a strategic approach to dismantling fossil fuel systems, beyond conventional innovation-driven transitions. • Develops a relational approach to explain the resilience of fossil regimes through their embedded political, ideological, and infrastructural networks. • Provides a comparative analysis of Milan and Civitavecchia, illustrating contrasting modes of contestation: symbolic-urban versus territorial-local mobilization. • It engages critically with dominant transition frameworks, arguing that the persistence of fossil fuels requires an active rupture , not just technological or market substitution. • It emphasizes that decarbonization is a political struggle , requiring multiscalar interventions, institutional transformation, and cultural delegitimization. This article explores the dynamics of climate obstruction and counter-obstruction through a comparative analysis of two Italian case studies: Milan and Civitavecchia. Based on a relational approach, it examines how fossil fuel infrastructures are sustained or deactivate through relational, strategic, and temporal processes. In Milan, climate activism focuses on symbolic and discursive delegitimisation of fossil companies such as ENI and ENEL. Despite persistent efforts, infrastructural continuity remains intact due to the entrenched alliances of fossil agents with financial, academic and cultural institutions. In contrast, the case of Civitavecchia demonstrates a rare instance of effective counter-obstruction. A multi-scalar coalition of environmentalists, trade unions, local institutions and civic groups succeeded in halting the conversion of a coal plant to gas, leading to its deactivation. The study highlights three critical conditions for successful counter-obstruction: internal realignment of obstructive networks, multi-level strategic practices (discursive, procedural, infrastructural), and temporal alignment with key decision-making moments. The comparison reveals that climate contestation is about but of strategic relational positioning within evolving infrastructural and institutional contexts. Ultimately, it argues that the deactivation of fossil infrastructure depends not only on public pressure, but on the capacity to fracture, reconfigure, and strategically disable the networks that sustain them.