Methodological review demonstrates how design science research bridges energy innovation and practice, highlighting its value in creating transferable interventions for sustainable transitions.
Energy Science is inherently interdisciplinary, integrating engineering, physics, environmental science, data analytics, and policy to support the transition to sustainable, low-carbon, and resilient energy systems. Despite rapid advances in technology and modeling, a long-standing innovation–implementation gap continues to hinder the translation of research into operational practice and policy-relevant outcomes. Yet Energy Science lacks a systematic methodological perspective that connects problem identification, solution design, implementation, evaluation, and the generation of transferable knowledge. We argue that Design Science Research offers a rigorous yet underutilized approach to addressing this gap. As a problem-driven, solution-oriented paradigm, it is well suited to the complexity, uncertainty, and socio-technical characteristics of contemporary energy systems. Our conceptual contribution is to position Design Science Research as a bridge between scientific understanding and the design, deployment, and continual improvement of energy-system interventions. We identify the methodological needs it can address, explain its underlying principles and activities, examine its theoretical contributions and limitations, and outline pathways for wider adoption. Through iterative design, demonstration, evaluation, and refinement, the approach can generate practical artifacts alongside transferable design knowledge that informs future interventions. Embedding Design Science Research within Energy Science can strengthen the connection between research and practice and support more effective technological, organizational, and policy responses to contemporary energy-transition challenges.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Matthews et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: