The geopolitics of energy transition has been the focus of a growing body of research (cf. IRENA 2019, van der Graaf et al 2020, Blondeel et al 2021, etc), yet the concept remains undertheorized, and the boundaries between geopolitics and geoeconomics are often blurry. In addition, many such geopolitical analyses tend to focus on how a future net zero world would be different from the world today (e.g. in redrawing the geopolitical map or in the expected diminished potential for cross-border conflicts over energy); fewer are explicitly concerned with the highly contested, multi-speed transitions unfolding at present, where the future of fossil fuels is still not fully decided (but see Goldthau and Westphal 2019 for a different take). While the geopolitics of fossil fuels emphasizes securing access to oil and gas resources, controlling energy transportation corridors, and the relative power of energy producers versus consumers, in a decarbonizing global economy, the issues of technology leadership, actively shaping value chains for clean technologies, and the rising power of energy consumers are becoming more prominent.
This paper will attempt to disentangle the concepts of geoeconomics and geopolitics and develop an analytical framework of the geoeconomics of the low-carbon transition, understood as managing strategic dependencies (and especially asymmetric dependencies) across three key dimensions: resources, physical infrastructure, and technology & data. In addition, the paper will consider three main channels of intervention that governments use in managing dependencies in the area of energy transition: these include markets, finance, and institutions/rules of interaction (e.g. policies, regulations, and standards). Following calls by geoeconomics scholars (e.g. Kim 2021) to better conceptualize the role of non-state actors, our framework will seek to integrate the activities of different types of actors in the low-carbon transition. In doing so, we will draw on theoretical insights from the literature on global production networks (GPNs), which has developed an apparatus for analyzing the various roles of both lead firms and states across GPNs (e.g. Horner 2016). Finally, the paper will discuss potential contradictions and trade-offs inherent in the ongoing low-carbon transition. These can stem from the occasionally conflicting logics of geopolitics and geoeconomics, or be rooted in the simultaneous need to achieve geo-economic leadership through competition, on the one hand, and the need for cooperation on climate as a collective action dilemma, on the other.
