Academic Journal of Suriname 2012, 3, 284-291

Energy system transition research

Full-length paper
Miscellaneous
1

Developing countries more in need of energy

system transition research
Danil A. Lachman
Institute for Graduate Studies and Research, University of Suriname, Suriname, South-America

Abstract
Globally, energy security is in dire straits and the affiliated energy systems, heavily
based on fossil fuels, need to be transformed into sustainable alternatives. Transition
research is an attempt to grasp the complexities of such so-called sustainability
transitions which involve not only (technical) artifacts but also encompass fundamental
societal transitions. Furthermore, due to the nature (of their energy sector) developing
countries are relatively more in need of this understanding of sustainability transitions.
However, virtually all research on sustainability transitions is confined to Western
societies and has limited applicability to the context of developing countries. This paper
is therefore a call to significantly ramp up the research on sustainability transitions in
developing countries.

Key words: developing countries, energy security, sustainability transitions

1. Introduction
Energy security is generally understood to
consist of availability, affordability and
reliability. Lately, two more aspects are being
regarded as noteworthy additions, namely
social acceptability and (environmental)
sustainability. Due to its importance as one of
the main conditions to keep modern society
running, achieving and maintaining an
acceptable level of energy security is a major,
economic, social and political goal, and is
nowadays more on the front page of
newspapers than ever before. The reason for
this lies in the fact that each of the components
mentioned above have come lately under
severe stress. In the case of energy availability
one has to look no further than the diminishing
fossil fuel resources which guarantee the
majority of global energy supply. This,
combined with increasing demand especially
from developing nations has its detrimental
effects on energy affordability, i.e. rising
energy prices, and reliability, in particular of
energy supply. The disaster in March 2011 in
the Japanese Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant

and its subsequent global shockwave causing

public opposition against nuclear power, are an
indication of the importance of acceptance of a
particular form of energy production by the
public. And finally, any energy supply should
be environmentally sound, meaning that the
entire energy flow path (from raw material
extraction to energy use) does not deprive
future generations of access to use this flow
path.
These negative effects concerning energy
security are not restricted to certain regions or
groups of countries, but rather are global in
scope, meaning that all types of countries
(ranging from poor to affluent, large and
small), will be affected in one way or another
if the current energy system, focused on fossil
fuels, is not transformed into one of a more
sustainable nature (Stern 2006). This alteration
of the current ruling energy system is
especially difficult since it involves collective
goods and large vested interests in power
plants, energy sources and infrastructure. This
is where the notion of sustainability
transition comes into play: a change (in terms
of the co-dynamics of technologies,

Correspondence to: Danil A. Lachman. Institute for Graduate Studies and Research, University of Suriname,
Paramaribo, Suriname. Tel: 597 8883156. E-mail: danny_lachman@yahoo.com
Available on-line June 20, 2012

Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291

Energy system transition research

institutions, organizations, and social and

economic subsystems) of systems (and
affiliated criteria to assess the appropriateness
of products, services and systems) towards
environmental
and
social
sustainable
alternatives which is /objective-oriented in
nature and can thus be controlled and directed
to a certain extent (Geels 2011). In reaction to
this need for sustainability transitions, research
has emerged in the last two decades on the
subject of transition thinking, sustainability
transitions, socio-technical transformations,
etc. This research has its origins in Western
societies and it is the objective of this paper to
assess the degree to which developing
countries are in need of the forthcomings of
transition research.
This paper defines the terms developed
countries and developing countries in the
same sense as is done in mainstream
publications, i.e. the scope of these terms are
based on conventions set by the International
Monetary Fund, that uses per capita income
level, degree of export diversification, and
degree of integration in the global financial
system as criteria (International Monetary
Fund 2012), and the World Bank, that uses
solely per capita income levels (World Bank
2012). This paper, however, does not suggest
that these criteria are correct indicators of
development; rather, it uses the widespread
notion of this distinction and focuses on the
differences in general between these two
loosely-defined groups as an argument for its
recommendations.
The paper is structured as follows: The
second section deals with transition research,
followed by a section on the need of transition
thinking in developing countries. The fourth
section discusses the notion that developing
countries are in need of their own research on
energy systems transition. The last section
provides concluding remarks.

2. Transition Thinking
It goes without saying that the majority of
the existing global energy infrastructure needs
to be altered. These fossil fuel-based energy
and transportation systems are socio-technical
in nature (a term first coined by Hughes in
1983) meaning that they encompass the
technological, social, political, regulatory, and
cultural aspects and thus require social
institutions and technological artifacts to
function (Sovacool 2009); nevertheless, most
work done on the subject of transforming
energy systems into sustainable alternatives
has focused more
on technology an

285

approach sometimes even endorsed by

environmentalists
(International
Energy
Agency 2011). However, social institutions
and technological artifacts are constructed of
established and dominating views, policies,
rules, practices and designs, which in turn are
kept in power by these same institutions and
artifacts. This dominance was described by
Dosi as a technological paradigm (1982), a
term which has been elaborated upon through
the concept technological regime by Rip and
Kemp (1998) and Geels (2002). This leads to
the notion that currently dominating fossil
fuel-based energy and transportation systems
are locked-in (Unruh 2002), i.e. they
maintain a dominant position in society
(relative to alternatives) which can easily
encompass several decades. In a more general
context such entanglement was observed by
Feyerabend (1975) years before the notion of
socio-technical
systems,
technological
paradigms and technological regimes was
brought up.
The change from embedded fossil fuelbased socio-technical systems to more
sustainable ones (i.e. ones that can guarantee
energy security on the long term) is where
transition thinking comes into play. Its origins
can be traced all the way back to the transition
concept coined around the times of the French
Revolution, and Darwinism which Schumpeter
incorporated in the social sciences leading to
the birth of evolutionary economics (Smith et
al 2005, Elzen et al. 2005). Darwinism
recognized non-technical drivers, such as those
found in social, political and economic
spheres, of innovation (Stirling 2011). With
the emergence of systems thinking in the
1950s
(Loorbach
2010),
evolutionary
economics led around the beginning of the
1980s to the notions of technological
regimes by Nelson and Winter (1977) and
technological paradigm by Dosi (1982) who
together with Thomas Hughes also rejected the
then dominant stance that technology was
completely autonomous and had no ties with
social, political, and economic spheres
(Sovacool 2009).
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, when
the policy concept of innovation systems and
transitions emerged, various strands of
transition thinking
evolved, such as Actor
Network Theory, Disruptive Innovation
Theory, Complex Adaptive Systems Theory
and Innovations Systems Theory. Combined
with governance and sustainability
concepts, around the turn of the millennium
the groundwork for the latest wave of
transition studies (with a strong focus on socalled sustainability transitions) was made
Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291

286

(Grin et al. 2010). These consisted of the

Multi-Level Perspective and the Technological
Innovation Systems approach (Alkemade et al.
2011), of which the former led to Strategic
Niche Management and the Transition
Management approach (Meadowcroft 2011).

3. Developing Countries and

Sustainability Transitions
As indicated in the first section, all
countries will experience detrimental effects
tarnishing their energy security and are
therefore forced to make the transition to
sustainable energy systems. However, the
impact
will
differ
across
countries.
Diminishing energy security will pose a
serious issue for developing countries on top
of their daily struggles. Developing countries
are characterized (among others) by the
following characteristics regarding energy
security:
- In the quest towards development the
energy intensity tends to rise implying that
demand virtually always outstrips supply;
- Another factor increasing demand is
population growth;
- Though approximately 1 billion people in
developing countries got access to
electricity services in the past decades,
these countries still have approximately
1.6 billion inhabitants deprived of these
services, since significant portions of the
countries are either not or are
inadequately electrified, especially in the
rural areas (Agbemabiese 2009);
- Energy supply is not always guaranteed,
for instance due to shortage of funds,
especially when fuel prices tend to
fluctuate;
- A large number of developing countries
often depend substantially on their own
natural resources to supply a significant
portion of the energy demand, in
particular wood (used as fuel) and hydro
power potential (Apergis and Payne
2008).
As
argued
by
the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change the changing climate could affect
the availability of these domestic
resources.
Developing countries thus still have some
considerable length to go in order to guarantee
the provision of sufficient, reliable, affordable
and environmentally sustainable energy
(Nagayama 2008). However, this poses a
dilemma for these countries: if they pursue
ramping up their energy security by using their
Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291

Danil Lachman

existing fossil fuel-based energy system this

might lead to a further degree of lock-in in
the existing energy system which is
environmentally unsustainable. The question
remains for how long such an existing system
modeled after the conventional energy systems
will be able to guarantee energy security.
Developing countries are thus forced to
undertake the dual task of not only upgrading
(in the qualitative sense) and expanding their
energy
system,
but
simultaneously
transforming the system into one that is
environmentally sustainable. This will be a
challenging task considering the resources
involved and the financial, know-how,
political restraints of developing countries.
However, these countries cannot sit idly by but
need to move forward since conventional
energy reserves are being depleted, prices and
demand are rising, insecurity is growing and
the effects of climate change are becoming
more tangible. One could thus argue that
developing countries are relatively more in
need of approaches towards understanding
energy system transitions.

4. Transition approaches can not be

transplanted
Though significant research has been done
in the field of energy system transitions and
important successes have been booked, it must
be noted that this research has been confined to
its birthplace, viz. Western societies, with the
notable exception of some Asian countries
which cannot be deemed representative for
other developing countries, especially those
outside the Asian context (Berkhout et al.
2010, Verbong et al. 2010). This implies that
transition theories and approaches discussed in
literature are applicable to that context where
they were conceived, i.e. Western countries,
and therefore cannot be simply transplanted to
developing countries with the expectation of
the same results (Goonatilake 1984,
Sankatsing 1989). This is evidenced by the
past, where transplantation occurred with the
majority of the social sciences often under the
banner of civilizing, aid or development
which, originated and formed in Western
societies, could not always provide satisfactory
results in the context of developing countries.
It was a globalization of a local Western
experience which often proved unproductive
since it could not provide an answer to
context-specific challenges (Sankatsing 1989,
Lachman 2011a).
Notably, apart from the characteristics
mentioned in section 3, there are some striking

Energy system transition research

287

differences between Western and developing

countries which are expected to have an impact
on transition approaches in the energy sector
of the latter:
-

Developing countries generally are very

restricted in terms of their financial
capability, (amongst others) as a result of
(Chang 2008, Collier 2009):
o Weak industrial base;
o Conflict;
o Poor management and leadership, and
quite often also corruption;
o Lack of human resources;
o The small nature of their economy
(especially for small development
states);
o Poor infrastructure;
o (Post) Colonial exploitation;
o Debts.

Of course, most of the items mentioned

above in turn are reinforced due to this lack of
financial resources. On the other hand, those
developing countries that have abundant
natural resources (such as gold, oil, iron ore
and bauxite), for instance Bolivia, Nigeria,
Venezuela, suffer from the so-called
resource-curse, which essentially means that
financial resources are wasted as a result of
poor governance because no clearly defined
rules, responsibilities, policies and strategies
exist to allocate effectively and efficiently the
huge sums of profits gained from natural
resource exploitation (Lachman 2010). As a
result of this resource curse, governments in
resource-rich developing countries often
cannot or will not effectively assign financial
resources to the following (Uddin and Taplin
2008, Gebreegziabher et al. 2010, Lachman
2010):
o Education (thus fostering the inability to
create proper human capital, explained in
more detail below);
o Institutions (thus making it impossible for
these institutions to grow and become
stronger, as explained below);
o Information dissemination to the general
public (elaborated below);
o (Improving) access to credit (Uddin and
Taplin 2008);
o Creating a solid and attractive investment
climate, which is further explained below.
These are symptoms of the political barrier to
sustainability transitions (Sovacool 2009).
- Governments in developing countries tend
to provide subsidies (even in the case of
financially restrained countries, thus
representing a significant share of the
government budget) to large groups of

poor households in order to keep basic

goods and services within reach.
However, these subsidy schemes are often
not transparent and even benefit large
groups of affluent people. Furthermore,
these subsidies tend to discourage energy
users to take energy saving and efficiency
into account (Sovacool 2008);
As explained by Nagayama (2008), power
sector reform in developing countries
should focus on eradicating poverty,
increasing private investment, and
adjusting prices to such an extent that they
represent the true cost of generation,
transmission and distribution. This is a
deviation from the norm in Western
countries where power sector reform is
aimed at privatization and market
deregulation and liberalization, in order to
achieve higher efficiencies and (thus)
lower costs. However, power sector
liberization in developing countries has
thus far only resulted in a neglect of those
living in rural areas (Beder 2003, Yu
2009);
The degree of success of any transition
attempt toward sustainable energy systems
is greatly dependent on public support,
which is created by growing awareness
regarding
sustainability
transitions
(Lovins 2010). However, this awareness is
much less present in developing countries
compared to industrialized countries. One
reason can be found in the difference in
culture, behavior and tradition (Sovacool
2009). Another reason can be found in the
fact that people in countries with a relative
lower Human Development Index tend to
have greater difficulty to grasp abstract or
less tangible terms as energy,
efficiency, climate change etc., thus
making it more difficult for those who
want to disclose information to the public
with the aim of behavioral change (Scheer
2005). This results in the fact that:
o People in these countries are more
or less accustomed to a lack of
energy security in the form of
scheduled / unscheduled power
black outs, voltage fluctuations etc.
and have therefore barely let their
voices be heard regarding issues
on energy security;
o People get less involved in
sustainable energy projects and
policies which lead to a low level
of ownership (Uddin and Taplin
2008). Because of this, energy
projects are either not initiated,

Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291

288

Danil Lachman

completed or sustained (Verbong et

al. 2010).
- It is often argued that developing
countries
can
benefit
from
technological
know-how
in
industrialized countries (Berkhout et
al. 2010). High-tech industries patent
each advancement they can get their
hands on in order to gain the upper
hand in competition with other
companies. However, as described in
detail by Chang (2008), this leaves
developing countries little other
choice than to either:
o buy the patents, which in the case
of renewable energy technologies
come at astronomical costs;
o buy the products (which is
relatively expensive since these
products have high-wage labor
inputs which contradict with
developing
policies
in
industrializing countries that aim
to get a grip on downstream
production activities), or;
o invent around the existing patents
(which is hardly possible due to
weak institutions and financial
constraints).
Thus, patent laws make it more
difficult and expensive to adopt and
conceive (energy) technologies in
particular in the case of financially
weak developing countries with
hardly any high-class research
institutions and industries (Chang
2008);
- Developing countries suffer from the
phenomenon where dynamism in the
field of (technological) innovation is
sorely lacking, as evidenced by the
slow diffusion rate of new
technologies, paradigms, practices,
etc. (Uddin and Taplin 2008,
Loorbach et al. 2008). The reason for
this can be traced back to (Uddin and
Taplin 2008, Berkhout et al. 2010):
o Lack of economic dynamism:
developing
economies
are
usually very static due to:
The small industrial base,
which does not have
resources to allocate for
innovation;
Industry is usually confined
only to commodities;
The fact that people often
have to survive to make ends
meet, they have little
incentive to take risks in
Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291

o
o

order
to
undertake
innovative activity. Rather,
they usually cling to
activities
which
almost
certainly will gain them
profit, such as small-scale
commerce;
Weak
institutions
(further
elaborated upon below);
Lack of sophisticated industries, in
other words firms that that are able
to add high value;
Insufficient
proper
human
resources: as a result of lack of
education options a poor education
system,
lack of industries in
different sectors that can function
as training grounds , and a braindrain
to
other
countries;
developing countries lack skilled
and well-educated human resources
which can bring forth conditions
for innovation;
Relative great distance from
international sources of innovation:
developing countries usually have
little contact with loci of
innovation.
Developing countries generally tend
to have weak institutions combined
with unclear roles and responsibilities
in the energy sector, which is the
result of a lack of adequate human
and financial resources, leading to a
lack of adequate technological
development (Uddin and Taplin
2008). This renders them weak with
respect to energy strategy and policy,
especially in cases where they have to
deal with the large context of projects
(Carvalho 2006). Furthermore, weak
institutions in developing countries
also render them weak within the
setting of multilateral institutions (e.g.
World
Trade
Organization,
International Renewable Energy
Agency) when it regards negotiating
terms and conditions;
Research has shown that regimes in
developing countries are relatively
more fluid than their industrialized
counterparts (Berkhout et al. 2010);
how convenient this may appear for
niches (the loci for societal
innovation) trying to emerge, it
appears that regimes are fluid or
instable to such an extent that this
actually proves to be an obstacle for
the emergence of these niches, since it
does not provide security to investors

Energy system transition research

and end-users, including for instance

transparent conditions to introduce
and use new energy technologies
(Verbong et al. 2010);
The educational and scientific base in
developing countries was modeled
after their Western often European,
as in the case of former colonies
counterparts. Therefore this base
which often has hardly evolved over
the years is unsuitable to react to local
challenges in developing countries,
since it was originally fabricated for
Western challenges with specific
Western characteristics (Sankatsing
1989). One
example is the
knowledge in developing countries of
Western-common sources of energy
and related systems (e.g. boilers,
fossil fuels etc.) as opposed to the
much scarcer and less-developed
knowledge of domestic energy
sources, such as large and micro
hydropower, solar energy, bio-fuels,
etc.;
Developing countries are relatively
more vulnerable to complexity and /
uncertainty in the global context as a
result of increasing globalization,
primarily due to their weak economy
usually consisting of a relatively
small number of production sectors,
which are often dependent on volatile
commodity prices, weak governing
institutions which are used for shortterm strategies and policies, and poor
management skills (Lachman 2011b).
They are therefore more in need of
long term strategies and policies and
methods and techniques to anticipate
unexpected
events,
so-called
wildcards, and sudden deviations
from trends (Lachman 2011b).
Transition
processes
are
also
characterized by high levels of
complexity and uncertainty due to the
involvement of a wide variety of
actors, and developing countries are
thus in need of the ability to deal with
complexity and uncertainty in order to
be able to guide sustainability
transitions;
For most developing countries it will
be very difficult to achieve increased
levels of development at a relatively
high pace without increasing their
environmental footprint (International
Energy Agency 2011). Second, it is
virtually unknown what the effect of
sustainability transitions accompanied

289

with added complexity will be on

economic development in these
countries (Berkhout et al. 2010);
The increasing complexity and
uncertainty, which are both multiplied
in the case of transitions, and the
unknown effect of sustainability
transitions on economic development,
demand a sophisticated level of
transition management. However, as
depicted by past experiments, it can
reasonably
be
expected
that
developing countries lack good
management practices characterized
by poor planning, monitoring,
evaluation, communication, etc. (a
result of poor human resources) to
effectively undergo a sustainability
transition (Verbong et al. 2010).

The
abovementioned
examples
of
characteristics of developing countries which
make them differ from developed countries
regarding energy security lead to two
important remarks:
1. Energy
system
transition
theories
conceived within the context of Western
countries cannot be simply applied in
alien settings; therefore they first would
require testing within these environments
in order to assess their validity;
2. A significant boost to research on
sustainability transitions in the field of
socio-technical systems in developing
countries is required. This will have to
provide a profound insight into the fabric
and dynamics within and factors external
to these systems which in turn can be used
to define and guide actions aimed at
sustainability transition.

5. Conclusion
In order to efficiently and effectively
transform energy systems in developing
countries into sustainable and socially
acceptable forms that guarantee energy
security, significant research on these sociotechnical systems and the transition thereof is
required. Due to their strong population
growth, increasing levels of affluence, energy
demand outstripping supply, plus large
portions of the country that need to be
electrified, these countries are relatively more
in need of these transition approaches.
However, virtually all transition research
has its origins and is confined to Western
countries. Developing countries differ in great
lengths from their Western counterparts on
Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291

290

various grounds, such as human resources,

economy, governmental, educational and
scientific institutions, awareness surrounding
environmental sustainability, energy strategy
and policy, and availability of financial
resources. These aspects have to be taken into
consideration when addressing sustainability
transitions since these transitions involve the
co-dynamics of technologies, institutions,
organizations, and social and economic
subsystems. Therefore it can be argued that
current transition research as originated in
Western societies has limited applicability to
the context of developing countries and will
therefore be unable to maximize control and
direction over sustainability transitions.
Thus, order to drive developing countries
toward more sustainable futures, sustainability
transitions need be informed by forthcoming of
transition research that is applied to the context
of these developing countries. This paper is
therefore a call for more research in
developing countries in the field of
sustainability transitions; or at least a call to
share experiences about attempts that have
been made and lessons learned.

References
Alkemade F., Hekkert M. P., Negro S. O. 2001.
Transition policy and innovation policy:
Friends or foes? Environ. Innovation Soc.
Transitions, Elsevier
Agbemabiese L. 2009. A Framework for Sustainable
Energy Development Beyond the Grid:
Meeting the Needs of Rural and Remote
Populations. In: Bulletin
of Science
Technology & Society, Vol.: 29, No.: 2, p.
151-158
Apergis, N. and Payne, J. E. 2008. Energy
consumption and economic growth in Central
America: Evidence from a panel cointegration
and error correction model. Energy
Economics, Vol.: 31, Elsevier
Beder, S. 2003. Power Play. The Fight to Control the
Worlds Electricity. The New Press, New York
Berkhout F., Verbong G., Wieczorek A. J. et al. 2010.
Sustainability
experiments
in
Asia:
innovations shaping alternative development
pathways?, In: Environmental Science &
Policy
Carvalho G. O. 2006. Environmental Resistance and
the Politics of Energy Development in the
Brazilian Amazon. In: The Journal of
Environment Development, Vol.: 15, No.: 3,
p. 245-268
Chang, H. 2008. Bad Samaritans: the myth of free
trade and the secret history of capitalism.
Bloomsbury Press, New York
Collier P. 2009. The Bottom Billion. Why the Poorest
Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done
About It. Oxford University Press, New York
Dosi G., 1982. Technological Paradigms and
Technological Trajectories: a Suggested
Interpretation of the Determinants and

Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291

Danil Lachman

Directions of Technical Change. Research

Policy, Vol: 11, Elsevier
Elzen, B., Geels, F.W, Green, K. (Eds.), 2005.
System Innovation and the Transition to
Sustainability: Theory, Evidence and Policy.
Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Feyerabend, P. 1975. Against Method. Outline of an
anarchistic theory of knowledge. Verso, s.l.
Gebreegziabher Z., Mekonnen A., Kassie M. et al.
2010. Urban Energy Transition and
Technology Adoption. The Case of Tigrai,
Northern Ethiopia. In: Environment for
Development. Vol.: 10, No.: 22
Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions as
evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a
multi-level perspective and a case-study.
Research Policy, 31, Elsevier
Geels F. W. 2011. The multi-level perspective on
sustainability transitions: Responses to seven
criticisms. In: Environmental Innovation and
Social Transition. In: Environ. Innovation Soc.
Transitions. Vol.: 1, No.: 1, Elsevier
Goonatilake S. 1984. Aborted Discovery: Science
and Creativity in the Third World. Zed Press,
London
Grin, J., Rotmans, J., Schot, J. et al. 2010.
Transitions to Sustainable Development; New
Directions in the Study of Long Term
Transformative
Change.
New
York:
Routledge.
International Energy Agency 2011. Energy Transition
for Industry: India and the Global Context.
Paris
International Monetary Fund 2012. Frequently Asked
Questions. World Economic Outlook (WEO).
Information retrieved from the website
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/faq.ht
m#q4b on 23 May 2012
Lachman D. A. 2010. Natural Resources:
Developments Friend or Foe? The Impact of
Possessing
Natural
Resources
on
Democracy, with Special Emphasis on
Suriname. The Academic Journal of
Suriname, Vol.1, p. 59-66, Anton de Kom
University of Suriname, Paramaribo
Lachman D. A. 2011a. Domination of the Mind.
Imposition of Scientific Paradigms. The
Academic Journal of Suriname, Vol. 2, p.
133-138, Anton de Kom University of
Suriname, Paramaribo
Lachman D. A. 2011b. Leapfrog to the future: Energy
scenarios and strategies for Suriname to
2050. In: Energy Policy. Vol.: 39, p. 50355044, Elsevier
Loorbach D. 2010, Transition Management for
Sustainable Development:
Prescriptive,
Complexity-Based Governance Framework.
Governance: An International Journal of
Policy, Administration, and Institutions, Vol.
23, No. 1
Loorbach D., van der Brugge R., Taanman M. 2008.
Governance in the energy transition: Practice
of transition management in the Netherlands.
In: International Journal of Environmental
Technology and Management, Vol.: 9, No.:
2/3, Inderscience Enterprises
Lovins A. B. 2010. Efficiency and Micropower for
Reliable and Resilient Electricity Service: An
Intriguing Case-Study from Cuba. Rocky
Mountain Institute, Snowmass
Meadowcroft J. 2011. Engaging with the politics of
sustainability
transitions.
Environmental
Innovation and Societal Transitions, Elsevier
Nagayama, H. 2008. Electric power sector reform
liberalization models and electric power

Energy system transition research

291

prices in developing countries. An empirical

analysis using international panel data.
Energy Economics. Vol. 31, Elsevier
Nelson R.R. and Winter S.G. 1977. In Search of
Useful Theory of Innovation. In: Research
Policy, Vol.: 6, Elsevier
Rip A., and Kemp R., 1998. Technological change.
In: Rayner, S., Malone, E.L. (Eds.), Human
Choice and Climate Change, Vol. 2. Batelle
Press, Columbus
Sankatsing G. 1989. Caribbean Social Science. An
assessment. URSHSLAC-UNESCO, Caracas
Scheer, H. 2005. Energy autonomy. Earthscan,
London
Smith A., Stirling A., Berkhout, F., 2005. The
governance of sustainable sociotechnical
transitions. Research Policy 35, Elsevier
Sovacool B. K. 2008. Renewable Energy:
Economically sound, Politically difficult. In:
The Electricity Journal, Vol.: 21, Issue 5, p.
18-29
Sovacool B.K. 2009. Rejecting renewables: The
socio-technical impediments to renewable
electricity in the United States. Energy Policy,
Elsevier
Stern, N., 2006. The Economics of Climate Change
the Stern Review. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Stirling, A. 2011, Pluralising progress: From
integrative transitions to transformative
diversity.
Environ.
Innovation
Soc.
Transitions, Elsevier
Uddin S. N., Taplin R. 2008. Toward Sustainable
Energy Development in Bangladesh. In: The
Journal of Environment Development, Vol.:
17, No.: 3, p. 292-315
Unruh G. C. 2002. Escaping carbon lock-in. Energy
Policy, 30, Elsevier
Verbong G., Christiaans W. Raven R., et al. 2010.
Strategic Niche Management in an unstable
regime: Biomass gasification in India. In:
Environmental Science & Policy
World Bank 2012. How we Classify Countries.
Information retrieved from the website
http://data.worldbank.org/about/countryclassifications, on 23 May 2012
Yu J. 2009. The Restoration of a Local Energy
Regime Amid Trends of Power Liberalization
in East Asia: The Seoul Renewable Energy
Authority. In: Bulletin of Science, Technology
& Society. Vol.: 29, No.: 124

Acad J Sur 2012 (3) 284-291