Solomon Evro, Emovigho Neil Omonigho, Darrell Mayon, Anthony Ekpikie, Moones Alamooti, Olusegun S. Tomomewo
{"title":"绿色复苏还是化石能源锁定?评估主要经济体的可持续性和能源转型路径","authors":"Solomon Evro, Emovigho Neil Omonigho, Darrell Mayon, Anthony Ekpikie, Moones Alamooti, Olusegun S. Tomomewo","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study analyzes the degree to which green recovery policies have succeeded in triggering energy transitions among the world's largest economies after the COVID-19 crisis. The crisis provided a short-term policy window through which fiscal stimulus could be integrated with decarbonization objectives, yet policies ranged from ambition, implementation, to impact. Through a formal multi-method framework of Investment Distribution Analysis (IDA), Emission Impact Assessment via the Kaya Identity, and Energy Transition Rate (ETR) modeling, this research evaluates the extent to which green energy transitions were enabled by post-pandemic recovery programs. Findings demonstrate substantial disparity between green recovery rhetoric and budgetary action. In India and Brazil, over 67 % of recovery expenditure was aimed at short-term economic stabilization, reducing financing levels for renewable energy development (RED) and green jobs and sustainability (GJS) to negligible levels. The UK, France, and Canada are no exception, as RED and GJS fell below 10 % of total spending even after they had signed their climate commitments. China achieved efficiency improvements despite higher absolute emissions; between 2015 and 2023, its net CO₂ emissions rose slightly from 11.02 to 11.22 GtCO₂e, yet its Kaya Multiple declined significantly from 10.19 to 8.29—indicating reduced emissions intensity per unit of economic output and modest structural efficiency gains. Germany and France saw post-COVID rebounds in emissions. Energy transition rates were wildly divergent: Brazil and China saw 50 % and 100 % increases in renewable-to-fossil energy ratios, while Canada and the UK saw stagnation or decrease. These long-term bottlenecks consist of underinvestment in grid modernization, policy incoherence, and inadequate just transition frameworks. The report concludes that green recovery requires more than finance—more institutional alignment, integration of equity, and long-term regulatory commitment to deliver transformative change.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"127 ","pages":"Article 104205"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Green recovery or fossil lock-in? Assessing sustainability and energy transition pathways in major economies\",\"authors\":\"Solomon Evro, Emovigho Neil Omonigho, Darrell Mayon, Anthony Ekpikie, Moones Alamooti, Olusegun S. Tomomewo\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104205\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study analyzes the degree to which green recovery policies have succeeded in triggering energy transitions among the world's largest economies after the COVID-19 crisis. The crisis provided a short-term policy window through which fiscal stimulus could be integrated with decarbonization objectives, yet policies ranged from ambition, implementation, to impact. Through a formal multi-method framework of Investment Distribution Analysis (IDA), Emission Impact Assessment via the Kaya Identity, and Energy Transition Rate (ETR) modeling, this research evaluates the extent to which green energy transitions were enabled by post-pandemic recovery programs. Findings demonstrate substantial disparity between green recovery rhetoric and budgetary action. In India and Brazil, over 67 % of recovery expenditure was aimed at short-term economic stabilization, reducing financing levels for renewable energy development (RED) and green jobs and sustainability (GJS) to negligible levels. The UK, France, and Canada are no exception, as RED and GJS fell below 10 % of total spending even after they had signed their climate commitments. China achieved efficiency improvements despite higher absolute emissions; between 2015 and 2023, its net CO₂ emissions rose slightly from 11.02 to 11.22 GtCO₂e, yet its Kaya Multiple declined significantly from 10.19 to 8.29—indicating reduced emissions intensity per unit of economic output and modest structural efficiency gains. Germany and France saw post-COVID rebounds in emissions. Energy transition rates were wildly divergent: Brazil and China saw 50 % and 100 % increases in renewable-to-fossil energy ratios, while Canada and the UK saw stagnation or decrease. These long-term bottlenecks consist of underinvestment in grid modernization, policy incoherence, and inadequate just transition frameworks. The report concludes that green recovery requires more than finance—more institutional alignment, integration of equity, and long-term regulatory commitment to deliver transformative change.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"127 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104205\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625002865\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625002865","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Green recovery or fossil lock-in? Assessing sustainability and energy transition pathways in major economies
This study analyzes the degree to which green recovery policies have succeeded in triggering energy transitions among the world's largest economies after the COVID-19 crisis. The crisis provided a short-term policy window through which fiscal stimulus could be integrated with decarbonization objectives, yet policies ranged from ambition, implementation, to impact. Through a formal multi-method framework of Investment Distribution Analysis (IDA), Emission Impact Assessment via the Kaya Identity, and Energy Transition Rate (ETR) modeling, this research evaluates the extent to which green energy transitions were enabled by post-pandemic recovery programs. Findings demonstrate substantial disparity between green recovery rhetoric and budgetary action. In India and Brazil, over 67 % of recovery expenditure was aimed at short-term economic stabilization, reducing financing levels for renewable energy development (RED) and green jobs and sustainability (GJS) to negligible levels. The UK, France, and Canada are no exception, as RED and GJS fell below 10 % of total spending even after they had signed their climate commitments. China achieved efficiency improvements despite higher absolute emissions; between 2015 and 2023, its net CO₂ emissions rose slightly from 11.02 to 11.22 GtCO₂e, yet its Kaya Multiple declined significantly from 10.19 to 8.29—indicating reduced emissions intensity per unit of economic output and modest structural efficiency gains. Germany and France saw post-COVID rebounds in emissions. Energy transition rates were wildly divergent: Brazil and China saw 50 % and 100 % increases in renewable-to-fossil energy ratios, while Canada and the UK saw stagnation or decrease. These long-term bottlenecks consist of underinvestment in grid modernization, policy incoherence, and inadequate just transition frameworks. The report concludes that green recovery requires more than finance—more institutional alignment, integration of equity, and long-term regulatory commitment to deliver transformative change.
期刊介绍:
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers.
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.