Call for Submissions for Issue 5 of Sciences Po Energy Review

About the Review

The Sciences Po Energy Review is a publication to advance dialogue about energy. Motivated by the pressing global need for energy transitions, the journal primarily employs a social scientific approach without being constrained by any single discipline. We propose a series of edited issues to feature graduate student writing, highlight and develop contributors by placing them in conversation with peers and experts, and strengthen existing debates and research about energy at Sciences Po and beyond. The publication employs varied and thought-provoking formats to achieve a holistic synthesis of developments and issues in the sphere of energy. The Sciences Po Energy Review operates under the auspices of the European Chair for Sustainable Development and Climate Transition.

Energy Security in a Fractured World

Introduction to the Issue Theme

Borders, Barrels, and Bombs: in an increasingly fragmented world, energy security has become a hotly debated topic. The concept itself is far from new, having emerged as a subject of contemporary concern during the oil crises of the 1970s, though the term was used in a more general sense far earlier. These critical events exposed the vulnerabilities of highly industrialised and interconnected global economies to shocks in energy supply chains, in a way that would shape both domestic and foreign policies for years to come. The central question, however, is to what extent this historical conceptualisation of energy security represents contemporary contexts. To highlight one example of how energy tides have changed over the decades, one might compare the limited scalable alternatives to fossil fuels available in the 1970s, with increasingly cost-competitive renewables, electrification, and clean technologies available in the present - which have dramatically expanded the scope of manoeuvre and range of possibilities.

More recently, the prominence of energy security has been further compounded by crises in Hormuz, Ukraine, and Venezuela – all of which have placed the concept at the heart of global political discourse today. This increased security prominence is evident in many respects, not least the 93% increase in google searches for ‘energy security’ within the past year (April 2025 - 2026). The impact of the ‘double shock’ caused by the confluence of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the US-Israeli attack on Iran, in particular, has played a significant role in shaping the way academics, policymakers, and the wider public alike perceive energy security in a contemporary context.

Perspectives on energy security have remained relatively narrow, focusing largely on security of supply, the price of energy resources, and the continued attempts of the fossil fuel sector to maintain dominance over global energy networks. The volume and prevalence of energy security debates have also emerged through crisis narratives, resulting in a neglect of fundamental and long-term strategies focused on resilience and prevention. Furthermore, notions of energy security have become increasingly intertwined with that of energy sovereignty, highlighting the importance of state control and national self-determination, which often constitutes a reactive stance seeking simply to respond to the impacts of energy shocks on global networks, markets, and multilateral institutions, and is promoted in the name of resilience, national development and economic growth.

However, the concept of energy security extends across a far greater scope than is proposed under this geopolitical or resource-nationalist view. Constructing energy systems truly secured against the challenges of both today and tomorrow encompasses far more than meeting global demand at an affordable price. The importance of environmental sustainability, economic resilience, and social equality cannot be excluded in discussions of energy security. Most crucially, climate is key. The ongoing impacts of low-carbon tech and widespread decarbonisation efforts, in addition to climate change resilient energy systems, are critical to understanding energy security in a contemporary context. Furthermore, achieving energy security at the state level does not guarantee access to energy at the community level, nor across social classes, and thereby ignores socio-economic stratification within state borders. Assured energy supply does not translate to affordable energy access, impacting the energy and electricity consumption behaviour patterns of people and industries, and ultimately permeating into the affordability of other key goods, such as food and heating. Furthermore, research has shown how energy security narratives have served to override local resource claims, displacing local communities, to open up mines and oil wells. Consequently, the pursuit of energy security has rendered many livelihoods increasingly insecure. This prompts questions regarding the trade-offs between global energy security and local grievances, shedding light on the lived experiences of marginalised groups as well as global power hierarchies.

Therefore, in this issue of the Sciences Po Energy Review we intend to emphasise the various dimensions through which energy security can be framed, highlighting the value of interdisciplinary approaches to the study of energy (in)security and the nuanced accounts, perspectives, and experiences which are far too often omitted from mainstream discussions.

Perspectives on Energy Security

Theoretical / Historical: Within academic literature and wider debates, the nature of energy security has evolved considerably over recent decades. What factors might explain this evolution, and to what extent do they relate to the increasing popularity of energy sovereignty and resource nationalism? What could a long-term perspective on energy security look like, considering the prominence of crisis narratives in the current framing of energy security? Investigations into the various contexts within which energy security narratives have informed domestic policymaking and legislative decision-making throughout the years could provide an interesting perspective to analyse such questions.

Environmental: The climatic, environmental, and ecosystemic challenges posed by current energy systems represents arguably the most pressing energy security concern of our time. On the one hand, the fossil fuel predominant energy system will continue to exacerbate climate disruptions, and, on the other, energy and electricity infrastructure –from production, generation, transmission and distribution– will directly be compromised by climate change. Among other challenges, increased risk of desertification and unpredictable precipitation patterns will render hydropower generation more fragile, whilst hotter rivers and seas disrupt nuclear energy cooling systems, and extreme weather events wreak havoc on transmission and transportation infrastructure. The direst possible consequences of climate change undeniably constitute the largest long-term threat to energy security –especially for the most vulnerable populations disproportionately located in the Global South. The expansion of clean and low-carbon energy generation, in its contribution to wider mitigation efforts, is therefore fundamental to energy security –particularly for countries with limited fossil fuel reserves. Could the recent double energy price shock catalyse the energy transition, which has been accelerating in speed and scale over recent years? Or will it lock-in the economic strength and power of oil and gas companies reaping unprecedented windfall profits?

Economic: Energy security is closely tied to economic prosperity and resilience. For many firms, energy is a critical input (cost): price spikes and supply shortages can weaken competitiveness, disrupt production processes and supply chains. At the same time, energy shocks travel through the wider economy, driving inflation and placing uneven burdens on households within and across countries. For some, energy shocks remain a manageable inconvenience; for others, they lead to energy poverty and difficult trade-offs between heating, mobility, and other basic needs. These dynamics raise urgent questions about how governments should respond: should they prioritise short-term relief through subsidies, price caps, and compensation schemes, or should crises be used to accelerate longer-term investments in efficiency, electrification, and clean energy infrastructure? The significant rise in (green) industrial and energy transition policies has been described as part of a broader “geoeconomic turn in decarbonisation”, as countries increasingly compete over the technologies and manufacturing capacities that will shape a future less dominated by fossil fuels. Terms such as nearshoring, reshoring, friendshoring, just-shoring, and de-risking reflect this shift, showing how energy security is intertwined with industrial capacity, supply chain dependencies, economic development and geoeconomic competition.

National security & geopolitical: One of the most dominant framings of energy security today is the geostrategic or geopolitical lens. Under this perspective, energy security is fundamentally a subset of national security and defence, as it highlights the vulnerability that energy systems and interdependence can pose to national security. Such debates focus on issues such as energy diplomacy, the implications of energy security for international trade relations, the threat of energy infrastructure and chokepoints being used as strategic geopolitical weapons, and global conflict relating to access to energy resources and their supply chains, such as those connected to the increasing demand of critical minerals and rare earths. Moreover, the present conjecture of energy dominance of certain states over mineral access, mineral processing, technological infrastructure manufacturing and technology specific knowhow – such as the United States dominance of fossil fuels and China’s of low-carbon tech – poses an additional strategic layer to both meeting growing energy demand and reaching decarbonization goals. Furthermore, in a world where most territories have been conquered and divided by states, the geopolitical framing of energy security invites us to analyse where the new extraction frontiers are and who is interested in them - such as deepsea mining, or emerging extraction activities in the Arctic and Antarctic regions.

Call for Submissions

Submissions can analyse, but are not limited to, the themes presented above. These suggestions are meant to spark critical thinking on the various dimensions of energy security, and their impact on global and local economies, ecologies, politics, and populations. Importantly, this issue will not engage with discussions of energy security from the perspective of cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, and digital infrastructures. Given the relatively recent emergence and rapid growth of such discussions, along with the large amount of sub-topics to be addressed, this more technological approach to energy security will instead be targeted in a future issue. Essays can be new or built on previous coursework. Submissions developing a clear and lucid argument, backed up by theory and concrete and well-researched examples are encouraged. Prospective authors are encouraged to read the guidance below regarding the process and further guidance on style. All submissions are to be sent via this Google Form by the 6th July 2026.

Issue's Structure

Students can contribute to the fifth issue of the Sciences Po Energy Review through two formats: critical essays or case studies, which are outlined below. Detailed guidelines for open submissions to the Review can be found here.

The Critical Essay Section

Submissions from those with professional, practical and/or academic experience relevant to the theme of the issue. Authors / co-authors may submit up to one critical essay per issue. Submissions are encouraged to be an opinion-style piece to reflect upon/raise awareness of your topic or a longer article that presents arguments in a more scholarly style. Authors are welcome to build on work they have created previously or with newly written arguments. They are also welcome to co-author pieces. The word count for critical essays, excluding footnotes, must fall between 1,500 - 2,500 words.
 

The Case Study Section

The case study section serves to ground multifaceted discussions of energy security within specific examples. Through their focus on particular scenarios, case studies aim to acknowledge what theories and dilemmas apply, and how they manifest in practice. They will dive deeper into the tangible impacts and issues surrounding energy security in contemporary and historical contexts, focusing on specific regions, events, or unique issues of special interest to the author. Authors and co-authors are encouraged to compile or compare case studies if desired, with a maximum of three case studies per submission. Single case studies must be a minimum of 500 words, and not exceed 1000 words (excluding footnotes), clearly highlighting the relevance to discussions surrounding energy security.
 

Call for Submissions Details

• Submissions to the debate, critical essays and case studies sections should follow these detailed guidelines
• All submissions are sent via the Google Form
• Submission deadline: 6 July 2026
   

Acknowledgement of AI use

The Sciences Po Energy Review maintains an AI policy in line with Elsevier’s guidelines, which can be found in detail here.

We understand and acknowledge the fair use of AI tools, and encourage authors to employ such in a transparent and academically honest manner. All submissions using AI must clearly outline which tools were used for what purpose, final submissions must be written in the author’s own words, and all referenced material should be traceable to original academic work. The Energy Review will not accept any submissions showing evidence of undisclosed or irresponsible AI use.
 

Editorial team
The current editorial team comprises students enrolled in the Paris School of International Affairs (PSIA at Sciences Po).

Editorial Board: Maxim Mouret, Laila García Ferrer, Michael Gillesberger, Sophie Schut
 

Senior advisors
The academic rigour and intellectual integrity of the Sciences Po Energy Review is enhanced and guaranteed through the appointment of senior advisors:

• Marc Ringel - Chairholder at the European Chair for Sustainable Development and Climate Transition at Sciences Po
• Philippe Le Billon - Professor of Political Ecology and Geopolitics at the University of British Columbia