Theoretical framework explores key indicators and international practices in energy resilience, highlighting adaptive choices.
Against the backdrop of global energy supply being frequently impacted by geopolitical conflicts, extreme climate events, and structural contradictions in energy transition, energy resilience has emerged as a core issue in global governance and energy research. The paper systematically reviews the theoretical evolution trajectory and integrated framework of energy resilience, explores its assessment methods and key indicators, and summarizes the differentiated paths in international practices. The conclusions are drawn as follows: First, energy resilience is not a single static attribute, but a dynamic complex system that requires the intertwining of technology, society, and policies. Second, the diversification of international energy resilience paths primarily stems from the "adaptive choices" made by countries at different stages of development and with varying economic and technical backgrounds. Developed countries rely on the dual drive of "technology + capital" to build energy resilience, while developing countries focus on low-cost and targeted breakthroughs in energy resilience paths. Moreover, the effectiveness of energy resilience does not lie in whether the model is "advanced or not", but in whether it forms a dynamic adaptation with the country's actual conditions and risk characteristics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhifeng Huang (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: