Geopolitical Energy Vulnerability in a Changing World: Regional Dependence and Resilience Across Energy Transition Pathways
Keywords:
energy vulnerability, energy resilience, geopolitical risk, critical materials, energy transitionAbstract
Energy transitions are reducing dependence on fossil-based electricity while simultaneously increasing reliance on critical materials and clean-energy technology supply chains, potentially redistributing geopolitical vulnerability across regions. This study assessed regional energy dependence, vulnerability, and resilience across alternative transition pathways, with attention to geopolitical constraints, critical-material pressure, and clean-technology supply-chain exposure. A quantitative scenario-based comparative framework integrated GCAM 7.0, PROMETHEUS V1, and TIAM-Grantham outputs with MARIO material and technology indicators. The NDC-LTT pathway served as the reference condition. Energy-system indicators were evaluated over 2020–2050, while critical-material changes were assessed over 2025–2050; diversification, constraint deviations, vulnerability and resilience indices, technology-price differentials, and Spearman correlations were subsequently derived. Fossil-electricity shares declined markedly while renewable penetration increased across all three models. PROMETHEUS vulnerability scores ranged from 0.104 to 0.667, while TIAM-Grantham scores ranged from 0.028 to 0.624. Vulnerability and resilience were inversely associated in TIAM-Grantham (ρ = −0.518, p = 0.048). Nickel and copper showed the strongest material pressure, while offshore wind and photovoltaic technologies exhibited the largest foreign–domestic price differentials. Energy transition therefore reduces conventional fossil dependence but creates uneven regional exposure to resource, technology, and supply-chain constraints. Resilient transition planning requires diversification, material-security strategies, and robust clean-energy supply networks.
References
1.Amato, V. (2025). The Renewable Energy Transition: A New Geopolitical Game. Perspective Politice, 18, 33.
2.Araújo, O. Q., & de Medeiros, J. L. (2021). How is the transition away from fossil fuels doing, and how will the low-carbon future unfold?. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 23(5), 1385-1388.
3.Blondeel, M., Bradshaw, M. J., Bridge, G., & Kuzemko, C. (2021). The geopolitics of energy system transformation: A review. Geography compass, 15(7), e12580.
4.Chen, S., Liu, P., & Li, Z. (2020). Low carbon transition pathway of power sector with high penetration of renewable energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 130, 109985.
5.Cui, L., Yue, S., Nghiem, X. H., & Duan, M. (2023). Exploring the risk and economic vulnerability of global energy supply chain interruption in the context of the Russo-Ukrainian war. Resources Policy, 81, 103373.
6.Dong, Z., Tan, Y., Wang, L., Zheng, J., & Hu, S. (2021). Green supply chain management and clean technology innovation: An empirical analysis of multinational enterprises in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310, 127377.
7.Gandomi, S., Barzegar, M., Zolghadri, S., & Rahimpour, M. R. (2024). The future of fossil fuels supply and impacts on sustainability. Encycl. Renew. Energy Sustain. Environ, 121, 121-129.
8.Holechek, J. L., Geli, H. M., Sawalhah, M. N., & Valdez, R. (2022). A global assessment: can renewable energy replace fossil fuels by 2050?. Sustainability, 14(8), 4792.
9.Khourdajie, Fragkos, P., Zisarou, E., van de Ven, D.-J., Rinaldi, L., Hawkes, A., & Mittal, S. (2024). IAM_COMPACT_Study_3_Geopolitics [Dataset]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13840864
10.Kuzemko, C., Blondeel, M., Bradshaw, M., Bridge, G., Faigen, E., & Fletcher, L. (2025). Rethinking energy geopolitics: Towards a geopolitical economy of global energy transformation. Geopolitics, 30(2), 531-565.
11.Lin, B., & Zhang, Z. (2025). Geopolitics of renewable energy development: The role of energy metals. Energy Policy, 198, 114482.
12.Mayer, A. (2022). Fossil fuel dependence and energy insecurity. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 12(1), 27.
13.Omokaro, G. O., Nafula, Z. S., Iloabuchi, N. E., Efeni, O. S., Adeyanju, O. I., Janet, O. O., & Idiong, O. U. (2025). Energy sanctions in the global economy: Geopolitical disruptions, market fragmentation, innovation and green transition. International Journal of Innovation Studies, 9(3), 246-261.
14.Rabbi, M. F., Popp, J., Máté, D., & Kovács, S. (2022). Energy security and energy transition to achieve carbon neutrality. Energies, 15(21), 8126.
15.Scholten, D. (2023). Introduction: The geopolitics of the energy transition. In Handbook on the geopolitics of the energy transition (pp. 1-18). Edward Elgar Publishing.
16.Shi, H., Heng, J., Duan, H., Li, H., Chen, W., Wang, P., ... & Wang, S. (2025). Critical mineral constraints pressure energy transition and trade toward the Paris Agreement climate goals. Nature Communications, 16(1), 4496.
17.Siddi, M. (2023). The geopolitics of energy transition: New Resources and Technologies. The implications of emerging technologies in the Euro-Atlantic space: views from the younger generation leaders network, 73-85.
18.Song, W., Li, Y., Cheng, J., Chen, R., Wu, J., & Jia, N. (2024). Enhancing social vulnerability assessment with energy resilience: A comprehensive study of the Netherlands. Sustainable Cities and Society, 103, 105251.
19.Wang, X., Guo, L., Xue, G., Tan, J., Niu, W., & Wu, Y. (2025). Toward low-carbon power systems: reviewing life cycle carbon footprints of diverse generation pathways. Energies, 18(24), 6413.
20.Wojtaszek, H. (2025). Energy transition 2024–2025: New demand vectors, technology oversupply, and shrinking net-zero 2050 premium. Energies, 18(16), 4441.
21.Yang, Y., Xia, S., & Qian, X. (2023). Geopolitics of the energy transition. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 33(4), 683-704.
22.Yao, B., Jeong, H., Mehrtash, M., Allan, B., Ockerman, D., & Dvorkin, Y. (2025). Understanding supply chain constraints for the US clean energy transition. npj Clean Energy, 1(1), 9.
