DOI: https://doi.org/10.61435/ijred.2026.61693
View PDF Download fulltext

Geopolitical risk, renewable energy transition and policy response: evidence from the BRICS economies

School of Economics, College of Business and Economics, University of Johannesburg, South Africa

Received: 21 Aug 2025; Revised: 16 Jan 2026; Accepted: 28 Mar 2026; Available online: 7 Apr 2026; Published: 1 Mar 2026.
Editor(s): Grigorios Kyriakopoulos
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Centre of Biomass and Renewable Energy (CBIORE)
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

This paper empirically examines the dynamic interplay between geopolitical risk, renewable energy transitions, and policy responses within the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) economies spanning the period from 1990 to 2023, thus addressing the pressing challenge of harmonizing the energy security priorities with the imperative for sustainable economic growth. Employing cross-sectional autoregressive distributed lag and Bayesian structural vector autoregression methodologies for a comprehensive analysis of short-run and long-run dynamics among variables, the findings show a significant negative relationship between geopolitical risks and the adoption and investment in renewable energy sources. Correspondingly, economic policy uncertainties are observed to spur renewable energy consumption under specific economic circumstances characterized by effective policy frameworks; however, policy uncertainties pose a hindrance to renewable energy investment. Furthermore, the study highlights that exchange rate fluctuations have a significant positive impact on renewable investment decisions, whereas demographic pressures stemming from population growth tend to impede energy transition processes. The response strategies to geopolitical shocks underscore the crucial nexus between policy formulation and stability, which collectively mold energy-related outcomes. The central policy recommendation emanating from this study emphasizes the significance of concerted cooperation among the BRICS nations, including measures such as shared supply-chain assurances, regional financing mechanisms, and harmonized regulatory regimes to alleviate barriers associated with geopolitical risks in the transition to renewable energy sources. Finally, the direct applicability of the results pertains to the unique context of the BRICS bloc, which is due to their specific trade dynamics, technological dependencies, and exposure to commodities.

 

Keywords: Geopolitical Risk; Renewable Energy Transition; Policy Responses; BRICSGeopolitical Risk; Renewable Energy Transition; Policy Responses; BRICS
Funding: University of Johannesburg, South Africa

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Research Article
Language : EN
Recent articles
Immobilized L-arginine on methacrylate polymer as reusable heterogeneous catalyst for crude palm oil transesterification Foreign direct investment, renewable energy and governance in major copper- and lithium-mining countries Robust control strategy for optimized IM-4S-VSI-based wind turbine simulator: Assessment for theoretical study Chemically activated biochar derived from mangrove litter with enhanced CO2 adsorption capacity for carbon sequestration The effect of different surface functionalization of SBA-15 catalysts on the production of C16 bio-aviation fuel precursor Development of an isothermal CO2 absorption process using DMC and PEG400 for carbon capture and storage technology More recent articles
Most cited articles
Optimum Sizing Algorithm for An Off Grid Plant Considering Renewable Potentials and Load Profile Performance Evaluation of the Effect of waste paper on Groundnut Shell Briquette Analytical Investigations of Kinetic and Heat Transfer in Slow Pyrolysis of a Biomass Particle Historic Developments, Current Technologies and Potential of Nanotechnology to Develop Next Generation Solar Cells with Improved Efficiency Optimization of Concentration and EM4 Augmentation for Improving Bio-Gas Productivity from Jatropha curcas Linn Capsule Husk More cited articles
  1. Ahir, H., Bloom, N., & Furceri, D. (2022). The world uncertainty index (No. w29763). National bureau of economic research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w29763
  2. Alsagr, N., & Van Hemmen, S. (2021). The impact of financial development and geopolitical risk on renewable energy consumption: evidence from emerging markets. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 25906-25919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12447-2
  3. Bakhsh, S., Zhang, W., Ali, K., & Oláh, J. (2024). Strategy towards sustainable energy transition: The effect of environmental governance, economic complexity and geopolitics. Energy Strategy Reviews, 52, 101330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2024.101330
  4. Baumeister, C., & Hamilton, J. D. (2019). Structural interpretation of vector autoregressions with incomplete identification: Revisiting the role of oil supply and demand shocks. American Economic Review, 109(5), 1873-1910. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151569
  5. Blomquist, J., & Westerlund, J. (2013). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels with serial correlation. Economics Letters, 121(3), 374-378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.09.012
  6. Bozoudis, V., & Sebos, I. (2021). The carbon footprint of transport activities of the 401 Military General Hospital of Athens. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 26(2), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-020-09701-1
  7. Caldara, D., & Iacoviello, M. (2022). Measuring geopolitical risk. American Economic Review, 112(4), 1194-1225. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20191823
  8. Chishti, M. Z., Dogan, E., & Zaman, U. (2023). Effects of the circular economy, environmental policy, energy transition, and geopolitical risk on sustainable electricity generation. Utilities Policy, 82, 101585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2023.101585
  9. Chishti, M. Z., Sinha, A., Zaman, U., & Shahzad, U. (2023). Exploring the dynamic connectedness among energy transition and its drivers: understanding the moderating role of global geopolitical risk. Energy Economics, 119, 106570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106570
  10. Chu, L. K., Doğan, B., Ghosh, S., & Shahbaz, M. (2023). The influence of shadow economy, environmental policies and geopolitical risk on renewable energy: A comparison of high-and middle-income countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 342, 118122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118122
  11. Chudik, A., & Pesaran, M. H. (2015). Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. Journal of econometrics, 188(2), 393-420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2015.03.007
  12. Dechamps, P. (2023). The IEA World Energy Outlook 2022–a brief analysis and implications. European Energy & Climate Journal, 11(3), 100-103. https://doi.org/10.4337/eecj.2023.03.05
  13. Flouros, F., Pistikou, V., & Plakandaras, V. (2022). Geopolitical risk as a determinant of renewable energy investments. Energies, 15(4), 1498. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15041498
  14. Hoffart, F. M., D’Orazio, P., & Kemfert, C. (2022). Geopolitical and climate risks threaten financial stability and energy transitions. Energy, 2004-2965. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Franziska-Hoffart/publication/366989990_Geopolitical_and_climate_risks_threaten_financial_stability_and_energy_transitions/links/63bd683f03aad5368e7d8feb/Geopolitical-and-climate-risks-threaten-financial-stability-and-energy-transitions.pdf
  15. Husain, S., Sohag, K., & Wu, Y. (2024). The responsiveness of renewable energy production to geopolitical risks, oil market instability and economic policy uncertainty: Evidence from United States. Journal of Environmental Management, 350, 119647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119647
  16. Li, H., Ali, M. S. E., Ayub, B., & Ullah, I. (2024). Analysing the impact of geopolitical risk and economic policy uncertainty on the environmental sustainability: evidence from BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31(34), 46148-46162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26553-w
  17. Liu, F., Su, C. W., Qin, M., & Lobonţ, O. R. (2023). Winner or loser? The bidirectional impact between geopolitical risk and energy transition from the renewable energy perspective. Energy, 283, 129174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.129174
  18. Michailidis, M., Zafeiriou, E., Kantartzis, A., & Galatsidas, S. (2025). Governance, energy policy, and sustainable development: Renewable energy infrastructure transition in developing MENA countries. Energies, 18(11), 2759. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18112759
  19. Nydrioti, I., Sebos, I., Kitsara, G., & Assimacopoulos, D. (2024). Effective management of urban water resources under various climate scenarios in semiarid Mediterranean areas. Scientific Reports, 14, Article 28666. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-79938-3
  20. 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, 107172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26553-w
  21. Pesaran, M. H. (2015). Testing weak cross-sectional dependence in large panels. Econometric reviews, 34(6-10), 1089-1117. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474938.2014.956623
  22. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010
  23. Rasoulinezhad, E., Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., Sung, J., & Panthamit, N. (2020). Geopolitical risk and energy transition in Russia: evidence from ARDL bounds testing method. Sustainability, 12(7), 2689. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072689
  24. Ren, X., Yang, W., & Jin, Y. (2024). Geopolitical risk and renewable energy consumption: Evidence from a spatial convergence perspective. Energy Economics, 131, 107384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107384
  25. Riti, J. S., Shu, Y., & Riti, M. K. J. (2022). Geopolitical risk and environmental degradation in BRICS: Aggregation bias and policy inference. Energy Policy, 166, 113010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113010
  26. Shu, Y., Hossain, M. R., Tillaguango, B., Alvarado, R., Işık, C., Murshed, M., & Chen, Z. (2024). Geo-political risks, uncertainty, financial development, renewable energy, and carbon intensity: Empirical evidence from countries at high geo-political risks. Applied Energy, 376, 124321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124321
  27. Sohag, K., Hammoudeh, S., Elsayed, A. H., Mariev, O., & Safonova, Y. (2022). Do geopolitical events transmit opportunity or threat to green markets? Decomposed measures of geopolitical risks. Energy Economics, 111, 106068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106068
  28. Su, C. W., Khan, K., Umar, M., & Zhang, W. (2021). Does renewable energy redefine geopolitical risks?. Energy Policy, 158, 112566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112566
  29. Tabash, M. I., Farooq, U., Al-Faryan, M. A. S., & Wong, W. K. (2024). Effect of geopolitical risk on energy consumption policy: New empirical evidence from BRICS. Heliyon, 10(19). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38049
  30. Tsepi, E., Sebos, I., & Kyriakopoulos, G. L. (2024). Decomposition analysis of CO₂ emissions in Greece from 1996 to 2020. Strategic Planning for Energy & the Environment, 43(3), 517–544. https://doi.org/10.13052/spee1048-5236.4332
  31. Tuna, G. (2024). The effect of geopolitical risk on the clean energy metals’ prices: the evidence of BRICS countries. International Journal of Green Energy, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15435075.2024.2400542
  32. Uddin, I., Usman, M., Saqib, N., & Makhdum, M. S. A. (2023). The impact of geopolitical risk, governance, technological innovations, energy use, and foreign direct investment on CO2 emissions in the BRICS region. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(29), 73714-73729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-27466-4
  33. Wang, Q., Wang, X., & Li, R. (2024). Geopolitical risks and energy transition: the impact of environmental regulation and green innovation. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03770-3
  34. Wang, Q., Zhang, C., & Li, R. (2024). Impact of different geopolitical factors on the energy transition: The role of geopolitical threats, geopolitical acts, and geopolitical risks. Journal of Environmental Management, 352, 119962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119962
  35. Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of applied econometrics, 23(2), 193-233. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.967
  36. Woźniak, T. (2024). Fast and Efficient Bayesian Analysis of Structural Vector Autoregressions Using the R Package bsvars. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15090. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.15090
  37. Zafeiriou, E., Galatsidas, S., Arabatzis, G., Tsiantikoudis, S., & Batzios, A. (2023). Environmental degradation by energy–economic growth interlinkages in EU agriculture. Energies, 16(9), 3900. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16093900
  38. Zhang, Y., Liu, B., Xue, J., Chen, Y., & Zhao, F. (2024). Would geopolitical risks be the new driver of the energy transition? An empirical study on renewable energy technology innovation. Energy Economics, 108100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2024.108100
  39. Zhao, W., Zhong, R., Sohail, S., Majeed, M. T., & Ullah, S. (2021). Geopolitical risks, energy consumption, and CO 2 emissions in BRICS: an asymmetric analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 39668-39679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13505-5
  40. Zhao, Z., Gozgor, G., Lau, M. C. K., Mahalik, M. K., Patel, G., & Khalfaoui, R. (2023). The impact of geopolitical risks on renewable energy demand in OECD countries. Energy Economics, 122, 106700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106700

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-04-15 17:21:06

No citation recorded.