Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Research & Social Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/erss

Original research article

The emerging field of energy transitions: Progress, challenges, and

opportunities
Kathleen Araújo ∗
Harvard Kennedy School of Government, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 79 John F. Kennedy Street, Mailbox 117, Cambridge, MA 02138,
USA1

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Energy transitions are an unmistakable part of today’s public discourse. Whether shaped by fuel price fluc-
Received 23 January 2014 tuation, environmental and security concerns, aspects of technology change, or goals to improve energy
Received in revised form 4 March 2014 access, attention regularly turns to ways in which to improve energy pathways. Yet what is understood
Accepted 5 March 2014
about energy system change is still emerging. This article explores the evolving field of energy transitions
with an aim to connect and enlarge the scholarship. Definitions and examples of energy transitions are
Keywords:
discussed, together with core ideas on trade-offs, urgency, and innovation. Global developments in energy
Energy transition
and related mega-trends are then reviewed to highlight areas of analytical significance. Key information
Energy system change
Policy and governance
sources and suppliers are examined next. The article concludes with ideas about opportunities for further
Learning research.
Path dependence © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Path creation
Multi-level perspective
Techno-economic paradigm
Globalization
Urbanization
Population

1. Introduction information and practices can alter the way that energy is utilized
[6]. To bridge these nuances in meaning, a more cross-cutting defi-
Changing the way we utilize energy is a recurring theme in nition is used here – namely, a shift in the nature or pattern of how
today’s public discussions. One need only look to policies that prior- energy is utilized within a system.2 This definition recognizes the
itize greener economies, evolutions in unconventional oil and gas, change associated with fuel type, access, sourcing, delivery, reli-
or post-Fukushima adjustments in nuclear energy utilization to see ability, or end use as well as with the overall orientation of the
elements of change underway. system. Change can occur at any level – from local systems to the
Despite frequent focus, no universally accepted definition of global one – and is relevant for societal practices and preferences,
‘energy transition’ exists. A review of energy transition writing infrastructure, as well as oversight [7–8].
shows that varied meanings have been in use since the early 1900s Prominent examples of energy transitions are evident today.
for topics, including quantum electrodynamics and industrial adap- Change in the Danish energy system, for instance, reflects a rise in
tation (Fig. 1). the overall annual share of wind power in the electricity mix from
Writing on the subject in the 1930s, for instance, considered under 1% in 1980 to 33% in 2013 [9]. Similar growth occurred in the
change in energy states that occurs with molecular dissociation [2]. Danes’ use of combined heat and power (CHP or cogeneration), ris-
Coverage in the 1970s centered on fuel substitution and resource ing from 18% to 75% in total thermal production between 1980 and
limitations [3–4]. More recent writing highlights ways to transform 2012, and from 39% to 73% in district heating [10]. These changes
economies in order to reduce carbon emissions [5]. The contem- have enabled the Danish energy system to become increasingly
porary focus also emphasizes how developments in technology,

2
An energy system is a constellation of energy inputs and outputs, involving
∗ Tel.: +1 617 495 1314. suppliers, distributors, and end users along with institutions of regulation, con-
E-mail address: Kathleen araujo@hks.harvard.edu version and trade. Energy system change and energy transitions or shifts are used
1
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/experts/2696/kathleen araujo.html. interchangeably in this article.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.03.002
2214-6296/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121 113

14,000 With this context in mind, I begin by examining some prevailing

12,000 ideas relating to energy system change. I then evaluate key patterns
of analytical significance in energy transitions and related mega-
10,000
trends. This is followed, next, by a discussion of key resources,
8,000 actors and theory. I conclude with some ideas about opportunities
6,000 for further research.
4,000
2,000 2. Ideas about energy transitions

0
To understand the nature of energy transitions studies, it’s
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
useful to first identify prominent ideas in the energy and policy
Fig. 1. Publications covering ‘energy transitions’.
communities.
Source: Based on ‘energy transition’ in titles, abstracts, or keywords of scholarly pub-
lications [1] A more, narrow search of the social sciences and humanities revealed 2.1. Urgency
a similar, albeit smaller-scaled, trend. The search could also be varied for related
terms like ‘energy system change’, ‘energy transformations’, etc.
In today’s discussions, an often-articulated perspective empha-
sizes how current conditions (unlike those in previous periods)
decentralized and efficient3 [11]. Somewhat different in nature
present an imperative to alter society’s energy utilization
is Germany’s nuclear phase-out, following the Fukushima Daichi
[25,27–29]. This view is shaped by pressures relating to sustaina-
accident in 2011. This shift entailed the shutdown of 8 out of 17
bility, access, security and/or reliability of energy. It’s worth noting
nuclear reactors, with the remaining nuclear fleet scheduled for
that pressures to alter energy pathways have existed in the past,
closure by 2022 [12–13]. If the German power supply is considered
particularly during periods of war and global oil shocks. Soci-
between 2010 and 2012, the total decreased by 3% [14] as its share
etal responses to the oil shocks of the 1970s and early 1980s,
from renewable energy rose from 10% to 12% [15].4 Contrary to
for example, included country-level initiatives that strengthened
some expectations, Germany’s net exports in electricity also grew
domestic energy self-sufficiency through conservation, efficiency
by 5586 GWh in the period between 2010 and 2012 [14,16].5 Yet
and/or scaling of domestic sourcing and industries [21,22,30–31].
another example of an energy transition can be seen with what is
What differs today is arguably a heightened awareness relating
occurring in the United States. In this instance, the application of
to the scope of energy challenges, their cross-border impacts, and
hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling technology to uncon-
efforts (depending on the challenge) that may be needed. It is, here,
ventional gas and oil in recent years has contributed to a notable
where social science has potentially its most significant role. Nat-
rise in output. Between 2002 and 2012, natural gas and oil produc-
ural science and technological solutions can be brilliant, and yet
tion grew by 27% and 13%, respectively [17–18]. In line with these
remain untapped within a lab or field project. Understanding how
changes, the United States has reduced its oil imports by 30% and
knowledge, perceptions and practices are shaped and influence;
is on the cusp of becoming a net exporter of natural gas [19–20].
what finance and markets can and cannot do; and how a society’s
While the above examples offer interesting views of contempo-
‘social contract’ enables or detracts from problem-solving are areas
rary energy system change, they do not entirely explain how the
where scholarship can contributen.
shifts are accomplished or what implications the transition may
have. That is where social science plays an instrumental role. The
2.2. Tradeoffs
launch of the Energy Research & Social Science journal provides a
forum to more fully explore such areas.
The International Energy Agency estimates that roughly $38 tril-
In this article, I draw upon previous analyses of energy systems
lion is needed in global investment to meet energy demand by 2035
and technology change [21,22], surveys of data and literature, as
[32]. Questions naturally arise about who pays (i.e. consumers,
well as discussions with energy researchers,6 to explore elements
tax payers, industry, etc.), who decides, and how this is settled.
in the emergent field of energy transitions. The resultant overview
One can also ask whether strategic interests such as jobs, science
identifies a number of areas where researchers, particularly those
and technology leadership, relevant timelines, flexible response,
in the social sciences and humanities, might strengthen the schol-
and responsible stewardship are prioritized. Similarly, what is
arship. Other articles in this special issue consider related themes,
required for underlying infrastructure (i.e. land use and siting, dis-
including Sovacool’s content analysis of energy publications and
placement, and acceptance)? Are short-term objectives guiding
proposed research agenda [23]; Brown and Pasqualetti’s discussion
choices and/or are longer-term aspects also seriously weighed? If
of geographic contributions to energy-society studies [24]; Fri and
more significantly altered pathways are considered, such questions
Savitz’s writing on ways that the social sciences can support the
are amplified by institutional considerations of how to navigate
management of an energy transition [25]; and Jones and Hirsh’s
new directions. Whichever path is taken, costs entail more than
exploration of how history enhances energy research and policy
finance. There are political, environmental, security and other soci-
[26], among others.
etal effects that are not monetized. Understanding the tradeoffs
and how to effectively address them is a fundamental concern for
decision-makers, and a pivotal area for scholarly investigation.

3
2.3. Innovation
Danish CHP plants can scale heat or power output, based on demand. Since they
also have heat storage, surpluses can be set aside for later use. Note: The shift in
self-sufficiency and clean energy is another area of significance in energy transitions Game-changing breakthroughs in how energy is sourced, deliv-
research. ered and utilized – such as what historically occurred with the
4
The domestic power supply (production with net imports) declined 3% from combustion engine or controlled nuclear fission – are often pointed
613,941 GWh to 597,059 GWh [11]. The trend toward renewables continued in
2013 to 11.8% [12].
to as being critical for a new energy transition. In this line of think-
5
Imports grew by 3307 GWh, while exports increased by 8893 GWh. [11] ing, there is no shortage of writing on the concept of accelerating
6
This essay is not intended to be a comprehensive review. innovation [33,34–35]. However, care is needed in how innovation
114 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121

2 3
Global Primary Energy (EJ) Global Primary Energy (%)
200 100%

150 80%

60%
100
40%
50
20%
0 0%
1850 1900 1950 2000 1850 1875 1900 1925 1950 1975 2000

Biomass Coal Biomass Coal Oil

Oil Gas Gas Hydro Nuclear
Hydro Nuclear New Renewables
New Renewables

Figs. 2 and 3. Global Primary Energy by unit amount (EJ) and relative shares. Note: Other reported totals for 2008 include: 478.91 EJ [38]; and 514.10 EJ [14]; 514.89 EJ [39].
For a discussion of variations in energy data, see Section 5.
Source: Adapted from [37]. Note: ‘New’ renewables include technologies like solar photovoltaic energy, geothermal power, and wind power. They do not include energy
derived from traditional water or wind mills, wind-powered sea travel, solar water heating, etc. The chart also does not reflect animal and human power.

is conceived, as discoveries do not happen on demand. Addition- with the growth in use of fossil fuels and electricity. Such portability
ally, translation and scaling of innovation can encompass more is not entirely intrinsic to the fuel type, since concerted investment
than simply the commercialization of a patent. The adoption of a in infrastructure is required, including that for pipelines, tankers,
novel idea into widespread practice, for example, can be driven by liquefaction plants and/or power grid networks.
factors which originate outside of a market. Distinctions are also Other qualitative attributes relating to environmental and health
important when considering the rapid diffusion of an energy inno- effects may focus on kinds of resource and material inputs, releases
vation versus that of an energy transition. While overlap may exist (i.e. emissions or waste), as well as impacts on land and biodiver-
between these phenomena, underlying socio-technical conditions sity, with marked differences in local and global character. Fig. 5
can also radically differ. Here, work by specialists in the history shows one environmental attribute, CO2 emissions from fossil fuels
of science; science, technology and society (STS); anthropologists, since the early 1970s. Here, OECD countries (traditional emitters)
political scientists, and policy can enlarge the theory and empirical are shown as being surpassed by Non-OECD countries in 2004.
insights on underlying determinants of change. Considered in terms of single country contributors, the United
States has dominated recent history for its output of CO2 emis-
sions from energy consumption. In 2006, the US was surpassed
3. Observing energy transitions
by China. (Note: Some variation may exist in the reported year
of this shift, depending on the form of CO2 accounting that is
When examining the field of energy transitions, scale, structure
used.).
and quality of change are common points of analysis [36].
When evaluating energy trends by countries more fully, the
The growth in the scale of different fuel types, for instance, is
way in which countries are characterized and gauged is subject to
shown in Fig. 2 with global primary energy increasing by nearly a
debate, and ripe for social science evaluation. Short-hand classifi-
factor of 20 from 28 Exajoules (EJ) in 1850 to 533 EJ in 2008. Fig. 3
cations of OECD versus Non-OECD countries, industrialized versus
shows the same evolution, but in terms of the relative structure of
industrializing, and developed versus developing characterizations
the global fuel mix. In this case, the diversification of fuels is readily
are frequently employed, but not fully accepted. ‘Developed and
apparent with the shift from a heavy reliance on biomass, like fuel
developing’, for instance, can have a highly subjective meaning
wood, in the mid-1800s to a more varied combination of inputs in
with little relevance for energy.
the 1900s, including nuclear generation that was not commercially
available in the 1800s.7 A more specific comparison of relative fuel
shares in the global energy mix for 1971 and 2011 (Fig. 4) shows a 4. Energy-related mega-trends
decrease in the dominance of oil as growth occurred in the shares
of natural gas, coal/peat, nuclear power, and some renewables. Trends in population, urbanization, and globalization are signif-
In terms of quality, energy systems can be evaluated with any icant for energy in terms of interdependencies and co-evolutionary
number of characteristics, including density, portability, environ- developments.
mental or health effects, efficiency, sustainability and reliability.
Energy density relates to the amount of energy contained within a 4.1. Population
unit of mass or volume. The historical shift from biomass to fos-
sil fuels and nuclear power (embodied in uranium, for instance) The relationship between energy use and population is posi-
constitutes a major change toward higher energy densities. Energy tively correlated, with substantial relevance for energy transitions
portability, or the ability to move energy with ease, has increased analysis. Since 1800, the world’s population has increased by a
factor of more than 7, from under 1 billion to 7.2 billion in 2012
[40,41]. This growth coincides with more than 20-fold increase in
7
A metric to illustrate aspects of these shifts is the ratio of renewables to fossil energy use [21,37]. Projections suggest that the world may reach
fuels changing from 16:1 to 0.2:1 for the period [30]. 9.6 billion by mid-century with the greatest growth occurring in
 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121 115

Fig. 4. Recent shifts in Global Primary Energy by shares of fuels.

Source: Ref. [14].

Africa and India (Fig. 6). By the middle of the 21st century, five of
20,000 the least developed countries – namely Bangladesh, Ethiopia, the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, the United Republic of Tanzania
and Uganda, are projected to be among the twenty most popu-
15,000
lous nations in the world [40,41]. Such trends can have significant
energy implications and related societal pressures, as the high pop-
10,000 ulation growth centers are the same regions where pronounced
energy access challenges exist today [42].
5,000 To put population trends into a slightly different energy con-
text, energy per capita on a global basis has more than tripled
0 between 1850 and 2000 [37,39]. While the world average has
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 changed incrementally in recent years, a number of country distinc-
tions are worth emphasizing (Fig. 7). The United States continues
OECD Non-OECD to far exceed the world average for energy use per capita. Increases
in areas like the Russian Federation, China and Brazil are also
Fig. 5. CO2 from fossil fuels (Mt of CO2 ).
Source: [14]. The Reference Approach, used here, is based on a country’s energy
noticeable. Underlying drivers and international pressures associ-
inventory and is calculated in such a way to include fugitive emissions from energy ated with these differences will continue to be an area of necessary
transformation (e.g. from oil refineries). research for the social sciences.
116 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121

Figs. 6 and 7. Population indicators.

Source: Fig. 6 – [40]. The 2050 estimate is based on medium case assumptions. Fig. 7 – Ref. [14].

4.2. Urbanization development choices remains a priority for urban planners, regu-
lators, utilities, and community members.
Urbanization is another area that presents opportunities and
challenges for energy (and, by extension, energy transitions
research), as underlying choices in power delivery and transporta-
4.3. Globalization
tion, infrastructure, land use, and industry affect energy utilization.
In 1800, roughly 2% of the world population lived in urban centers
Globalization – the intensification of cross-border flows of peo-
[43]. Today, more than half the world population does so [39,40].
ple, information, and trade – is yet another mega-trend with
In fact, mega-cities of 10+ million residents are on the rise (Fig. 8).
relevance for energy system change. Within this phenomenon,
As two thirds of current energy consumption occurs in cities [42],
countless sub-developments matter for energy transition analysis.
such shifts have significance for energy markets, efficiency poten-
One area of particular importance is the substantial rise in cross-
tial, as well as environmental and health impacts. Energy demand
border energy trading (Table 1). If one considers the global supply
centers, for instance, are now much more concentrated, so losses
of natural gas, for example, one finds that 31% of natural gas con-
from the long-range distribution of electricity may be minimized
sumed in 2011 was imported compared to 5% in 1971. To place
[44]. With these conditions, urbanization can lessen the areas of
this in context, the amount of natural gas imports worldwide grew
land use impacts. However, environmental impacts may also inten-
by more than a factor of 17 during the period. This shift reflects
sify in certain areas as air and water pollution is typically more
a greater degree of systemic complexity, when more borders are
concentrated around urban centers. Here, there is potential for mit-
involved.
igation at the source point. Understanding the strategic options of
Daniel Yergin and Michael Levi have written extensively about
the complex dynamics of global energy. In particular, they have
pointed to the increasingly integrated world economy and level of
interconnectivity among countries that factor in energy demand
2025 37 [45–48]. Such inter-relatedness can be seen with the disruptive
shifts in the global economy and geopolitics that are associated
with unconventional gas and oil. Views differ on whether this
2011 23 higher degree of integration constitutes an improvement, as it pro-
vides opportunities to rapidly respond to new conditions, like risk,
in a distributed manner. However, it also brings issues from distant
1990 10 geographies into close proximity.
For analysts of energy transitions, globalization presents oppor-
tunity for more sophisticated focus on: changing models of energy
1970 2
self-sufficiency in international markets, the systemic interaction
of global environmental and security concerns with long-term
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
energy planning, the enlarged influence of IGOs and international
Fig. 8. Number of mega-cities with 10+ million inhabitants in recent years. finance institutions in regional energy investment, and the ways
Source: [40]. that shifting travel modalities alter cross-border energy tracking.
 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121 117

Table 1
Energy imports.

Global imports by fuel type 1971 2011 Growth factor % Fuel that is consumed
1971–2011 1971–2011

Electricity 0.3 EJ 2.3 EJ 8.9 2% → 4% (final energy)

Coal 5.4 EJ 29.2 EJ 5.9 9% → 18% (TPES)
Gas 2.0 EJ 36.2 EJ 17.5 5% → 31% (TPES)
Crude oil, NGL and feedstock 52.1 EJ 96.3 EJ 1.8 50% → 54% (TPES)

Source: Ref. [14].

5. Resources and suppliers of energy information stood as the kind that is monetized and traded within a market
[37]. Non-commercial energy, collected by end-users outside of mar-
In recent decades, energy analysis and the field of energy kets, is often excluded from global calculations. The exclusion of
transitions have evolved with the diversification and growth of non-commercial energy in reporting can be significant as it often
information sources and suppliers of content.8 represents sizeable shares of an industrializing country’s current
consumption and all countries’ historical totals.
5.1. Key suppliers Beyond data sets, technology roadmaps are increasingly used,
such as those generated by the IEA [75]. This form of planning tool
During the global oil shocks of the 1970s, individuals inter- generally evaluates prospective energy trajectories by integrating
ested in energy transitions would have been hard-pressed to locate resource assessments with modeled scenarios.9 The annual World
information on the subject. Many energy ministries had yet to be Energy Outlook is a widely recognized reference which draws upon
created, and in-depth writing or reporting on energy was limited. this approach, in conjunction with in-depth discussion of issues
Contributions of early pioneers, like Putnam [49] and Darm- and developments [65].
stadter et al. [50], provided some of the first, detailed historical Another type of reference material that is relevant for energy
accounts and synthesized data from the League of Nations and transitions research is produced by large teams of specialists. The
United Nations [51]. Such work has been extended by theoret- World Energy Assessment [44], the Global Energy Assessment [37],
ical contributions, discussed in Section 6, like that of physicist and the MIT Future of energy technology series [76] are all examples
Marchetti and energy economist Nakicenovic [52]; physicist of such authoritative writing which focuses on the boundaries of
Goldemberg [53–57]; natural scientist Smil [58–59]; and technical the knowledge frontier. With these references, the mode of report
scientist/planner Grubler [33,36,39,51,60–61]. Interestingly, many development matters, if, for instance, consensus is required. In such
of the prominent, early thought leaders in the field of energy tran- cases, key points may be diluted to secure buy-in. However, una-
sitions have been natural scientists and economists. nimity may bolster the legitimacy of the findings. The diversity
Today’s analysts and scholars are able turn to a diverse range of disciplinary, regional, and technology representation on expert
of sources for industry and policy-relevant writing. Intergov- panels also matters, as variation in methods, experience, and exper-
ernmental organizations (IGOs) such as the United Nations; the tise can substantially alter how biases and knowledge gaps are
Organization of Petroleum Export Countries; the International handled.
Atomic Energy Agency; and International Energy Agency (IEA),
are joined by new players, like the International Renewable 5.3. Challenges
Energy Agency (IRENA), as producers of key energy reporting
and policy-relevant writing [62–67]. Energy industry actors, like As energy data and information providers have become increas-
the International Geothermal Association and BP, also contribute, ingly diverse, discretion is needed to ensure that information limits
complemented by a host of regional and international financial and compatibilities are reasonably understood.
institutions, non-governmental organizations/think tanks and con- Specific to data collection, the United Nations, International
sultancies [38,68–74]. Energy Agency, and World Energy Council rely on surveys of
country authorities or industry members to accurately convey
5.2. Types of energy information national energy information. While this is arguably an efficient
approach, it is subject to different respondent interpretations,
When evaluating energy systems, data sets can vary based on varying degrees of rigor with data collection and estimation, and
definitions, fuel inclusion, and estimations, among factors. Energy sometimes the politics of reporting [77]. Reporting on energy
systems, for instance, can be assessed in terms of primary or final reserves and resources, for example, often involves different sets
energy. Primary energy is essentially raw or unrefined energy as of assumptions and political objectives which can alter technology
it is found in natural form. Examples include: the chemical energy and economic feasibilities, and, in turn, translate to widely ranging
of fossil fuels and biomass; the kinetic potential of river water, the totals. Social scientists and experts in the humanities can improve
electromagnetic potential of solar radiation, as well as the energy such resources with better harmonization of cross-cultural infor-
that is released in a controlled fission reaction with uranium [30]. mation and analytical approaches that are attuned to regionally
By contrast, final energy is the converted or refined form of energy idiosyncratic nuances.
that is utilized in end use, as with gasoline and electricity. Another consideration for energy transitions research is the
Another distinction in energy data involves commercial versus accounting method that is employed when developing primary
non-commercial forms. Commercial energy is generally under- energy data. With combustible fuels, namely fossil fuels and
biomass, the selection of high or low heat values in calculations

8
This article focuses mostly on global and national data. Related information at
9
the regional and local levels provides another valuable level of analysis. Varying Scenario modeling employs backcasting, a method used in resource manage-
socio-political influences and discontinuities of information across local, regional ment and strategic planning that works backwards from a desired target to identify
and national entities present interesting areas for further study. actions or paths to attain the objective.
118 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121

can produce a spread of 5–6% for solid and liquid fuels and 10% framework is used by a variety of authorities, including the Euro-
for gas [37]. Variances for non-combustibles, by contrast, can be pean Commission and UNIDO [79].
much wider [37]. Methods of conversion frame these kinds of dif- When applying the IS lens, scoping may be done at the techno-
ferences and generally encompass substitution, direct equivalents logical, regional, sectoral, national or global level with the choice
or hybridized approaches. depending largely on the case(s) and unit of analysis. The notion
Basic gaps in data also exist. Global and country level infor- of national systems of innovation (NIS), for instance, is useful
mation is fairly comprehensive from the 1970s to recent years for cross-country studies of energy system change [80–82] that
with less detail available on a historical basis for industrializ- encompass interactions of national drivers which spur systemic
ing countries. Estimates of non-commercial energy (when they feedbacks and adaptations [83]. In contrast to NIS is the notion
do exist) generally focus on biomass, like fuel wood and waste, of the technological innovation system (TIS) which considers the
but exclude other forms of non-commercial energy, such as that development, diffusion and use of a specific technology, such as
derived from traditional water wheels and wind mills, wind- geothermal energy, that may be a sub-system of a sector (i.e. elec-
propelled sea travel, and solar water heating. Here, historians and tricity) or bridge several sectors (power, heat, and tourism) [84].
sociologists, as well as scholars of international development are At the global IS level, work now focuses on cross-border elements,
well-suited to apply disciplinary tools, methods, and insights to like transnational institutions, that can advance innovation in ways
improve and extend existing estimates. where countries may be limited [85].
The need for more differentiated data is another challenge Broadly speaking, the strength of IS theory is in its fairly coher-
in energy transitions analysis. Renewable energy information is ent conceptualization of complex ecosystems which allows for
often bundled as one technology in such a way that discrete in-depth analysis of interdependencies and comparisons across
energy trajectories are obscured, including those associated with related cases. This theoretical area has the potential to be extended
geothermal heat and power, solar thermal heat and power, wind with directions, like socio-political investigation of power dynam-
power, biofuels, ocean power, etc. Whether by design or an indi- ics.
rect consequence, this unevenness in reporting creates a resource
bias for researchers that favors more data-rich topics, like his- 6.2. Techno-economic paradigms and socio-technical multi-level
torically commercialized energy. Simplified reporting also misses perspectives
nuanced technology options, like efficiency, storage, and sys-
tems approaches. Recent efforts by organizations, including the Drawing upon ideas about long wave cycles of business devel-
IEA, IRENA and REN21 are making some inroads. In terms of opment and innovation [86–87], the concept of techno-economic
data on energy research and development funding, country level paradigms (TEP) provides another theoretical lens with which to
data has mostly reflected Organization of Economic Cooperation examine energy transitions. Highlighting ties between innovation,
and Development (OECD) governmental support. Relatively recent economic development, technology and institutional change, TEP
efforts have also begun to report on research, development and postulates that new research rationales and norms can develop
demonstration expenditures at a more global level, including large over the course of five or six decades to explain technological
industrializing countries and private sector investment [33,78]. revolutions. As seen with work on low carbon energy today, a
Nonetheless, much remains to be studied, including that associated new paradigm guides the upgrading and modernization of exist-
with state-owned enterprises and non-OECD national laboratories. ing industries to harmonize or synergize with newer industries
Similar to basic data gaps noted above, historians, sociologists, and [88–90].
perhaps industry-focused scholars may be able to extend estimates, A related school of thought includes the sociotechnical systems
when access to concrete information is limited. At a more theoret- multi-level perspective (MLP). MLP expands on transition ideas
ical level, the way that energy information is created and reported found in policy, demographics, ecology, sociology and evolutionary
can be mapped more fully to identify underlying influences in economics, adding normative aims related to sustainable devel-
knowledge development–a subject which experts on institutions opment [91,92]. MLP’s framework views transitions as occurring
and STS have natural strengths. in situations such as those where external pressures destabilize a
prevailing regime to allow for breakthroughs in niches [91,93–95].
Here, disruptive technologies co-evolve with shifts in markets,
6. Theorizing energy transitions regulations, infrastructure, user practices, industrial networks, cul-
tural meaning and scientific understanding [96].
The multi-disciplinary nature of energy transitions is well- In recent years, the disparate lines of TEP and STS MLP theory
suited for theoretical inquiry which considers how and why have become more closely aligned, with writing, such as that of
transitions occur; what enables ‘successful’ models vs. ‘unsuccess- Freeman and Louçã [89], which introduced a layered, subsystem
ful’ ones; and whether certain attributes, like historical familiarity model for TEP. Both sets of theory are useful for conceptualizing co-
or technology conduciveness are critical determinants for energy evolving trends amidst larger system change. Their framing is more
system change. The following conceptual framings reflect some of complex than IS and positions energy transitions within broader
the more central ideas of current relevance for the field of energy developments. While this kind of framing is used by authorities,
transitions. like the Dutch government, some experts note that its level of focus
can miss insights specific to an energy system [51].

6.1. Innovation systems 6.3. Path dependence and creation

Innovation systems theory (IS) is an approach which has been Another set of ideas of relevance to energy transition research
used increasingly to explain technological shifts, like that to low centers on how inertia and enablement shape courses of action.
carbon energy or to distributed generation. With IS, elements of a Path dependence refers to inertia of prior choices constraining
system are highlighted for their roles in how innovation is actively future pathways, based on self-reinforcing limits like sunk invest-
or passively enabled. IS goes beyond technical componentry and ment costs; increasing returns; inter-relatedness of technologies;
processes to include actors, institutions, and networks [79]. This and network effects [97–98]. Sometimes called ‘lock-in’, this idea
 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121 119

explains why new energy technology, may not be adopted even if how energy is sourced, accepted and utilized. The way that this
it is superior and/or economically feasible [99–100]. In contrast to is done plays out often with lines diverging around market-based
the impedance of path dependence is the notion of path creation versus regulatory approaches. This widely used form of classi-
which highlights the agency of entrepreneurs who at least in part fication can obscure a range of approaches that include direct
define the flow of events [101]. Writing, such as that by Garud and deployment by government employees, information or education-
Karnoe’s provides a useful foundation for additional research on led change, leadership by example, and bottom-up or societal-led
agents of change in the context of energy system change. change, among possibilities [21,114].
An important strand of policy writing centers on the rela-
6.4. Learning tive performance of specific tools to attain defined objectives
[115–117]. This work contributes to broad understanding of
Learning is yet another integral concept that relates to energy options. Yet it’s worth underscoring that policy tools which effec-
transitions. While learning generally implies improvement, based tively contribute to or enable an energy transition in one culture
on novel or accrued knowledge, it can be operationalized in a vari- can dramatically differ from those in another. Evaluating policy
ety of ways, including experience curves and adaptive capacity. tools without consideration of institutions, mechanisms or soci-
Experience curves provide a quantitative means to assess cost etal orientation will limit the applicability of findings [104,118].
improvements. Such curves are developed from double log func- Research on societal orientations, the interactions of plural gover-
tions to evaluate change in costs for every doubling of output nance around energy, and the multi-polarity of global actors and
[102]. A variant to this approach is one which considers economies stresses are promising areas that are gaining intellectual ground
of scale in installed or investment cost curves for similar energy under the banner of energy governance [22,119–121].
projects over time [103]. Both forms allow the opportunity to con-
trast changes in energy costs by technology or region, however
7. Areas for future work and conclusion
their simplification limits their use in explaining the rationale for
change.
After examining points raised in this article, one can see that
A somewhat different theoretical tie between energy transitions
a substantial agenda exists for energy transitions research – one
and learning may be found in ideas on adaptiveness, openness,
where social science and humanities can add importantly.
and innovative capacities. Adaptiveness and openness of com-
To begin, scholarly writing can be enhanced with greater com-
plex energy systems generally refer to the resilience and capacity
parative depth on shifts in practices, perceptions, knowledge, and
of a system to interact with external influences [104]. Smil has,
financing relating to energy. In addition, data could be extended
for example, comparatively analyzed national energy transitions,
with more complete and systematic estimates of historical energy
arguing that agility can be a compelling factor in countries’ ability
activity, particularly with respect to Non-OECD countries.
to adapt [105]. A similar idea is the notion of national innovative
Potential also exists for more comprehensive work on the socio-
capacities (NICs), which indicates that a country’s enabling envi-
political and socio-technical conduciveness of differing energy
ronment (i.e. factors that shape its innovative propensity) are key
technologies as they relate to decentralized versus centralized
for competitive performance [106–108].
pathways, and adoption-acceptance factors. While important,
foundational research exists on time constants of change and
6.5. Time scales, and early vs. late adoption
learning, the significance of timing and readiness, convergence
Time scales, forms of adoption, and diffusion rates also have of co-evolutions, and instrumentality of focusing events are also
obvious significance for energy system change. Marchetti and Naki- promising areas. The agency of actors could be explored by more
cenovic provided an early basis for theory-building around time fully evaluating types of change agents in relation to different kinds
constants for energy shifts, based on logistic modeling of energy of energy transitions. Similarly, the role of spillovers, unintended
systems transitions [52]. Using equations to evaluate global energy consequences, and dual purpose technology present additional
technology substitution, they found that periods of 80–130 years lines of inquiry for comparative energy transition cases. Systems
were needed for a shift from 1 to 50%, or 10–90% of the market change theory that is now en vogue also leaves the door open
share. A different study of 14 historical energy transitions by Fou- for alternative conceptual models which more squarely consider
quet at sectoral and service levels [109] found that the time to move industrial and societal readiness in relation to energy shifts. Empir-
from technological innovation to niche market utilization to mar- ical insight on the differences between deliberate and emergent
ket dominance took at least 40 years. Subtle differences between energy pathways could be also amplified with greater attention
these studies, including their scoping, timelines and methods for to modalities of change – namely, deployment, encouragement,
evaluation present promising areas for further exploratory work. monitoring, and organic emergence.
The sequencing of adopters is another critical area of relevant This article set out to highlight areas of progress, challenge, and
theory. Grubler and Wilson have highlighted how first adopters opportunity for the field of energy transitions. Continued complex-
reach a higher market saturation level, while later adopters scale ities in energy pathways and the timeless nature of transitions
more quickly, but less extensively [110–112]. An important insight research underscore a genuine and ongoing need for innovative
is that early adopters may well become entrenched in the lock-in scholarship.
of their existing technology choice, as with fossil fuels. Meanwhile,
late adopters may have less sunk costs and be more nimble in References
adopting a subsequent option. Goldemberg approached this idea
[1] Scopus database, January 1, 2014. Scopus covers peer-reviewed journal arti-
somewhat differently by articulating how late adopters benefit
cles and other publications from the life sciences (4300+ titles), health
from the opportunity to sidestep early issues in order to advance sciences (6800+ titles), physical sciences (7200+ titles), and social sciences
directly to newer, more superior technologies [113]. and humanities (5300+ titles). It is one of two premium periodical databases.
The coverage and functionality of Scopus made it a reasonable choice. Web
of Science/Knowledge would be another reasonable option.
6.6. Policy and governance
[2] Semenoff N, Shecter A. Transition of kinetic into vibrational energy by colli-
sions with particles. Nature 1930;126(3177):436–7.
Because energy is fundamental to society’s day-to-day deal- [3] Robinson C. The energy market and energy planning. Long Range Planning
ings, government can be expected to take an active interest in 1976;9(6):30–8.
120 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121

[4] Wishart R. Industrial energy transition: a petrochemical perspective. Science USA/Laxenburg, Austria: Cambridge University Press/International Institute
1978;199(10):614–8. for Applied Systems Analysis; 2012.
[5] Trudeau N, Tam C, Graczyk D, Taylor P. Energy transition for industry: India [38] BP. Statistical review of world energy; 2013 http://www.bp.com/
and the global context. IEA Information Paper. Paris: IEA; 2011. en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-
[6] LaMonica M. Opower CEO: don’t underestimate utilities in energy world-energy-2013.html
transition, Greenbiz; 2014 http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/02/27/ [39] EIA. International data; 2014 http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/
opower-ceo-dont-underestimate-utilities-energy-transition [28.02.14]. [40] United Nations Population Division. World population prospects, Revision;
[7] See also Laird F. Against transitions? Uncovering conflicts in changing energy 2013.
systems. Sci Cult 2013;22(2):149–56. [41] United Nations Population Division. The world at six billion; 2000
[8] Verbong G, Loorbach D. Governing the energy transition. London: Routledge; http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/sixbillion/sixbillion.htm
2012. [42] IEA. World energy outlook. Paris: IEA/OECD; 2008.
[9] 2013 was a record-setting year for Danish wind power, Energinet.dk. 2014. [43] UN Habitat. Urbanization: facts and figures, UNHSP/BASICS1/02; 2013
[10] Danish Energy Agency. Energy statistics; 2012 http://www.ens.dk/ http://www.unhabitat.org
en/info/facts-figures/energy-statistics-indicators-energy-efficiency/annual- [44] World Energy Assessment. UNDP, UN Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs,
energy-statistics WEC; 2000.
[11] Danish Energy Agency, Danish Board of District Heating. District heating: [45] Levi M. The emerging irony of U.S. energy independence. CNBC Special Report;
Danish and Chinese experience; undated. http://www.ens.dk/ 2013 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100780504 [03.06.13].
[12] International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). PRIS database; 2014 [46] Yergin D. The globalization of energy demand. CNBC Special Report; 2013
http://www.iaea.org [accessed 26.03.14]. http://www.cnbc.com/id/100784599 [03.06.13].
[13] World Nuclear Association (WNA). Nuclear Power in Germany; 2013 [47] Yergin D. The quest. New York: Penguin Press; 2011.
http://www.world-nuclear.org [accessed 26.02.14]. [48] Yergin D. The prize. New York: Free Press; 2011.
[14] International Energy Agency (IEA). Data, subscription; 2014 [accessed [49] Putnam P. Energy in the future. New York: Van Nostrand; 1953.
01.03.14]. [50] Darmstadter J, Teitelbaum P, Polach J. Energy in the world economy: a statisti-
[15] AG Energiebilanzen, Press, 2013 and 2011. http://www.ag- cal review of trends in output, trade, and consumption since 1925. Baltimore:
energiebilanzen.de/ The Johns Hopkins University Press; 1971.
[16] Loreck C, Hermann H, Matthes F, Emele L, Rausch L [Henshaw J, [51] Grubler A. Energy transitions research. Energy Policy 2012;50.
Cook V, Trans.] Impacts of Germany’s nuclear phase-out on electricity [52] Marchetti C, Nakicenovic N. The dynamics of energy systems and the logistic
imports and exports, Report. Berlin, Germany: Oko-Institut e.V.; 2013 substitution model, RR-79-13. Luxemburg, Austria: IIASA; 1979.
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/ [31.01.13]. [53] Goldemberg J. Global options for short-range alternative energy strategies.
[17] Energy Information Administration (EIA). U.S. natural gas marketed produc- Energy 1979;4:733–44.
tion (MMcf), Table N9050US2; 2014 http://www.eia.gov/ [31.01.14]. [54] Goldemberg J. Energy needs in developing countries and sustainability. Sci-
[18] EIA. Crude oil production; 2014 http://www.eia.gov/ [27.02.14]. ence 1995;269(5227):1058–9.
[19] EIA. International and interstate movements of natural gas by state, Table; [55] Goldemberg J, Johannsson T, Reddy A, Williams R. End-use oriented global
2014 http://www.eia.gov/ [28.02.14]. energy strategy. Annu Rev Energy 1985;10:613–88.
[20] EIA. Net imports of total crude oil and products into the US by country, Table; [56] Goldemberg J. Rural energy in developing countries. In: World energy assess-
2013 http://www.eia.gov/ [27.09.13]. ment. UNDP, UN Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, WEC; 2000.
[21] Araújo, K. Transformative energy: Low carbon energy transitions and inno- [57] Goldemberg J, Lucon O. Energy, environment and development. New York,
vation in prime mover countries. Oxford University Press: New York, USA/Abingdon, UK: Earthscan; 2010.
forthcoming. [58] Smil V. Energy in the twentieth century: resources, conversions, costs, uses,
[22] Araújo, K. Geothermal energy in Kenya, Working Paper, Innovation and access and consequences. Annu Rev Energy Environ 2000;25:21–51.
to technologies for sustainable development, Harvard University, Cambridge, [59] Smil V. Energy in world history. Boulder, CO: Westview; 1994.
MA, Fall 2013. [60] Grubler A, Jefferson M, Nakicenovic N. Global energy perspectives. Technol
[23] Sovacool BK. What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy schol- Forecast Soc Change 1996;51(3):237–63.
arship and proposing a social science research agenda. Energy Res Soc Sci [61] Grubler A, Nakicenovic N, Victor D. Dynamics of energy technologies and
2014;1:1–29. global change. Energy Policy 1999;27(5):247–80.
[24] Pasqualetti M, Brown M. Ancient discipline, modern concern: geographers in [62] Hohler A, Tyne A, Fadhl F, Aspinall N, Greenwood R, Boyle R. Global trends in
the field of energy and society. Energy Res Soc Sci 2014;1:122–33. sustainable energy investment 2010. Frankfurt School and UNEP; 2010.
[25] Fri B, Savitz M. Rethinking energy innovation and social science. Energy Res [63] Organization of Petroleum Export Countries. World oil outlook. Vienna:
Soc Sci 2014;1:183–7. OPEC; 2013.
[26] Jones C, Hirsh R. History’s contributions to energy research and policy. Energy [64] International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The safety case and safety assess-
Res Soc Sci 2014;1:106–11. ment for the pre-disposal management of radioactive waste, GSG-3; 2013
[27] Hirst N, Froggatt A. The reform of global energy governance. Discussion Paper http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/IAEABooks/8882/The-Safety-Case-and-
No. 3. London: Chatham House, Imperial College; December 2012. Safety-Assessment-for-the-Predisposal-Management-of-Radioactive-Waste
[28] El-Ashry M. National policies to promote renewable energy. Daedalus [65] IEA. World energy outlook. Paris: OECD/IEA; 2013.
2012;141(2):105–10. [66] Isaksson A. Energy infrastructure and industrial Development, Working
[29] Florini A, Dubash N. Introduction to a special issue: governing energy in a paper, UNIDO. Working Paper, 12/2009. Vienna, Austria: Research and Statis-
fragmented world. Glob Policy 2011;2. tics Branch; 2009/2010.
[30] National Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978, NECPA, Pub. L. 95- [67] International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). Global atlas for renewable
619, 92 Stat. 3206, enacted November 9, 1978; Office of Energy energy: overview of solar and wind maps; 2014.
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, US Department of Energy, The [68] International Geothermal Association and International Finance Corpo-
appliance and equipment standards program, http://energy.gov/eere/ ration. Geothermal exploration best practices guide; 2013 http://www.
buildings/about-appliance-and-equipment-standards-program geothermal-energy.org/ifc-iga launch event best practice guide.html
[31] EIA, Fuel economy standards have affected vehicle efficiency, August 3, 2012, [69] Tenenbaum B, Greacen C, Siyambalapitiya T, Knuckles J. From the bottom
http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7390 up: how small power producers and mini-grids can deliver electrification
[32] IEA. World energy outlook. Paris: IEA/OECD; 2011. and renewable energy in Africa. Directions in development. Energy and
[33] See, for example, Grubler, A. Aguayo, F., Gallagher, K., Hekkert, M., Jiang, K., mining. Washington, DC: World Bank Group; 2014 http://documents.
Mytelka, L., Neij, L., Nemet, G., and Wilson, C. Chapter 24 – Policies for the worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/01/18812270/bottom-up-small-power-
Energy Technology Innovation System (ETIS), in: Global Energy Assessment producers-mini-grids-can-deliver-electrification-renewable-energy-africa
– Toward a Sustainable Future. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK [70] African Development Bank. Shale gas and its implications for Africa
and New York, NY, USA and the International Institute for Applied Systems and the African Development Bank; 2013 http://www.afdb.org/
Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, 665–1744 (2012). en/documents/document/shale-gas-and-its-implications-for-africa-and-
[34] Jaccard M, Agbenmabiese L, Azar C, de Oliveira A, Fischer C, Fisher B, Hughes A, the-african-development-bank-33878/ [17.10.13].
Ohadi M, Kenji Y, Zhang X. Chapter 22 – Policies for Energy System Transfor- [71] Global Environment Facility (GEF). Investing in renewable energy. Washing-
mations: Objectives and Instruments. In: Global Energy Assessment – Toward ton, DC: GEF; undated.
a Sustainable Future. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA/Laxenburg, [72] McKinsey & Company. Energy efficiency: a compelling global resource,
Austria: Cambridge University Press/International Institute for Applied Sys- Report; 2010 http://mckinseyonsociety.com/energy-efficiency-a-
tems Analysis; 2012. p. 1549–602. compelling-global-resource/ [March 2010].
[35] Henderson R, Newell R. Accelerating energy innovation: Insights from multi- [73] Ochs A, Makhijan S. Sustainable energy roadmaps, 187, Report. Worldwatch;
ple sectors. Working Paper 10-067. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School; 2012.
2010/2011. [74] IHS. http://www.ihs.com/index.aspx
[36] Grubler A. Transitions in energy use. In: Cleveland C, editor. Concise encyclo- [75] IEA. Technology Roadmap series; various years. http://www.iea.org
pedia of the history of energy. Boston: Elsevier; 2008. [76] Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Future of Energy series,
[37] Adapted from Grubler A, Johansson T, Mundaca L, Nakicenovic N, Pachauri http://mitei.mit.edu/publications/reports-studies
S, Riahi K, Rogner H, Strupeit L. Energy primer. In: Global Energy Assess- [77] Sovacool B. The methodological challenges of creating a comprehensive
ment – toward a sustainable future. oCambridge, UK and New York, NY, energy security index. Energy Policy 2012;48:835–40.
 K. Araújo / Energy Research & Social Science (2014) 112–121 121

[78] Kempener R, Diaz Anadon L, Tarco J. Energy innovation pol- [99] Cowan R. Nuclear power reactors: a study in technological lock-in. J Econ Hist
icy in major emerging countries, Policy brief; December 2010 1990;50:541–67.
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/20615/energy innovation [100] Unruh G. Understanding carbon lock-in. Energy Policy 2000;28(12):
policy in major emerging countries.html 817–30.
[79] Johnson A. Functions in innovation systems approaches, Paper, DRUID Con- [101] Garud R, Karnoe P. Path creation as a process of mindful deviation. In: Garud
ference; undated. R, Karnoe P, editors. Path dependence and creation in the Danish wind turbine
[80] Nelson R, editor. National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. New field. London: LEA Associates Publishers; 2001 [chapters 1 and 2].
York: Oxford University Press; 1993. [102] Nakicenovic N, Grubler A, Macdonald A. Global energy perspectives.
[81] Freeman C. The ‘national system of innovation’ in historical perspective. Camb Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998/1999.
J Econ 1995;19:5–24. [103] Grubler A. The costs of French nuclear scale-up. Energy Policy
[82] Lundvall B, editor. National innovation systems: towards a theory of innova- 2010;38(9):5174–88.
tion and interactive learning. London: Pinter; 1992. [104] Cherp A, Jewell J, Goldthau A. Governing global energy: systems, transitions,
[83] Edquist C. Systems of innovation. In: Fagerburg J, Mowery D, Nelson R, editors. complexity. Glob Policy 2011;2.
Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005. [105] Smil V. Energy transitions. Westport, CT: Praegar; 2010.
[84] Bergek A, Jacobsson S, Carlsson B, Lindmark S, Rickne A. Analyzing the func- [106] Furman J, Porter M, Stern S. The determinants of national innovative capacity.
tional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis. Res Policy 2002;31:899–933.
Res Policy 2008;37(3):407–29. [107] Henderson R, Newell R. Accelerating energy innovation: insights from multi-
[85] Project on Sustainable Innovation and Access to Tech- ple sectors, Working Paper 10-067. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School;
nologies for Sustainable Development, Harvard University. 2010/2011.
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/sustsci/activities/ [108] Porter M. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press; 1990.
program-initiatives/innovation [109] Fouquet R. The slow search for solutions: lessons from historical transitions
[86] Kondratiev N. The long waves in economic life. Rev Econ Stat 1935;17:105–15. by sector and service. Energy Policy 2010;38:6586–96.
[87] Schumpeter J. Business cycles: a theoretical, historical and statistical analysis [110] Grubler A. Time for a change: on the patterns of diffusion of innovation.
of the capitalist process, vol. I. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1939. Daedalus 1996;125(3):19–42.
[88] Freeman C. The economics of industrial innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press; [111] Wilson C, Grubler A. Lessons from the history of technological change for
1982. clean energy scenarios and policies. Nat Resour Forum 2011;35:165–84.
[89] Freeman C, Louçã F. As time goes by. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002. [112] Wilson C. Upscaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion
[90] Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Silverberg G, Soete L, editors. Technical change of energy technologies. Energy Policy 2012;50.
and economic theory. London: Pinter; 1982. [113] Goldemberg J. Leapfrog energy technologies. Energy Policy
[91] Verbong G, Loorbach D. Governing the energy transition. London: Routledge; 1998;26(10):729–42.
2012. [114] Foxon T. Transition pathways for a UK low carbon electricity future. Energy
[92] Eldredge N, Gould S. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic grad- Policy 2013;52:10–24.
ualism. In: Schopf T, editor. Models in paleobiology. San Francisco: Freeman [115] Verbruggen A, Lauber V. Assessing the performance of renewable electricity
Cooper; 1972, reprinted in Eldredge N. Time frames. Princeton: Princeton support instruments. Energy Policy 2012;45:635–44.
University Press; 1985. [116] Faulkner R. Global environmental politics and energy: mapping the research
[93] Rip A. Kemp R. Technological change. Vol. 2, S. Rayner and E.L. Malone (Eds.) agenda. Energy Res Soc Sci 2014;1:188–97.
In: Human choices and climate, Battelle Press: Columbus (1998). [117] OPTRES. Assessment and optimization of renewable energy support schemes
[94] Geels F. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: in the European electricity market. Report by order of the European Commis-
a multilevel perspective and a case-study. Res Policy 2002;31:1257–74. sion. Brussels, Belgium: DG Energy and Transport; 2007.
[95] Geels F, Schot J. Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res Policy [118] Burtraw D. The institutional blind spot in environmental economics. Daedalus
2007;36:399–417. 2013;142(1):110–8.
[96] Geels F. Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: refin- [119] Goldthau A, Witte J. Assessing OPEC’s performance in global energy. Global
ing the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective. Technol Forecast Social Policy 2011;2(5).
Change 2005;72(6):681–96. [120] La Viña A, Dulce J, Saño N. National and global energy governance: issues,
[97] Arthur W. Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by histor- linkages and challenges in the Philippines. Global Policy 2011;2(5).
ical events. Econ J 1989;99(394):116–31. [121] Goldthau A. Rethinking the governance of energy infrastructure: scale, decen-
[98] David P. Clio and the economics of QWERTY. Am Econ Rev 1985;75:332–7. tralization and polycentrism. Energy Res Soc Sci 2014;1:134–40.