Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

Research article

Review of the use of system dynamics (SD) in scrutinizing local

energy transitions
Sujeetha Selvakkumaran a, b, *, Erik O. Ahlgren a
a
Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden
b
Sustainable Built Environment, RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Gothenburg, Sweden

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Local energy transition processes are complex socio-technical transitions requiring careful study. The use of
System dynamics System Dynamics (SD) in modelling and analyzing local energy transitions is especially suitable given the
Modelling characteristics of SD. Our aim is to systematically categorize the different ways SD is used and useful to scrutinize
Local
local energy transitions, and to see if we can discern any common themes that can be useful to researchers
Energy transitions
looking to scrutinize local energy transitions, using SD. The study is exploratory in nature, with peer-reviewed
Multi-level perspective
journal and conference articles analyzed using content analysis. The six categories on which the articles are
analyzed are: the sector the article studies; the transition that is studied in the article; the modelling depth in the
article; the objective of the article; the justification for using SD provided in the article and the levels of inter­
action with ‘local’. Our findings show most of the local energy transitions have been studied using simulatable
Stock and Flow Diagrams in SD methodology. The important sectors in the energy field are represented in terms
of SD modelling of local energy transitions, including electricity, transport, district heating etc. Most of the local
energy transitions scrutinized by SD in the articles have descriptive objectives, with some prescriptive, and just
one evaluative objective. In terms of justification for using SD provided by the articles analyzed in this study, we
found four major themes along which the justifications that were provided. They are dynamics, feedbacks,
delays and complexity, systematic thinking, bridging disciplines and actor interactions and behaviour. The
‘dynamics, feedbacks, delays and complexity’ theme is the most cited justification for the use of SD in scruti­
nizing local energy transitions, followed by systematic thinking.

1. Introduction
Deep transformations are needed to our current energy systems to
attain carbon neutrality in time to achieve climate targets. Such deep
transformations require concerted efforts at multiple levels and scales,
ranging from transformations in global socio-technical systems to
practices at the local community level (Hoppe et al., 2015).
In the study of energy transitions, local energy transitions have been
gaining ontological attention, notwithstanding the practical transitions
happening in multiple locations and scales in Europe and worldwide.
Local energy transitions are often characterized as local in space and
geographical scope, but also local in system specific selection (Turnheim
et al., 2015). The study of local energy transitions have been undertaken
in association with energy communities (Van Der Schoor et al., 2016),
niches in societies selecting energy technologies and/or community ef­
forts at sustainably providing the energy needs of a contained group of
people.
Local energy transitions processes can be complex socio-technical
transitions processes with myriad feedbacks between different sys­
tems, structures and agents. In real-life transitions, initiating them, un­
derstanding and managing them requires a grounded understanding of
the causal feedbacks between the elements in the transitions processes.
When researchers have studied such real-life transitions, the evidence
has shown that local energy transitions have difficulties and complex­
ities of their own, just like sustainability transitions in general (Selvak­
kumaran and Ahlgren, 2017).
1.1. The plural meanings of local
In this study, we have interpreted the meaning of ‘local’ widely. The
word ‘local’ as an adjective is generally defined as ‘responsible for a
small area, especially of a country’ by the Cambridge Dictionary

* Corresponding author. Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
E-mail address: sujeetha@chalmers.se (S. Selvakkumaran).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111053
Received 7 April 2020; Received in revised form 24 June 2020; Accepted 3 July 2020
Available online 11 July 2020
0301-4797/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren
(Cambridge Dictionary and Cam, 2019). Similarly, in the
Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Merriam-Webster, 2019), local is defined
as ‘characterized by or relating to position in space, having a definite
spatial form or location’ and, ‘of relating to or applicable to part of a
whole’. In our study we have adopted a wider meaning of the word
‘local’, meaning as a restricted geographical space or location and also as
meaning applicable to a part of a whole, as in being representative of a
small part of a larger system. This definition we have chosen to give here
is especially important in the context of the study further on.
1.2. Multi-level perspective (MLP)
Multi-level Perspective (MLP), a theory generally used to study
transitions, is building upon evolutionary economics and technology
studies (Geels, 2002). Transitions through the MLP are generally
analyzed retrospectively, through micro, meso and macro levels
(Papachristos, 2020), or as actor and structural interactions of niche,
regime and landscape factors. Here, the three levels of niche, regime and
landscape are analytical and/or heuristic levels, rather than levels found
in reality (Geels and Schot, 2007). Niche is defined as the space where
innovations are given birth to and survive, and protection is given to
these innovations within this niche. In contrast, regime is the already
existing and entrenched socio-technical system, with its technologies,
artefacts, actors, structures, norms and rules. The landscape is the
macro-economic factors which are extraneous to both niche and regime,
and present opportunities or threats to both niche and regime (Geels and
Schot, 2007). The MLP has seen widespread use in sustainability tran­
sitions research (Geels, 2019), spanning multiple years and works.
It is our premise that the word ‘local’ in local energy transitions
tacitly implies the niche-regime interactions; the niche here signifying
the localized transitions occurring at the geographically constrained or
sub-system level counter to the regime. An example of this is grassroots
innovations as niches acting counter to the regime of embedded energy
businesses. Another different example, also being taken as being a local
energy transition is the diffusion of solar PV among households, as a
viable alternative to the local grid electricity. Here, both are examples of
niches, and how the niches come about and their interactions with the
regime is intended to signify local, in this study.
1.3. System dynamics and energy transitions
System dynamics (SD) is a systems approach, or more commonly a
systems thinking approach, where the various components of a system
are thought of as stocks, flows and auxiliary variables with feedbacks
between them (Lane, 2000). Moreover, SD modelling is closely aligned
with systems thinking; “the ability to see the world as a complex and
interconnected system” (Sterman, 2000).
In his seminal work asking whether SD is a ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ science
(Lane, 2000), Lane notes that three characteristics define SD method­
ology: 1. Information feedback loops, which represent the causality of
the variables and the delays and feedbacks; 2. Computer simulation,
which overcome the inability of the human mind to grapple with
non-linearity and 3. The need to engage with mental models, which
leads to heavy abstraction and aggregation in the models thus devel­
oped. Similarly, in (Ł, 2001) (here again the citation is Lane, 2001)Lane
posits that heavy aggregation aids in depicting social models, as all
models are in some way simplistic aggregations of reality. In both the
works, he surmises that aggregation and abstraction should be viewed as
a strength of SD, rather than a weakness, as it has led to the use of ar­
chetypes within SD methodology, as shown in (Wolstenholme, 2003).
Papachristos (Papachristos, 2020) (the year is wrong again) provides
an in-depth investigation of SD and its use in studying or modelling
socio-technical transitions. While the author concludes that the preva­
lent method to study socio-technical transitions has been case study
research, he also points out that use of modelling and simulation has
increased. Additionally, scholars studying sustainable transitions and
2
Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053
socio-technical transitions have discussed the suitability of SD as a
modelling tool; chief among them SD’s ability to handle complexity
(Timmermans et al., 2008), (Ko €hler et al., 2018), ability to enable
participatory or group model-building (B�erard, 2010), modelling with
actors such that the reality of the transition is captured as accurately as
possible (van Bruggen et al., 2019), and enable theory-building through
its conceptualizing of societal transitions (Bleda and Shackley, 2012)
(Schwaninger and Groesser, 2008a) (Schwaninger and Groesser,
2008b).
System Dynamics is a modelling tool suited for the study of energy
transitions and sustainable transitions, since it is the explicit study of
causal feedbacks between interconnected factors, as noted by (Ko €hler
et al., 2018), among others. Papachristos also reinforces the view that
transitions are analyzed in terms of micro, meso and macro levels and SD
modelling methodology is capable of being used at the three levels and
thus it serves as a critical tool in conceptualizing and assessing local
energy transitions. Ref (Leopold, 2016) provides an overview of system
dynamics models in the field of energy, until 2016. The review provides
examples of the use of SD in energy transitions and in some cases local
energy transitions. The focus of (Bleda and Shackley, 2012) is
wide-ranging and is not limited to studies of energy transitions. While it
may be argued that all models of energy systems may actually be
characterized as models of energy transitions, the capture of transition
process should be explicit for it to be considered models of energy
transitions. Most of the studies reviewed in (Bleda and Shackley, 2012)
do not explicitly capture the transition process.
Papachristos (Papachristos, 2020), (wrong year again)in his expla­
nation of the use of SD in transitions modelling, explicitly mentions the
use of SD at the micro-level of a socio-technical transition; that is the
application of SD to model bottom-up, often local socio-technical tran­
sitions, such as local energy transitions. These local energy transitions
have at their crux the niche-regime interactions.
Given the attention local energy transitions have garnered in recent
times, both epistemologically (Turnheim et al., 2015) and in real-life,
and the importance of SD as a tool to modelling and understanding
socio-technical transitions, it will be useful to know how SD can be used
to study local energy transitions but there is no work that systematically
categorizes the different ways SD can be used to model local energy
transitions. We see this as a gap in literature in two ways; primarily,
existing literature ignores and fails to document the usability of SD in
modelling energy transitions, and also fails to categorize and analyse the
different ways in which local energy transitions have been modelled
using SD.
Thus, this study aims to answer two questions related to SD and local
energy transitions, which are: 1. How is SD used to scrutinize local en­
ergy transitions? and 2. Why is SD used to scrutinize local energy
transitions? Ultimately, our aim is to systematically categorize the
different ways SD is used and useful to scrutinize local energy transi­
tions, and to see if we can discern any common themes that can be useful
to researchers looking to scrutinize local energy transitions, using SD.
2. Methodology
This study is designed to be exploratory in nature, since both the
research questions posed in Section 1 answer questions of ‘how’ and
‘why’ (Shields and Rangarajan, 2013). Most exploratory research is
explicitly focused on the analysis of secondary data. So, in our study, to
understand and explore how and why SD is used to scrutinize local
energy transitions we deductively analyse existing scientifically pub­
lished articles dealing with local energy transitions studies using SD,
using the method of Content Analysis (CA).
Content analysis is the analysis of the implicit or explicit content of
any communicated material through classification, tabulation and
evaluation of its key symbols and themes, in order to ascertain its
meaning, according to (Krippendorff, 2004). Thus, in our study, to
analyse how and why SD is used to study local energy transitions, we
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053

analyse the contents of scientific peer-reviewed literature dealing with
local energy transitions and SD. Hsieh and Shannon (Papachristos,
2020) (wrong citation) show that there are three general approaches to
CA: conventional, directed and summative. In this study, we choose the
directed CA approach. The CA process generally consists of the following
steps; 1. Formulating a research question (in this case, how and why is
SD used to scrutinize local energy transitions?), 2. Selecting the sample
(in this case, the selection of literature or articles) (detailed in Section
2.1), 3. The categorization of information (detailed in Section 2.2), 4.
Outlining and implementing the coding process (detailed in Section 2.3)
and 5. Analyzing the results of the coding process (Sections 3, 4 and 5).
This methodological process draws inspiration from (Selvakkumaran
and Ahlgren, 2018a) in their study looking at factors affecting household
energy transitions.
2.1. Selection of literature
We searched the two largest academic literature repositories; SCO­
PUS and Web of Science, using multiple combinations of selected key
words and Boolean operators. The multiple combinations of key words
were necessary to capture as many of the relevant literature as possible.
The different combinations of words (identified as strings here) and
the Boolean operators used during the searches are given in Table 1.
Each of these searches were carried out in January of 2019. The strings
were given in the category of “Key words, Abstract, Title and Body” in
the case of SCOPUS and Topic for Web of Science (which searches Title,
Abstract, keywords given by authors and Keywords Plus (given by the
journal or publisher)). No restrictions were made on the subject matter,
but the type of content was limited to journal articles, conference papers
and proceedings, and language was limited to English.
In order to be thorough in the search, to not miss out on relevant
work and to avoid selection bias and errors, we carried out the searches
with strings substituted for other heuristically popular interchangeable
strings. For example, often in the scientific field of sustainability tran­
sitions, the word ‘transitions’ and ‘transformations’ are used inter­
changeably, so ‘energy transformation’ was also input as a string.
Similarly, ‘local’ and ‘regional’ are also used with the same connotation
(which is sub-national) and in order to not miss out on the papers having
a regional focus (which could also be local, according to the wide
definition used in this study), ‘regional’ was also a string input.
These searches were carried out individually one after the other, and
the results manually examined. Not all the search results were appro­
priate for the study; some of the results were not in the field of energy
transitions, but were in the field of particle physics, where the results
were returned due to the prevalence of ‘dynamics’ and ‘transition’ in the
strings input into the search criteria. Thus, all the values returned in all
the individual searches were manually examined and each of the ab­
stracts of the returned values were skimmed. Thus, in total, search re­
sults from 14 of these searches carried out (seven for SCOPUS and seven
for Web of Science) were all manually examined and only the articles
examining local energy transitions using SD were selected. This also
ensured that duplicates of the same articles were eliminated from the
eventual sample of articles. This targeted literature search yielded 29
articles to be analyzed.
2.2. The categorization of information
The articles selected are analyzed to answer the research questions of
how and why SD is used to scrutinize local energy transitions. In order to
answer these questions, through CA, it is vital that the necessary infor­
mation is extracted from the selected articles. In a directed CA approach,
as has been adopted in this study, the categorization of information
happens deductively. Furthermore, the basis of categorization needs to
be clear and precise, in order to ensure that the analysis is relevant.
To this effect, we have selected six categories which we have deemed
heuristically appropriate to analyse and answer the research questions.
These categories are:
� The sector the article studies
� The transition that is studied in the article
� The modelling depth in the article
� The objective of the article
� The justification for using SD provided in the article
� The levels of interaction with ‘local’
The sector the article studies is important to contextualize the arti­
cles within the local energy transitions field, while the transition that is
studied also gives a description of what the local energy transition is
about. The sector categorization happens when the articles are read
initially. The sector categories that are used in this study are selected
based on the actual sector the article has as its focus, within the domain
of energy systems. These categories are electricity, transport, district
heating, bioenergy, marine energy, energy in buildings, household en­
ergy, energy in combination with other domains such as economy, and
combinations of various sectors.
The modelling depth of the article is based on the modelling meth­
odology of SD. SD is based on and encompasses systems thinking, a
conceptual causal modelling method called Causal Loop Diagrams
(CLDs), simulatable stock and flow diagrams (SFDs), and SD used in
combination with another modelling methodology. The modelling
depth of the article implies these four encompassed stages. This cate­
gorization is important to understand both how and why SD is used in
the articles to study local energy transitions. The modelling depth of the
articles helps concretize how the modelling has been undertaken and
gives an indication as to the depth of the use of SD, for example through
causal loop diagrams or stock and flow diagrams and also to investigate
which articles have used which depths of SD in them.
The objective of the article is important to gain a deeper under­
standing of why SD is used in the contexts present in the selected arti­
cles. The objectives of the articles are categorized as descriptive,
prescriptive or evaluative objectives. Descriptive research and objec­
tives focus on mapping causal relationships, while prescriptive objec­
tives are applied rather than theoretical, and actually recommend
solutions or new ideas. Evaluative objectives are concerned with the
assessment of programs or frameworks and can be ex-post as well
(Timmermans et al., 2008).
The justification for using SD provided is connected to the questions
of how SD is used to scrutinize local energy transitions and finally why
SD is used to scrutinize local energy transitions, in each of the selected
articles. The categorization of the justifications happens when the

Table 1
The search criteria used in the selection of literature.
Search criteria String 1 Boolean operator String 2 Boolean operator String 3

Search criteria 1 Local AND energy transition AND system dynamics

Search criteria 2 regional AND energy transition AND system dynamics
Search criteria 3 Policy AND energy transition AND system dynamics
Search criteria 4 modelling AND energy transition AND system dynamics
Search criteria 5 Local AND energy transformation AND system dynamics
Search criteria 6 Policy AND energy transformation AND system dynamics
Search criteria 7 modelling AND energy transformation AND system dynamics

3
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren
articles are analyzed in subsequent stages.
Similarly, the levels of interaction with ‘local’ is important to
contextualize how the ‘local’ of the local energy transitions scrutinized
in the articles are handled. This categorization is explained through the
framing of MLP. The MLP framework structures the levels within a socio-
technical system as niches, regime and landscape factors. Here, in the
articles scrutinizing local energy transitions, we analyse the levels of
interaction that is studied between the niches (and/or ‘local’) and the
regime and landscape. This is signified by the category of levels of
interaction with local.
2.3. The coding process
The coding process was manually implemented, with each article
being read one after the other, and the information contained in the
articles pertaining to the six categories explained in Section 2.2, being
extracted from the articles. It follows that each article was read deduc­
tively, to extract the information pertaining to the six categories. The
information extracted was input into spreadsheets, which were then
analyzed.
3. Findings
The findings section presents the articles selected, the analysis of the
information extracted and analyzed deductively.
Table 2 gives the list of the 29 articles selected in this study, with
their title, the journal or conference proceedings series they appeared in
along with the keywords for the articles in alphabetical order. This list
has a spread of eight conference proceedings and 21 journal articles,
spanning a time period of publication year from 2005 to 2019.
Out of the 29 articles selected, five articles do not have keywords
assigned by the authors or the repositories. Unsurprisingly, of the 24
articles which do have keywords, System Dynamics and System Dy­
namics modelling are the most frequently occurring keyword, with only
seven articles (Agnew et al., 2018; Mazur et al., 2018; Guo et al., 2019;
Jonker et al., 2017; Hollmann and Voss, 2008; Blumberga et al., 2015;
Brouwer et al., 2018) out of the 24 articles not having the keywords
System Dynamics or System Dynamics modelling in the list of keywords.
But, out of the seven, causal loop modelling (Agnew et al., 2018) and
causal loop (Guo et al., 2019) are present in two, along with systems
thinking (Agnew et al., 2018) and dynamic feedback (Guo et al., 2019)
and simulation (Mazur et al., 2018; Hollmann and Voss, 2008). These
terms imply some connection to SD since they are concepts generally
associated with SD. This implies that in most local energy transitions
literature the use of SD is significant enough to be included as a
keyword.
3.1. Sectors studied
The sectors represented in the 29 articles are presented in Table 3,
along with how many articles that belong to every sector. The categories
selected were electricity sector, transport, district heating, electricity in
combination with another sector, bioenergy, marine sector energy, en­
ergy in buildings, household energy and multi, which is energy and non-
energy sectors; totaling nine sectors (see Table 3).
In terms of representation, local energy transitions in the electricity
sector alone or with another sector is widely analyzed among the chosen
articles, followed by the transport sector and the district heating sector.
A conclusion we can come to is that the major sectors of energy are
among the local energy transitions scrutinized using SD.
3.2. The transitions studied
The transitions studied in these articles are briefly described here, in
conjunction with the sectors studied. The raw file of the coding for the
transitions studied is given in Appendix 1.
4
Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053
In the electricity sector, the transition to renewable electricity gen­
eration at the local scale, given the autarky aspirations of the group of
prosumers (Kubli and Ulli-Beer, 2016), and through municipality action
(Selvakkumaran and Ahlgren, 2018b) is studied, while general localized
renewable electricity generation is studied in (Liu et al., 2018; Pruyt and
Thissen, 2007). In electricity in combination with another sector, elec­
tricity with transport (Matthew et al., 2017) and electrification of
transport, electricity with heating (Hollmann and Voss, 2008), elec­
tricity with hydrogen (Blumberga et al., 2015) and electricity with gas
grids are studied, using SD (Pruyt, 2011).
In the transport sector, the transition to alternative fuel vehicles is
the transition studied mostly, chief among them the electrification of
transport (Mazur et al., 2018; Shafiei et al., 2012, 2013; Struben and
Sterman, 2008). The transport infrastructure transition in a local region
is studied in (York et al., 2017), followed by the transition of the local
car industry given external pressures in (Barazandeh and Rafieisakhaei,
2018). The transition to 4th generation district heating is studied in
(Ziemele et al., 2016, 2017a, 2017b), followed by the transition to
concentrated solar for desalination in (Brent et al., 2011).
The transition to liquid biofuels at the regional level and the tran­
sition to bioenergy are the transitions studied in (Jonker et al., 2017)
and (Cavicchi, 2018), respectively.
In (Bucher et al., 2016), tidal current and wave power technology
uptake and diffusion is studied, while in (Guo et al., 2019) the transition
to more efficient buildings is studied. The uptake of LPG and phase out of
kerosene is studied in (Destyanto et al., 2017).
In articles which look at the energy sector and non-energy sectors,
the transition dynamics of carbon trading among three regions in China
is studied in (Zhao et al., 2018) and the low-carbon transition through
different sets of energy and climate policies is studied in (Brouwer et al.,
2018).
3.3. Modelling depth
The modelling depth is analyzed as to how deep the SD modelling
method has been used in the articles studied. Their modelling depth
could be limited to systems thinking which is analyzing a transition
through a systems thinking method, which underpins the SD models, or
have conceptual models explaining the transition through Causal Loop
Diagrams (CLDs) or have fully developed CLDs and stock and flow di­
agrams (SFDs), which are simulatable, followed by SD used in combi­
nation with another modelling method (see Table 4).
The majority of the articles analyzed (21 out of 29) have used SFDs to
study the local energy transition, followed by seven with CLDs and only
one just employing systems thinking to look at the transition. Out of the
29, four articles use SD and another methodology, such as ABM in
(Shafiei et al., 2013), multi-criteria analysis in (Ziemele et al., 2017b),
interactive gaming and simulation in (Pruyt, 2011), and
macro-economic modelling in (Brouwer et al., 2018). In this analysis,
any article could potentially satisfy more than one modelling depth. But,
of the four articles satisfying more than one modelling depth, the second
such modelling depth is the combination with another modelling
method.
3.4. Objective of the study
The objective of the literature gives an indication of what the study
aims to uncover and helps to identify and tabulate the contexts in which
system dynamics has been used to study local energy transitions. We
categorize the objective of the studies as descriptive, prescriptive or
evaluative (as explained in Methodology). The raw data can be found in
Appendix 2.
Through our analysis, we find that the majority of the articles have
descriptive objectives (22 out of 29), to investigate the impacts or
explore the dynamics of introducing technologies etc. Examples are
given below: (this should not be indented like this, but rather like the
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053

Table 2
The general characteristics of the list (in alphabetical order) of selected literature in this study.
Number Title of the article Year Journal/Conference proceedings Keywords
published

Art. 1 A dynamic simulation of low-carbon policy influences on 2017 Energy Policy Endogenous electricity demand; Island electricity
endogenous electricity demand in an isolated island systems; System dynamics; Electric-vehicles
system (Matthew et al., 2017) expansion; Energy efficiency; Tourism
Art. 2 A hybrid modeling framework for diffusion of alternative 2012 2012 IEEE International Energy Transport; vehicles; agent-based model; Alternative
fuel vehicles (Shafiei et al., 2012) Conference and Exhibition fuel vehicles; hybrid modeling; system-dynamics
Art. 3 A system dynamics approach to analyse the impact of 2018 Energy Efficiency Energy service company (ESCO); Energy efficiency;
energy efficiency policy on ESCO ventures in European Energy policy; Business simulation; System dynamics
Union countries: a case study of Portugal (Capelo et al.,
2018)
Art. 4 A system dynamics model of the auto industry: Case 2018 2017 IEEE Conference on
study on sustainability of Iran’s car market (Barazandeh Technologies for Sustainability
and Rafieisakhaei, 2018)
Art. 5 Can hydropower develop as expected in China? A 2018 Energy Power; electricity; Primary energy; Emission trade
scenario analysis based on system dynamics model (Liu scheme; Government policy; Hydropower; Scenario
et al., 2018) analysis; System dynamics model
Art. 6 Causal loop modelling of residential solar and battery 2018 Journal of Cleaner Production Battery storage; Causal loop modelling; Energy policy;
adoption dynamics: A case study of Queensland, Residential; Solar; Systems thinking
Australia (Agnew et al., 2018)
Art. 7 Combining energy efficiency at source and at consumer 2017 Energy Heating; 4GDH; District heating; Renewable energy;
to reach 4th generation district heating: Economic and Sustainable energy; System dynamics modeling
system dynamics analysis (Ziemele et al., 2017a)
Art. 8 Comparing the effects of vehicle automation, policy- 2018 Sustainability (Switzerland) Transport; vehicles; Autonomous vehicles; Electric
making and changed user preferences on the uptake of vehicle; Policy; Simulation; Transition
electric cars and emissions from transport (Mazur et al.,
2018)
Art. 9 Creation of investor confidence: The top-level drivers for 2016 Renewable Energy Investor confidence; Marine energy
reaching maturity in marine energy (Bucher et al., 2016) commercialization; Strategic drivers; System dynamics
Art. 10 Decentralization dynamics in energy systems: A generic 2016 Energy Research and Social Electricity; decentralized electricity; Death spiral;
simulation of network effects (Kubli and Ulli-Beer, 2016) Science Distributed generation; Energy systems; Network
effects; Simulation; System Dynamics; Transition
Art. 11 Dynamic feedback analysis of influencing factors of 2019 Sustainability (Switzerland) Building; energy; Building energy-saving; Causal loop;
existing building energy-saving renovation market based Dynamic feedback; Influencing factor analysis; Market
on system dynamics in China (Guo et al., 2019) development
Art. 12 Evaluating the effect of technology transformation on the 2017 Renewable and Sustainable Energy Death spiral; Electricity utilities; Renewables; System
electricity utility industry (Castaneda et al., 2017) Reviews dynamics
Art. 13 Evaluation of mitigation effects on air pollutants for 2018 IOP Conference Series: Earth and
electric scooters in Taiwan with the energy flow analysis Environmental Science
and system dynamics approach (Hsieh et al., 2018)
Art. 14 Exploration of government policy structure which 2017 IOP Conference Series: Earth and
support and block energy transition process in Indonesia Environmental Science
using system dynamics model (Destyanto et al., 2017)
Art. 15 Implications of biofuel production in the Western Cape 2017 Journal of Energy in Southern Green economy; Bio-energy (Biomass energy); Western
province, South Africa: A system dynamics modelling Africa Cape (South Africa); Sustainable engineering
approach (Jonker et al., 2017)
Art. 16 Infrastructure implications of a green economy transition 2017 Development Southern Africa Green economy; infrastructure; South Africa; system
in the Western Cape Province of South Africa: A system dynamics; transport; Western Cape
dynamics modelling approach (York et al., 2017)
Art. 17 Integrated Agent-based and System Dynamics Modelling 2013 Transport Reviews agent-based model; alternative fuel vehicles; dynamic
for Simulation of Sustainable Mobility (Shafiei et al., simulation; hybrid modelling; sustainable mobility;
2013) system dynamics
Art. 18 Model-based exploration of co-creation efforts: The case 2018 Sustainability (Switzerland) Co-creation; Diffusions; Local energy transitions;
of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) in Skåne, Sweden ( Sweden; System dynamics
Selvakkumaran and Ahlgren, 2018b)
Art. 19 Modeling of decentralized energy supply structures with 2005 2005 International Conference on Decentralized power supply; Decision support systems;
“System Dynamics” (Hollmann and Voss, 2008) Future Power Systems Operations research; Power system modeling; Power
system simulation; Strategic enterprise planning
Art. 20 Smart transition management to smarten energy systems 2011 Portland International Center for
in a deeply uncertain world (Pruyt, 2011) Management of Engineering and
Technology, Proceedings
Art. 21 Sustainability of heat energy tariff in district heating 2017 Energy 4GDH; Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA); District
system: Statistic and dynamic methodologies (Ziemele heating; Renewable energy; Sustainable energy;
et al., 2017b) System dynamics modelling
Art. 22 System dynamic model for the accumulation of 2015 Environmental and Climate Electrolysis; Energy model; Energy transition;
renewable electricity using Power-to-Gas and Power-to- Technologies Methanation; Sustainability
Liquid concepts (Blumberga et al., 2015)
Art. 23 System dynamics model analysis of pathway to 4th 2016 Energy 4GDH; District heating; Renewable energy; Sustainable
generation district heating in Latvia (Ziemele et al., energy; System dynamics modeling
2016)
Art. 24 Systems dynamics modelling to assess the sustainability 2011 WIT Transactions on Ecology and Africa; Systems dynamics; Technology assessment;
of renewable energy technologies in developing the Environment Technology policy; Technology strategy
countries (Brent et al., 2011)
Art. 25 The burden of sustainability: Limits to sustainable 2018 Energy Policy Bioenergy; Governance; Sustainability; System
bioenergy development in Norway (Cavicchi, 2018) dynamics; Transitions
(continued on next page)

5
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren
Table 2 (continued )
Number Title of the article
Art. 26 The nexus concept integrating energy and resource
efficiency for policy assessments: A comparative
approach from three cases (Brouwer et al., 2018)
Art. 27 The sustainable development of the economic-energy-
environment (3E) system under the carbon trading (CT)
mechanism: A Chinese case (Zhao et al., 2018)
Art. 28 Transition challenges for alternative fuel vehicle and
transportation systems (Struben and Sterman, 2008)
Art. 29 Transition of the European electricity system and system
of systems concepts (Pruyt and Thissen, 2007)
Table 3
The sectors studied in the articles and their spread among the sectors.
Sectors studied Articles
Electricity sector Art. 3; Art. 5; Art. 6; Art. 10; Art.
12; Art. 18; Art. 29
Transport Art. 2; Art. 4; Art. 8; Art. 13; Art.
16; Art. 17; Art. 28
District heating sector Art. 7; Art. 21; Art. 23; Art. 24
Electricity in combination with Art. 1; Art. 19; Art. 20; Art. 22
another sector
Bioenergy Art. 15; Art. 25
Marine energy sector Art. 9
Energy in buildings Art. 11
Household energy Art. 14
Multi; energy and non-energy Art. 26; Art. 27
sectors
paragraph immendiately following this)
“Investigate the development patterns of hydropower generation,
considering energy policy, economy and environment.” (Liu et al.,
2018); “Achieve a holistic understanding of the interplay of different
distributed generation systems and consumption concepts, techno­
logical solutions and actor-specific decision criteria, by integrating
technological, economic and social behaviour aspects.” (Kubli and
Ulli-Beer, 2016); “Explore the possibility to introduce in Latvia the
4GDH and by considering conditions of the 4GDH conception …
“(Ziemele et al., 2016); “Obtain a rigorous knowledge of the key
demand dynamics …” (Matthew et al., 2017); and
“Identify drivers, constraints and opportunities of commercial biofuel
production; investigate methods to inform strategic decision-making and use
the most appropriate method to identify and advise on key strategic areas with
the aim of strengthening the business case of biofuel production; …” (Jonker
et al., 2017).
On the other hand, only one article has an evaluative objective, that
is to evaluate ex-post transition concerning household kerosene use
being phased out (Destyanto et al., 2017). Here, the objective is stated as
“Evaluate the energy transition policy that has been implemented in Indonesia
on the past conversion program of kerosene to LPG for household cook fuel
consumption, which considered [sic] as successful energy transition program
implemented since 2007.”
Out of the 29 articles, three have prescriptive objectives, with the
remaining having both prescriptive and descriptive objectives.
All three of the articles with prescriptive objectives give solutions or
recommendations as to the realization of the local energy transition in
question; in (Pruyt and Thissen, 2007), “… whether the transition of the
European electricity system towards a more sustainable and CO2-poor gen­
eration mix improves efficiency, reduces demands and brings about other
better performances. “Similarly, in (Ziemele et al., 2017a), “… examine
the impact of energy saving measures … in the transition towards 4GDH
system”.
Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053
Year Journal/Conference proceedings Keywords
published
2018 Sustainability (Switzerland) Energy modelling; Low-carbon economy; Nexus
concept; Renewable energy; Resource efficiency
2018 Sustainability (Switzerland) Carbon trading (CT); China; Economic-energy-
environment (3E) system; Sustainable development;
System dynamics (SD)
2008 Environment and Planning B:
Planning and Design
2007 2007 IEEE International European energy policy; System dynamics modeling;
Conference on System of Systems Systems-of-systems concepts; Transition toward
Engineering sustainable electricity systems
The three articles that have both prescriptive and descriptive ob­
jectives both “identify and explore factors that underpin the local energy
transitions and give recommendations as to how to go forward” (Jonker
Number of et al., 2017); “… highlight the sustainability issues that must be addressed
articles
…” (Blumberga et al., 2015); and “… study which types of vehicle tech­
7 nologies can support the transition to sustainable mobility, …what the most
effective policies for the market penetration of AFVs are.” (Shafiei et al.,
7
2013).
4
4
3.5. Justification for using SD
2
1
1
The justification for using SD which is provided in the articles gives
1 an indication of why SD has been used to scrutinize local energy tran­
2 sitions in the selected articles. The raw findings are provided in Ap­
pendix 3. When going through the justifications provided, we found four
recurring themes which were provided by the articles. They are (in no
particular order) 1. Dynamics, feedbacks, delays and complexity, 2.
Systematic thinking, 3. Bridging disciplines and 4. Actor interactions
and behaviour. We used these four themes to categorize the justifica­
tions given by the articles for using SD to scrutinize local energy
transitions.
Dynamics, feedbacks, delays and complexity is the implication that
SD’s capability of modelling dynamics, feedbacks and delays and suit­
ability to handle complexity is the reason for choosing SD. Systematic
thinking is the implication that the mapping process and the holistic and
systematic view given by SD makes it suitable for the scrutiny of the
transition. Bridging disciplines is the suitability of SD to facilitate multi-
and inter-disciplinary domains and subjects in a modelling framework
and finally, Actor interactions and behaviour is the suitability of SD to take
into account actor interactions and behaviors in its modelling frame­
work being given as a justification.
Two articles (Blumberga et al., 2015), (Barazandeh and Rafieisa­
khaei, 2018) do not give any justification for their use of SD in the
scrutiny of the local energy transitions.
3.5.1. Dynamics, feedbacks, delays and complexity
The most common justification given is that SD is suitable for dy­
namics, feedbacks, delays and complexity, with 16 out of 29 articles citing
a justification along this theme.
Art 12 (Castaneda et al., 2017). says “… this paper has considered a
systems modelling perspective as it facilitates high levels of aggregation, the
understanding of dynamic feedback processes and other complexities. … this
approach was chosen over others because of its capability of modelling the
highly dynamic power markets, characterized by investment cycles that
involve lags, nonlinearities, and feedbacks”.
Similarly, in Art. 27 (Zhao et al., 2018), “… Carbon Trading mecha­
nism involves multivariable, high order, and nonlinear, dynamic feedback
complex systems, with obvious SD characteristics. Although other types of
quantitative modeling can be used for impact analysis, the SD model, which
has the advantage of solving dynamic problems, can better simulate the
process of development of 3E.”
6
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053

Table 4 Table 4 (continued )

The modelling depth found in the articles selected for this study. Electricity
Electricity
Modelling depth Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. Art.
Modelling depth Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. 3 5 6 10 12 18 29
3 5 6 10 12 18 29
With another
Systems thinking � modelling
CLDs � method
CLDs þ SFDs � � � � �
Multi þ non-energy sectors
With another
Modelling depth Art. Art.
modelling
26 27
method
Systems thinking
Transport
CLDs �
Modelling depth Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. Art.
CLDs þ SFDs �
2 4 8 13 16 17 28
With another �
Systems thinking modelling
CLDs method
CLDs þ SFDs � � � � � � �
With another �
modelling 3.5.2. Systematic thinking
method The second most common theme is systematic thinking, with 13 out
District Heating of 29 articles giving this justification.
Modelling depth Art. Art. Art. Art. Art. 10 (Kubli and Ulli-Beer, 2016) says “… SD is a simulation and
7 21 23 24
mapping method based on causal modelling.“, and that this is important to
Systems thinking understand the decentralization dynamics at the regional level. Simi­
CLDs � larly, in (Mazur et al., 2018), the authors mention “… SD which suc­
CLDs þ SFDs
cessfully explored the behaviour of systems during technology diffusion
� � �
With another �
modelling scenarios.”
method More importantly, in (York et al., 2017), the authors note that “the
Electricity þ conceptual methods of model building, both mental and computational, are
Modelling depth Art. Art. Art. Art. relatively easy, and robust models can be created.”
1 19 20 22

Systems thinking 3.5.3. Bridging disciplines

CLDs The justification that SD is suited to bridging disciplines is not an
CLDs þ SFDs � � � � often-cited justification, with just six out of the 29 articles giving this
Another modelling �
justification.
method
One example of the justification given is by (Agnew et al., 2018),
Bioenergy where the authors note “… while bridging the gap between the sciences and
Modelling depth Art. Art.
15 25
humanities to connect often seemingly incongruent variables.”
Similarly (Hollmann and Voss, 2008), notes that SD is useful for “…
Systems thinking
linking together modeling of these various sciences and diversified disciplines
CLDs �
CLDs þ SFDs � …” and “due to its ability to accurately represent interactions and in­
Another modelling terconnections from a variety of sectors and disciplines with relative ease”
method (Jonker et al., 2017).
Marine energy In the case of (Destyanto et al., 2017), with the evaluative objective
Modelling depth Art. of analysing the successful transition to LPG, the authors note “In the
9 government framework of transition management, system dynamics also help
Systems thinking the government in operational level, for experimenting and project building
CLDs � before the energy transition project will be implemented”.
CLDs þ SFDs
Another modelling
method
3.5.4. Actor interactions and behaviour
The actor interactions and behaviour theme has been given as a
Energy in buildings
justification the least in the selected articles. Only five out of the 29
Modelling depth Art.
11 articles have mentioned the suitability of SD for facilitating the model­
ling of “complex dynamic relationships between stakeholders” (Shafiei
Systems thinking
CLDs � et al., 2012). In (Selvakkumaran and Ahlgren, 2018b), the authors note
CLDs þ SFDs “SD modelling is a quantitative methodology which can elicit the complex
With another relationships between the different actors and their impact on the diffusion
modelling …“.
method
More importantly, Art. 24 notes that SD is important since new
Household energy technology transitions and assessments “… involves diverse actors
Modelling depth Art.
including policy makers, technology developers/investors, assessment prac­
14
titioners, and the community that would be involved in establishing the
Systems thinking technologies, to name a few.”
CLDs
CLDs þ SFDs �

7
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren
3.6. Levels of interaction with local
The level of interaction with local are analyzed in this section, in two
ways. The first way is analysis of the different ways in which the ‘local’
energy transition has been represented. The second way is the method
used to model the ‘local’ interaction with the other regime and land­
scape factors. The raw data with the coding is given in Appendix 4.
In all articles, the ‘local’ of the local energy transition has been
explicitly modelled, along with the interactions with the regime (meso)
or/and landscape (macro) factors. Explaining further, the local energy
systems scrutinized in the articles have been modelled with their keys
components represented in the model, and the relationship to the regime
and landscape modelled. The SD models have separate sub-models
looking at utilities’ decision and consumers’ decisions (Castaneda
et al., 2017), separate models looking at behavioral archetypes of con­
sumer groups and utilities (Matthew et al., 2017; Capelo et al., 2018;
Kubli and Ulli-Beer, 2016; Castaneda et al., 2017; Ziemele et al., 2016,
2017b), with distinct separation of the different utility actors and mar­
ket actors (Mazur et al., 2018; Shafiei et al., 2013; Struben and Sterman,
2008), taking into account the local, regional, and national level factors
affecting the local transition (Cavicchi, 2018), along with municipality
or government action and its impact on diffusion (Destyanto et al., 2017;
Selvakkumaran and Ahlgren, 2018b), while in some cases looking at the
interactions with landscape factors such as economy (Brouwer et al.,
2018; Brent et al., 2011; Zhao et al., 2018; Pruyt and Thissen, 2007). On
the other hand, articles explicitly also focus on the regime factors
impacting the ‘local’ energy transition, such as during the transition to
electric scooters (Hsieh et al., 2018) and during the diffusion of solar PV
systems (Agnew et al., 2018). Some articles scrutinize the local transi­
tion bounded by geographical location and the interplay between
infrastructure and localized technology suitability (Jonker et al., 2017;
York et al., 2017).
The ‘local’ in terms of the local energy transitions have different
implications and implicitly different meanings in the articles chosen, but
they all have the interactions between local niches and regime and
landscape factors scrutinized.
Contrarily, there is variety in the methods used to represent the local
interactions. In most articles, the local interactions within the transitions
processes studied are represented mechanistically, without any explicit
actor-specific insight informing the model. In some articles, secondary
sources inform the modelling of local actors (Guo et al., 2019; Matthew
et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2018; Kubli and Ulli-Beer, 2016; Castaneda et al.,
2017); in other articles, authors’ understanding of the existing system
forms the basis of actor interactions (Schwaninger and Groesser, 2008a;
Matthew et al., 2017; Shafiei et al., 2012; Ziemele et al., 2017a; Casta­
neda et al., 2017); some of the studies have futuristic and hypothetical
transitions and actor interactions within them (Ko €hler et al., 2018; Guo
et al., 2019; Barazandeh and Rafieisakhaei, 2018) are modelled as
influenced by rigid techno-economic logic.
Some articles explicitly exhibit qualitative data as the basis of the SD
model at the base of the model. In the case of (Selvakkumaran and
Ahlgren, 2018b), multiple iterations of interviews informed the diffu­
sion model of solar PV technology, while in (Agnew et al., 2018), 68
interviews with varied groups of actors involved with the local transition
formed the basis of the SD model. In (Capelo et al., 2018), expert in­
terviews informed the model, while in (Ziemele et al., 2017a) expert
workshop with the district heating company helped determine the local
actors’ interactions within the energy system.
This leads us to conclude that a popular way local energy transitions
have been modelled with an explicit actor perspective using SD has been
through some form of identification of real-world actors within the local
energy transition setting and then acquiring data through them, and
then this data forming the basis for the SD model. But such studies are
definitely the minority, since only seven out of the 29 articles followed
this actor-perspective method.
8
Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053
4. Analyses
This section provides the cross-sectional categorical analysis to study
if there are any significant findings from the articles selected, in terms of
how and why SD is used to study local energy transitions.
4.1. Objective and modelling depth
In the cross-sectional analysis of objectives of the articles and the
modelling depth of the articles, the most important conclusion we can
come to is that SD as a modelling tool at different modelling depths has
been used to conduct research with descriptive and prescriptive objec­
tives. In Art. 21 (Pruyt and Thissen, 2007), the prescriptive objective is
realized by the recommendations given in the article through systems-of
systems thinking. But, in (Brent et al., 2011) causal loop diagrams un­
derpin the recommendations and prescriptions given by the author. To
the contrary, in both (Jonker et al., 2017; Shafiei et al., 2013), SFDs are
used to achieve the prescriptive and descriptive objectives outlined in
the articles.
One reasonable conclusion we could come to is that SD has been used
with versatility to scrutinize local energy transitions and is still suitable
for that purpose at different modelling depths.
4.2. Justification for using SD and levels of interaction with local
In the cross-sectional analysis of the justification given for the use of
SD in the articles and the level of interaction with local energy transi­
tions that the studies have, we discovered certain pertinent trends. In all
seven articles with qualitative data informing the actor interactions
within the local energy transition, the systematic thinking and mapping
which is possible through SD is not cited as a justification, except in
(Selvakkumaran and Ahlgren, 2018b).
Out of the seven articles, only two (Bucher et al., 2016; Selvakku­
maran and Ahlgren, 2018b) give the justification of actor interactions,
even though their modelling of the local energy transitions is under­
scored by working with actors pertinent to the said transition.
Conversely (Shafiei et al., 2012; Kubli and Ulli-Beer, 2016; Brent et al.,
2011; Cavicchi, 2018), discuss the suitability of SD in terms of being
capable of handling actor interactions, behaviour and the complexity
arising out of it, but do not take actors in the local energy transition into
account when the models are built, especially through qualitative data.
This brings us to the conclusion that there is certainly a gap between
the strengths of SD in scrutinizing local energy transitions and to what
extent that strength is used. For example, SD has the capacity to include
data from actors in the local energy transitions process, yet our analysis
shows that capacity is not exploited to the fullest extent.
5. Discussion
Given the findings in Section 3 and Section 4, there are certain
critical points that need to be discussed here. Overall, SD is a tool that is
used to scrutinize local energy transitions but its flexibility is also a
critical part of its suitability for the study of local energy transitions; that
it is capable of handling the dynamics, complexity etc., and also capable
of handling actor-interactions, especially within the confines of local
energy transitions, is important.
In existing literature, as mentioned before, socio-technical transition
scholars have espoused the capability of SD to handle complexity. Our
findings also show that complexity arising out of causal feedbacks is one
of the main reasons given for the use of SD in local energy transitions.
Similarly, SD scholars and practitioners have documented how SD
may be used in group and participatory model building settings. Simi­
larly, the importance of actor-interactions and participatory model
building in local energy transitions processes are stressed in (Selvak­
kumaran and Ahlgren, 2017), (this should be Selvakkumaran and
Ahlgren, 2018b) but, the findings from this study show us that there is a
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren
clear lack of articles which look at local energy transitions through SD
modelling, explicitly modelling actor-interactions while supporting the
modelling through actor-based qualitative data. The importance of this
is further stressed by Ulli-Beer et al. (2017), where they go a step further
and cement the process of participative modelling within the frame of
socio-technical transitions modelling. This approach while documented
in other domains of application of SD has not been widely used in the
field of local energy transitions.
Our findings also show that systematizing of factors within the local
energy transitions is a reason for using SD in the field of local energy
transitions, coupled with analysis using MLP. This is also useful when
combined with the modelling of actor-interactions within local energy
transitions, leading to better mechanism-based transition research
methodology, as per (Papachristos, 2018).
Furthermore, it also strengthens the argument for using SD in the
field of local energy transitions to enable theory-building through
modelling, as described by (Bleda and Shackley, 2012; Schwaninger and
Groesser, 2008a). Given that most articles analyzed in this study have
descriptive objectives, and the use of SD to achieve descriptive objec­
tives within the field of local energy transitions are common as our
findings show, the use of SD for theory-building within the local energy
transitions field is especially suited.
Most articles studied in this work are theoretical and abstract in
form, as in they make use of authors’ understanding of the underlying
transition context, including the mental models and analysis of sec­
ondary sources. So, while they are local in scope either geographically or
as in part of a larger system, the SD modelling is not necessarily
empirically or ‘locally’ informed. This suggests a gap in the use of SD to
study local energy transitions, given the importance of empirical models
stressed by (Ko €hler et al., 2018). This point also ties in with the use of
actor-based local data being the basis of the SD models built to scrutinize
local energy transitions.
So, the use of SD within the socio-technical transitions field is clearly
documented and there is a critical mass, in terms of use of SD within that
field. It is used as a tool to model complexity, a tool to build theory and
also a tool to model actor-informed societal transitions. Despite this,
when it comes to local energy transitions, the use of SD to model local
energy transitions with data from the actors themselves, or model with
the actors is not done as much as it is used to model complexity.
6. Conclusion
Most of the local energy transitions have been studied using simu­
latable SFD in SD methodology. The important sectors in the energy field
are represented in terms of SD modelling of local energy transitions,
including electricity, transport, district heating etc.
Most of the local energy transitions scrutinized by SD in the articles
have descriptive objectives, with some prescriptive, and just one eval­
uative objective.
In terms of justification for using SD provided by the articles
analyzed in this study, we found four major themes along which the
justifications that were provided. They are dynamics, feedbacks, delays
and complexity, systematic thinking, bridging disciplines and actor
interactions and behaviour. The ‘dynamics, feedbacks, delays and
complexity’ theme is the most cited justification for the use of SD in
scrutinizing local energy transitions, followed by systemic thinking.
Although, there are seminal literatures in the field calling for the in­
clusion of actor interactions and behaviour, especially in the field of
local energy transitions, at present this theme does not have wide rep­
resentation in the articles analyzed in the study.
All the articles selected are in the field of local energy transitions,
specifically local given the interactions of the niches in the energy
transitions process with the regime or landscape factors as framed
through the MLP. Some articles explicitly build SD models based on local
actor interactions, with qualitative data from actors underpinning the
models but these articles are very few (seven out of the 29 articles
9
Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053
studied), with the majority being theoretical or descriptive/explorative
studies informed by mental models of the authors or secondary sources.
This brings us to the conclusion that although SD is a flexible tool in
the field of modelling local energy transitions, and even though it has
inherent benefits such as model-based theory building, the use of SD to
model actor-interaction based transitions is not that wide.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Sujeetha Selvakkumaran: Writing - original draft, Visualization,
Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis. Erik O.
Ahlgren: Writing - review & editing, Conceptualization, Methodology,
Resources, Funding acquisition.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge funding from Energy Area of
Advance, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden and funding from
Swedish Energy Agency. Author S.S is grateful to Elias Hartvigsson for
the various discussions on the epistemic use of System Dynamics.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111053.
References
Agnew, S., Smith, C., Dargusch, P., 2018. Causal loop modelling of residential solar and
battery adoption dynamics: a case study of Queensland, Australia. J. Clean. Prod.
172, 2363–2373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.174.
Barazandeh, B., Rafieisakhaei, M., 2018. A system dynamics model of the auto industry:
case study on sustainability of Iran’s car market. In: 2017 IEEE Conf. Technol.
Sustain. SusTech 2017, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/SusTech.2017.8333540.
B�
erard, C., 2010. Group model building using system dynamics: an analysis of
methodological frameworks. Electron. J. Bus. Res. Methods 8, 35–45.
Bleda, M., Shackley, S., 2012. Simulation modelling as a theory building tool: the
formation of risk perceptions. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simulat.
Blumberga, A., Timma, L., Blumberga, D., 2015. System dynamic model for the
accumulation of renewable electricity using Power-to-Gas and Power-to-Liquid
concepts. Environ. Clim. Technol. 16, 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1515/rtuect-2015-
0012.
Brent, A.C., Mokheseng, M.B., Amigun, B., Tazvinga, H., Musango, J.K., 2011. Systems
dynamics modelling to assess the sustainability of renewable energy technologies in
developing countries. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 143, 13–24. https://doi.org/
10.2495/ESUS110021.
Brouwer, F., Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia, L., Alexandri, E., Bremere, I., Griffey, M.,
Linderhof, V., 2018. The nexus concept integrating energy and resource efficiency
for policy assessments: a comparative approach from three cases. Sustain. Times 10,
1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124860.
Bucher, R., Jeffrey, H., Bryden, I.G., Harrison, G.P., 2016. Creation of investor
confidence: the top-level drivers for reaching maturity in marine energy. Renew.
Energy 88, 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2015.11.033.
Cambridge Dictionary, Cambridge Dictionary, Local, Cambridge Dict, 2019. https://dicti
onary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/local. (Accessed 11 September 2019).
Capelo, C., Ferreira Dias, J., Pereira, R., 2018. A system dynamics approach to analyse
the impact of energy efficiency policy on ESCO ventures in European Union
countries: a case study of Portugal. Energy Effic 11, 893–925. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12053-018-9617-9.
Castaneda, M., Franco, C.J., Dyner, I., 2017. Evaluating the effect of technology
transformation on the electricity utility industry. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 80,
341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.179.
Cavicchi, B., 2018. The burden of sustainability: limits to sustainable bioenergy
development in Norway. Energy Pol. 119, 585–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enpol.2018.05.015.
Destyanto, A.R., Silalahi, T.D., Hidayatno, A., 2017. Exploration of government policy
structure which support and block energy transition process in Indonesia using
system dynamics model. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 94 https://doi.org/
10.1088/1755-1315/94/1/012155.
S. Selvakkumaran and E.O. Ahlgren
Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a
multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Pol. 31, 1257–1274. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8.
Geels, F.W., 2019. Socio-technical transitions to sustainability: a review of criticisms and
elaborations of the Multi-Level Perspective. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.009.
Geels, F.W., Schot, J., 2007. Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res. Pol. 36,
399–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003.
Guo, H., Qiao, W., Liu, J., 2019. Dynamic feedback analysis of influencing factors of
existing building energy-saving renovation market based on system dynamics in
China. Sustain. Times 11, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010273.
Hollmann, M., Voss, J., 2008. Modeling of decentralized energy supply structures with
“system dynamics. In: 2005 Int. Conf. Futur. Power Syst., IEEE, p. 6. https://doi.org/
10.1109/fps.2005.204267 pp. – 6.
Hoppe, T., Graf, A., Warbroek, B., Lammers, I., Lepping, I., 2015. Local governments
supporting local energy initiatives: lessons from the best practices of Saerbeck
(Germany) and Lochem (The Netherlands). Sustain. Times 7, 1900–1931. https://
doi.org/10.3390/su7021900.
Hsieh, P.Y., Chang, L.F.W., Yu, T.Y., Wu, K.C., 2018. Evaluation of mitigation effects on
air pollutants for electric scooters in Taiwan with the energy flow analysis and
system dynamics approach. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 191 https://doi.org/
10.1088/1755-1315/191/1/012136.
Jonker, W., Brent, A.C., Musango, J.K., De Kock, I., 2017. Implications of biofuel
production in the Western Cape province, South Africa: a system dynamics
modelling approach of South Africa: a system dynamics modelling approach.
J. Energy South Afr. 28, 1. https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3051/2017/v28i1a1457.
K€
ohler, J., de Haan, F., Holtz, G., Kubeczko, K., Moallemi, E., Papachristos, G.,
Chappin, E., 2018. Modelling sustainability transitions: an assessment of approaches
and challenges. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simulat. 21 https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.3629.
Krippendorff, K., 2004. Content Analysus: an Introduction to its Methodology. SAGE
Publications, Thousand Oaks; London; New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.2307/
2288384.
Kubli, M., Ulli-Beer, S., 2016. Decentralisation dynamics in energy systems : a generic
simulation of network effects. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 13, 71–83. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.015.
Lane, D.C., 2000. Should system dynamics be described as a ‘hard’ or ‘deterministic’
systems approach? Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 17, 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)
1099-1743(200001/02)17:1<3::aid-sres344>3.3.co;2-z.
Leopold, A., 2016. Energy related system dynamic models: a literature review. Cent. Eur.
J. Oper. Res. 24, 231–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-015-0417-4.
Liu, D., Zhao, W., Li, Z., Xu, X., Xiao, B., Niu, D., 2018. Can hydropower develop as
expected in China? A scenario analysis based on system dynamics model. Energy
161, 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.07.113.
Matthew, G., Nuttall, W.J., Mestel, B., Dooley, L.S., 2017. A dynamic simulation of low-
carbon policy influences on endogenous electricity demand in an isolated island
system. Energy Pol. 109, 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.060.
Mazur, C., Offer, G.J., Contestabile, M., Brandon, N.B., 2018. Comparing the effects of
vehicle automation, policy-making and changed user preferences on the uptake of
electric cars and emissions from transport. Sustain. Times 10, 4–6. https://doi.org/
10.3390/su10030676.
Merriam-Webster, 2019. Definition of Local. Merriam-Webster.Com. https://www.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/local. (Accessed 11 September 2019).
Papachristos, G., 2018. A mechanism based transition research methodology: bridging
analytical approaches. Futures 98, 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
futures.2018.02.006.
Papachristos, G., 2020. System dynamics modelling and simulation for sociotechnical
transitions research. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions. 1–14. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.eist.2018.10.001.
Pruyt, E., 2011. Smart transition management to smarten energy systems in a deeply
uncertain world. Technol. Manag. Energy Smart World (PICMET), 2011 Proc.
PICMET ’11 1–9.
Pruyt, E., Thissen, W., 2007. Transition of the European electricity system and system of
systems concepts, 2007. IEEE Int. Conf. Syst. Syst. Eng. SOSE. https://doi.org/
10.1109/SYSOSE.2007.4304305.
Schwaninger, M., Groesser, S.N., 2008a. Modeling as theory-building. In: Proc. 2008 Int.
Conf. Syst. Dyn. Soc., pp. 1–26. In: http://www.systemdynamics.org/conferences/
2008/proceed/papers/SCHWA162.pdf.
10
Journal of Environmental Management 272 (2020) 111053
Schwaninger, M., Groesser, S.N., 2008b. System dynamics as model-based theory
building. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 8, 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.
Selvakkumaran, S., Ahlgren, E.O., 2017. Understanding the local energy transitions
process: a systematic review. Int. J. Sustain. Energy Plan. Manag. 14 https://doi.org/
10.5278/ijsepm.2017.14.5.
Selvakkumaran, S., Ahlgren, E.O., 2018a. Determining the factors of household energy
transitions: a multi-domain study. Technol. Soc. 1 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
techsoc.2018.12.003.
Selvakkumaran, S., Ahlgren, E.O., 2018b. Model-based exploration of co-creation efforts:
the case of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) in Skåne, Sweden. Sustain. Times 10. https://
doi.org/10.3390/su10113905.
Shafiei, E., Stefansson, H., Asgeirsson, E.I., Davidsdottir, B., Raberto, M., 2012. A hybrid
modeling framework for diffusion of alternative fuel vehicles. In: 2012 IEEE Int.
Energy Conf. Exhib. ENERGYCON 2012, pp. 1071–1076. https://doi.org/10.1109/
EnergyCon.2012.6347729.
Shafiei, E., Stefansson, H., Asgeirsson, E.I., Davidsdottir, B., Raberto, M., 2013.
Integrated agent-based and system dynamics modelling for simulation of sustainable
mobility. Transp. Rev. A Transnatl. Transdiscipl. J. 33, 341–366. https://doi.org/
10.1080/01441647.2012.745632.
Shields, P.M., Rangarajan, N., 2013. A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating
Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. New Forum Press, Stillwater, OK.
Sterman, J.D., 2000. Business Dynamics - Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex
World.
Struben, J., Sterman, J.D., 2008. Transition challenges for alternative fuel vehicle and
transportation systems. Environ. Plann. Plann. Des. 35, 1070–1097. https://doi.org/
10.1068/b33022t.
Timmermans, J., de Haan, H., Squazzoni, F., 2008. Computational and mathematical
approaches to societal transitions. Comput. Math. Organ. Theor. 14, 391–414.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-008-9035-1.
Turnheim, B., Berkhout, F., Geels, F., Hof, A., McMeekin, A., Nykvist, B., van Vuuren, D.,
2015. Evaluating sustainability transitions pathways: bridging analytical approaches
to address governance challenges. Global Environ. Change 35, 239–253. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.08.010.
Ulli-Beer, S., Kubli, M., Zapata, J., Wurzinger, M., Musiolik, J., Furrer, B., 2017.
Participative modelling of socio-technical transitions: why and how should we look
beyond the case-specific energy transition challenge? Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 34,
469–488. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2470.
van Bruggen, A., Nikolic, I., Kwakkel, J., 2019. Modeling with stakeholders for
transformative change. Sustainability 11, 825. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su11030825.
Van Der Schoor, T., Van Lente, H., Scholtens, B., Peine, A., 2016. Challenging obduracy:
how local communities transform the energy system. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 13,
94–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.009.
Wolstenholme, E.F., 2003. Towards the Definition and Use of a Core Set of Archetypal
Structures in System Dynamics, 19, pp. 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.259.
York, T.A., Brent, A.C., Musango, J.K., de Kock, I.H., 2017. Infrastructure implications of
a green economy transition in the Western Cape Province of South Africa: a system
dynamics modelling approach. Dev. South Afr. 34, 529–547. https://doi.org/
10.1080/0376835X.2017.1358601.
Zhao, X., Zhang, Y., Liang, J., Li, Y., Jia, R., Wang, L., 2018. The sustainable development
of the economic-energy-environment (3E) system under the carbon trading (CT)
mechanism: a Chinese case. Sustain. Times 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su10010098.
Ziemele, J., Gravelsins, A., Blumberga, A., Vigants, G., Blumberga, D., 2016. System
dynamics model analysis of pathway to 4th generation district heating in Latvia.
Energy 110, 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.11.073.
Ziemele, J., Gravelsins, A., Blumberga, A., Blumberga, D., 2017a. Combining energy
efficiency at source and at consumer to reach 4th generation district heating:
economic and system dynamics analysis. Energy 137, 595–606. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.123.
Ziemele, J., Gravelsins, A., Blumberga, A., Blumberga, D., 2017b. Sustainability of heat
energy tariff in district heating system: statistic and dynamic methodologies. Energy
137, 834–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.130.
Ł, D.C.L., 2001. Rerum cognoscere causas : Part I — how do the ideas of system dynamics
relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate ? y 17,
97–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.209.