Directions of Green Transition Strategy in Global Value Chains
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32515/2663-1636.2025.14(47).11-25Keywords:
digital transformation, global value chains, sustainable development, green transition, cybersecurity, ESG strategies, digital risks.Abstract
The article examines the transformation of the European Union's energy supply chains in the context of russia's full-scale war against Ukraine and sanctions pressure on the russian energy sector, which have caused a reorientation from the pipeline model to imports of liquefied natural gas and, at the same time, have increased the importance of renewable energy as the basis for decarbonization and reducing import dependence. The aim of the study is to provide a scientific and methodological substantiation of the interrelationships between geopolitical shocks, climate policy, and the structural restructuring of global value chains in renewable energy from the perspective of simultaneously ensuring energy security, competitiveness, and climate neutrality.
It is substantiated that the substitution of traditional liquefied natural gas supplies from distant markets is accompanied by increased transaction costs, logistical risks, and infrastructural constraints, which raise the “cost” of energy security and highlight the need to develop a more autonomous architecture of energy provision. Based on a generalization of contemporary approaches to the analysis of Global Value Chains and the “green transition,” the determinants of the revision of energy value chains after 2022 are systematized. The key vulnerabilities of renewable energy supply chains are identified, including the concentration of component and material production in a limited number of countries, dependence on critical minerals, protectionism and trade barriers, technological intermittency of generation, and the lack of long-term storage capacity.
It has been proven that the “green transition” shifts the center of systemic risks from the fuel market to the markets of technologies, raw materials, network infrastructure, and institutional regulation (including carbon adjustment mechanisms, sustainable financing standards, and corporate reporting), forming new requirements for supply chain sustainability management. The policy of managed diversification of renewable energy sources supply chains, investment in networks and storage technology portfolios, as well as strengthening the measurability of environmental results to minimize greenwashing risks, is justified.
References
Список літератури
1. Паризька угода. ООН; Угода, Міжнародний документ від 12.12.2015. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_l61#Text (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
2. Пакет ЄС “Fit for 55” – це набір пропозицій щодо перегляду та оновлення законодавства ЄС і впровадження нових ініціатив, з метою забезпечення відповідності політики ЄС кліматичним цілям. URL: https://brdo.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/13-ZK-Dosyagnennya-tsili-vugletsevoi-ney-tralnosti-analiz-nayavnyh-vugletsevyh-rynkiv-ta-instrumentiv-i-hnogo-regulyuvannya.pdf (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
3. Bacchus J. The Black Hole of National Security. CATO Policy Analysis. 2022. Vol. 936. URL: https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2022-11/policy-analysis-936.pdf (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
4. Beise, Marian, and Klaus Rennings. 2005. Lead Markets and Regulation: A Framework for Analyzing the International Diffusion of Environmental Innovations. Ecological Economics. 52 (1). pp. 5–17.
5. Black, Simon, Ian Parry, and Karlygash Zhunussova. 2022. More Countries Are Pricing Carbon, but Emissions Are Still Too Cheap. International Monetary Fund (IMF) Blog.
6. Blakers A., Stocks M., Lu B., Cheng C. A review of pumped hydro energy storage. Prog. Energy. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2516-1083/abeb5b.
7. BP Energy Outlook 2023. Energy Outlook. Energy economics. Home (bp.com).
8. BP Energy Outlook 2022. EO22 means Energy Outlook 2022.
9. Brandi, Clara, Jakob Schwab, Axel Berger, and Jean-Frédéric Morin. 2020. Do Environmental Provisions in Trade Agreements Make Exports from Developing Countries Greener? World Development. 129 (104899).
10. Byers, E.A., et al., 2016: Water and climate risks to power generation with carbon capture and storage. Environ. Res. Lett., 11(2), 24011, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748- 9326/11/2/024011.
11. Chernet Haregewoin, H., K. Alfredsen and H. Midttømme Grethe, 2014: Safety of hydropower dams in a changing climate. J. Hydrol. Eng., 19(3), 569–582, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.000083.
12. Ciuriak D. Unfree Flow with No Trust: The Implications of Geoeconomics and Geopolitics for Data and Digital Trade. Centre for International Governance Innovation: Website. 14.02.2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3963074.
13. Corey Lee Bell, Elena Collinson, Xunpeng Shi, 2023. The China Factor in Japan-South Korea Rapprochement. Dipl. URL: https://thediplomat.com/2023/05/the-china-factor-in-japan-south-korea-rapprochement/ (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
14. EEA, 2017: Climate Change, Impacts and Vulnerability in Europe 2016 – An Indicator-based Report. EEA Report No 1/2017. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, ISBN 978-92-9213-835-6. (424 pp).
15. Filippidis M., Filis G. Geopolitical risk and energy prices. Encyclopedia of Monetary Policy, Financial Markets and Banking. 2025. Vol. 3. Pp. 194-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-44-313776-1.00132-X
16. Goldthau A., Hughes L. Protect global supply chains for low-carbon technologies. Nature 2020. №585. Р. 28–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02499-8.
17. Guo Y., Zheng H., Zeng Y., Fan W., Albahooth B., Bhuiyan R. A. Natural resources extraction of RCEP trade bloc: examining geopolitical risk and economic situation. Resources Policy. 2023. Vol. 86. P. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104227.
18. IEA The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions. Paris. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/f262b91c-en.
19. IEA. Global Energy Review: CO2 Emissions in 2021, IEA, Paris 2022. URL: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-co2-emissions-in-2021-2 (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
20. IEA. Special Report on Solar PV Global Supply Chains. Int. Energy Agency. 2022. URL: https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv-global-supply-chains/executive-summary.
21. IEA. World Energy Outlook 2022, IEA. Paris. 2022. URL: https://www.iea.org/reports/worldenergy-outlook-2022 (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
22. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. 2023. URL: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-cycle/ (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
23. IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 3056 pp., DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844.
24. Jacobsen, Stine, and Nikolaj Skydsgaard. 2022. Denmark agrees corporate carbon tax. Reuters. 24 June.
25. Koks, E., R. Pant, S. Thacker and J.W. Hall, 2019a: Understanding business disruption and economic losses due to electricity failures and flooding. Int. J. Disaster Risk Sci., 10(4), 421–438, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-019-00236-y.
26. Krishnan, Aarti, Valentina De Marchi, and Stefano Ponte. 2022. Environmental Upgrading and Downgrading in Global Value Chains: A Framework for Analysis. Economic Geography. 99. pp. 25–50.
27. Michael Harley, 2023. China Overtakes Japan As The World’s Biggest Exporter Of Passenger Cars [WWW Document]. Forbes. URL: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelharley/2023/05/22/china-overtakes-japan-as-the-worlds-biggestexporter-of-passenger-cars/?sh=3db6db642c4f (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).
28. Nepal R., Deng Y., Dong K. Going with the flow: How does global energy value chain adapt to geopolitical risks? Energy Economics. 2025. Vol. 144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108288.
29. Pata U. K., Alola A. A., Erdogan S., Kartal M. T. The influence of income, economic policy uncertainty, geopolitical risk, and urbanization on renewable energy investments in G7 countries. Energy Economics. 2023. Vol. 128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.107172.
30. Pechan, A. and K. Eisenack, 2014: The impact of heat waves on electricity spot markets. Energy Econ., 43, 63–71, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.02.006.
31. Ranasinghe R., A.C. Ruane, R. Vautard, N. Arnell, E. Coppola, F.A. Cruz, S. Dessai, A.S. Islam, M. Rahimi, D. Ruiz Carrascal, J. Sillmann, M.B. Sylla, C. Tebaldi, W. Wang and R. Zaaboul, 2021: Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J. B. R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. In press.
32. Roberts A., Moraes H. Ch., Ferguson V. Toward a Geoeconomic Order in Trade and Investment. Journal of International Economic Law. 2019. Vol. 22(4). Pp. 655-676. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgz036
33. Salminen, Jaakko, Mikko Rajavuori, Mika Viljanen, and Agnes Hellner. 2022. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Global Value Chains: Governance, Regulation and Liability. Copenhagen Business School Law Research Paper Series No. 22-05. Copenhagen.
34. SET plan progress report 2025. – URL: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/4514d861-b56a-11f0-b37f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en (дата звернення: 28.11.2025 р.).35. Tabelin, Carlito Baltazar, Jessica Dallas, Sophia Casanova, Timothy Pelech, Ghislain Bournival, Serkan Saydam, and Ismet Canbulat. 2021. Towards a Low-Carbon Society: A Review of Lithium Resource Availability, Challenges and Innovations in Mining, Extraction and Recycling, and Future Perspectives. Minerals Engineering.163 (106743).
36. Weber, J., et al., 2018: Impact of climate change on backup energy and storage needs in wind-dominated power systems in Europe. PLoS ONE, 13(8), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201457.
References
1. Paris Agreement. (2015). United Nations. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_l61#Text [in Ukrainian].
2. European Commission. (2021). Fit for 55: Delivering the EU’s 2030 climate target through legislative reform. https://brdo.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/13-ZK-Dosyagnennya-tsili-vugletsevoi-ney-tralnosti-analiz-nayavnyh-vugletsevyh-rynkiv-ta-instrumentiv-i-hnogo-regulyuvannya.pdf [in Ukrainian].
3. Bacchus, J. (2022). The black hole of national security (Policy Analysis No. 936). Cato Institute. https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2022-11/policy-analysis-936.pdf [in English].
4. Beise, M., & Rennings, K. (2005). Lead markets and regulation: A framework for analyzing the international diffusion of environmental innovations. Ecological Economics, 52(1), 5–17. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.06.007.
5. Black, S., Parry, I., & Zhunussova, K. (2022). More countries are pricing carbon, but emissions are still too cheap. IMF Blog. https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs [in English].
6. Blakers, A., Stocks, M., Lu, B., & Cheng, C. (2021). A review of pumped hydro energy storage. Progress in Energy. [in English]DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2516-1083/abeb5b.
7. BP. (2023). BP energy outlook 2023. https://www.bp.com/energyoutlook [in English].
8. BP Energy Outlook 2022. EO22 means Energy Outlook 2022 [in English].
9. Brandi, C., Schwab, J., Berger, A., & Morin, J.-F. (2020). Do environmental provisions in trade agreements make exports from developing countries greener? World Development, 129, Article 104899. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104899.
10. Byers, E. A., et al. (2016). Water and climate risks to power generation with carbon capture and storage. Environmental Research Letters, 11(2), Article 024011. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/2/024011.
11. Chernet, H., Alfredsen, K., & Midttømme, G. H. (2014). Safety of hydropower dams in a changing climate. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 19(3), 569–582. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000836.
12. Ciuriak, D. (2022). Unfree flow with no trust: The implications of geoeconomics and geopolitics for data and digital trade. Centre for International Governance Innovation. [in English] https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3963074.
13. Corey Lee Bell, Elena Collinson, Xunpeng Shi. (2023). The China Factor in Japan-South Korea Rapprochement. Dipl. URL https://thediplomat.com/2023/05/the-china-factor-in-japan-south-korea-rapprochement/ [in English].
14. European Environment Agency. (2017). Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016: An indicator-based report (EEA Report No. 1/2017). Publications Office of the European Union. [in English].
15. Filippidis, M., & Filis, G. (2025). Geopolitical risk and energy prices. In Encyclopedia of monetary policy, financial markets and banking (Vol. 3, pp. 194–203). Elsevier. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-44-313776-1.00132-X.
16. Goldthau, A., & Hughes, L. (2020). Protect global supply chains for low-carbon technologies. Nature, 585, 28–30. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02499-8.
17. Guo, Y., Zheng, H., Zeng, Y., Fan, W., Albahooth, B., & Bhuiyan, R. A. (2023). Natural resources extraction of RCEP trade bloc: Examining geopolitical risk and economic situation. Resources Policy, 86, Article 104227. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104227.
18. International Energy Agency. (2021). The role of critical minerals in clean energy transitions. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1787/f262b91c-en.
19. International Energy Agency. (2022a). Global energy review: CO₂ emissions in 2021. https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-co2-emissions-in-2021-2 [in English].
20. International Energy Agency. (2022b). Special report on solar PV global supply chains. https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv-global-supply-chains/executive-summary [in English].
21. International Energy Agency. (2022c). World energy outlook 2022. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2022 [in English].
22. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2023). Sixth assessment report. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-cycle/ [in English].
23. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844.
24. Jacobsen, S., & Skydsgaard, N. (2022, June 24). Denmark agrees corporate carbon tax. Reuters. [in English].
25. Koks, E., Pant, R., Thacker, S., & Hall, J. W. (2019). Understanding business disruption and economic losses due to electricity failures and flooding. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 10(4), 421–438. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-019-00236-y.
26. Krishnan, A., De Marchi, V., & Ponte, S. (2022). Environmental upgrading and downgrading in global value chains: A framework for analysis. Economic Geography, 99, 25–50 [in English].
27. Michael Harley, 2023. China Overtakes Japan As The World’s Biggest Exporter Of Passenger Cars [WWW Document]. Forbes. URL: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelharley/2023/05/22/china-overtakes-japan-as-the-worlds-biggestexporter-of-passenger-cars/?sh=3db6db642c4f [in English].
28. Nepal, R., Deng, Y., & Dong, K. (2025). Going with the flow: How does the global energy value chain adapt to geopolitical risks? Energy Economics, 144, Article 108288. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108288.
29. Pata, U. K., Alola, A. A., Erdogan, S., & Kartal, M. T. (2023). The influence of income, economic policy uncertainty, geopolitical risk, and urbanization on renewable energy investments in G7 countries. Energy Economics, 128, Article 107172. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.107172.
30. Pechan, A., & Eisenack, K. (2014). The impact of heat waves on electricity spot markets. Energy Economics, 43, 63–71. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.02.006.
31. Ranasinghe, R., et al. (2021). Climate change information for regional impact and risk assessment. In V. Masson-Delmotte et al. (Eds.), Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Cambridge University Press [in English].
32. Roberts, A., Moraes, H. C., & Ferguson, V. (2019). Toward a geoeconomic order in trade and investment. Journal of International Economic Law, 22(4), 655–676. [in English] https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgz036.
33. Salminen, J., Rajavuori, M., Viljanen, M., & Hellner, A. (2022). Greenhouse gas emissions in global value chains: Governance, regulation and liability (CBS Law Research Paper No. 22-05). Copenhagen Business School [in English].
34. SET plan progress report 2025. – URL: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/4514d861-b56a-11f0-b37f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en [in English].
35. Tabelin, C. B., et al. (2021). Towards a low-carbon society: A review of lithium resource availability, challenges and innovations. Minerals Engineering, 163, Article 106743 [in English].
36. Weber, J., et al. (2018). Impact of climate change on backup energy and storage needs in wind-dominated power systems in Europe. PLoS ONE, 13(8). [in English] https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201457.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Valerii Mytsenko
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
