Mixed-methods analysis reveals key governance gaps in low-carbon skills development for SMEs, suggesting strategies for sustainability.
Coal-dependent areas experience complicated transformations to low-carbon energy systems which necessitate governance arrangements that incorporate economic, social, and environmental factors. This research examines the development of green skills to develop SMEs in areas under energy transitions. The focus was on identifying and implementing strategies to foster the development of green skills, ensuring a workforce prepared for sustainable practices in the region under transition of Western Macedonia, Greece. The research adopts a mixed methodology using a focus group with 20 key quadruple helix stakeholders—government, industry, civil society, and academia approach and applying the Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping method to identify governance determinants. Findings identify clear governance imbalances: Western Macedonia is institutionally strong but has poor public participation with serious socio-economic problems characterized by dispersed governance and lagging transition performance. FCM outcomes underscore participatory governance, policy incentive alignment with local demands, and firm economic interventions and the data revealed a highly interconnected system with susceptibility to feedback loops, highlighting the necessity of adaptive, multi-dimensional governance approaches. Findings underscore the importance of integrating local expertise by strengthening partnerships between academic institutions and SMEs. Linking green skills to the region’s cultural and natural heritage was identified as a valuable strategy to promote sustainability and local development. The article illustrates FCM's utility in representing stakeholder perceptions and simulating intricate governance systems, with lessons in policy design for energy transitions. It invites future work to test FCM on other transitioning economies to continue to build inclusive governance models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kanteler et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: