Integrating Sustainable Energy Development with Energy Ecosystems: Trends and Future Prospects in Greece

Abstract

This study integrates Sustainable Energy Development (SED) with an Energy Ecosystems (EE) framework in Greece to reveal how macrolevel policies, mesolevel infrastructures, and microlevel behaviors shape energy transitions. Drawing on historical data primarily spanning 2010–2024, supplemented by 16 semi-structured expert interviews and a macro–meso–micro analytical approach, it examines SED dimensions—affordability, supply, consumption, and security—within the supplier–producer–distributor–consumer nexus. The findings show notable progress in solar and wind adoption but also underscore persistent challenges such as high import dependency, regulatory inefficiencies, and infrastructural gaps. By proposing targeted policy directions and suggesting a new modus operandi of local-level institutional coordination, the research illustrates how an SED–EE synergy can foster resilience, innovation, and social equity, thereby informing sustainable energy strategies not just for Greece but also for other regions facing similar structural hurdles. The novel integrative perspective of this paper, unlike prior approaches that address either macropolicy targets or microlevel entrepreneurial activity alone, clarifies how mesolevel dynamics facilitate or hamper SED goals. This theoretical and practical synthesis is expected to inform the design of more resilient, equitable, and innovation-driven energy policies.

1. Introduction

The transition towards Sustainable Energy Development (SED) is essential for addressing pressing global challenges such as climate change, energy security, and economic sustainability [1,2]. In this context, Greece provides a revealing case due to its unique geography, economic structure, and evolving political landscape, all of which shape its energy ecosystem [3]. High import dependency, infrastructural inefficiencies, and regulatory barriers hamper progress toward SED objectives [4,5].

Greece recently emerged from a prolonged period of austerity after a severe crisis that nearly caused bankruptcy, leaving its economy struggling to regain momentum [6]. Economic contraction reached about 26% between 2008 and 2014, with unemployment peaking at nearly 25% in 2014–2015 [7]. Despite subsequent GDP growth (8.7% in 2021, 5.7% in 2022, 2.3% in 2023), GDP per capita and purchasing power remain below European Union (EU) averages [8]. On average, Greeks have around 54% of the EU mean purchasing power, which significantly constrains disposable income and consequently affects decisions on technology adoption (e.g., heat pumps, solar rooftops) [8]. Furthermore, several NUTS2 regions in Greece lag behind in terms of infrastructural and economic development [9,10,11], reflecting an uneven distribution of energy investments and heightened vulnerability to energy poverty.

Such economic vulnerability intersects with energy-sector challenges, including price volatility, shifting regulatory mandates, and geopolitical tensions [12]. Addressing these issues requires a comprehensive approach that integrates SED with an Energy Ecosystems (EE) perspective, effectively situating the interplay among the macrolevel (international political economy of energy), mesolevel (EEs), and microlevel (energy entrepreneurship). By spanning the supplier–producer–distributor–consumer nexus, this EE framework can reveal interdependencies across these synthesizing levels [13,14].

Although Greece has advanced in solar and wind adoption, barriers persist, including limited domestic energy production, regulatory inefficiencies, and reliance on imports [4,15]. Overcoming these hurdles demands technical solutions alongside coordinated, multi-level interventions that align with EU decarbonization targets [16]. This study aims to bridge SED and EEs in the Greek context. By examining historical trends, recent developments, and future prospects, this paper elucidates strategies for more effective energy transition. It addresses two research questions: (1) Why is the integration of SED with the examined EE framework crucial in the Greek (and broader European) energy context? Where is the Greek energy system headed, given these SED–EE dynamics?

It must be noted that SED principles—such as accessible, affordable, and environmentally responsible energy—have been globally articulated—e.g., Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7) [17]—but often stall in country-specific operationalization. Greece’s prolonged financial challenges and unique geography underscore why an ecosystem-based approach can offer new insights.

Section 2 reviews the relevant SED and EE literature, paying particular attention to how these two frameworks can be conceptually bridged. Section 3 outlines the integrative, critical, and narrative case study methodology, detailing data sources and sampling strategies. Section 4 presents findings on Greece’s energy trends and ecosystem dynamics, enriched with quotes from expert interviews. Section 5 interprets policy and practical implications within a macro–meso–micro perspective, exemplifying how synergy between SED and EEs can shape more resilient strategies. Section 6 concludes with key insights and directions for further research, focusing on how SED–EE integration can guide Greece’s path forward and inform similar contexts with challenging economic and geographic conditions.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. The Concept of Sustainable Energy Development

The concept of SED emerged from the broader framework of sustainable development, first articulated in the 1987 Brundtland Report, “Our Common Future”. This foundational document underscored the importance of energy in achieving sustainable development but acknowledged the absence of concrete pathways, noting that a safe and sustainable energy pathway is crucial to sustainable development, and unfortunately we have not yet found it [18]. This ambiguity began to dissipate with Agenda 21, adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit, which linked energy development to environmental sustainability, particularly in reducing greenhouse gas emissions [19].

During the 1990s, energy policy discourse centered on addressing climate change, energy security, and fossil fuel scarcity. However, these discussions were fragmented and often failed to consider the broader economic and social dimensions of energy development [1]. The 1997 UN General Assembly marked a significant shift, acknowledging the necessity of more sustainable energy use patterns and laying the groundwork for a more integrated approach [2]. In 2000, the UNDP’s World Energy Assessment introduced SED as a holistic paradigm, emphasizing cleaner and diversified energy resources, equitable access, and energy efficiency. This report marked a turning point by framing energy as a critical enabler of sustainable development [20].

Despite this progress, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), adopted later that year, omitted any direct mention of energy. This oversight reflected the still-nascent recognition of energy’s role in achieving broader development objectives [21]. The omission highlighted the need for a more comprehensive understanding of how energy intersects with economic growth, social development, and environmental sustainability [1].

The 2001 Commission on Sustainable Development session (CSD9) further advanced the discussion by emphasizing energy access for poverty reduction and promoting cleaner energy systems [22]. This session laid the groundwork for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in 2002, which brought international attention to the necessity of improving energy access and transitioning to cleaner energy systems. However, the WSSD failed to produce concrete agreements due to a lack of global consensus and institutional mechanisms [23].

Recognizing these gaps, the international community took steps to institutionalize SED. In 2004, UN-Energy was established to coordinate efforts across UN agencies, followed by the creation of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in 2009 to promote the adoption of renewable energy globally [24]. These initiatives reflected a growing consensus on the importance of energy in addressing global development challenges [1].

Simultaneously, efforts to develop indicators for sustainable energy provided a more structured framework for SED. The Energy Indicators for Sustainable Development (EISD), introduced in 2005 through a collaboration among IAEA, UNDESA, and other agencies, offered a comprehensive set of metrics to assess progress across social, economic, and environmental dimensions [25]. These indicators were pivotal in linking energy policy to broader sustainable development goals.

In 2011, the UN’s Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative, championed by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, marked a transformative moment for SED. The initiative focused on three core objectives: universal access to energy, improved efficiency, and increased use of renewable energy sources (RES). These goals were later enshrined in SDG7, adopted in 2015, which aimed to ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all [17]. The inclusion of SDG7 firmly positioned energy as a central pillar of sustainable development.

Over the decades, the thematic focus of SED has expanded significantly. Early approaches were narrowly focused on emissions reduction and energy security. However, the concept has since evolved to encompass a broader understanding of energy’s role in promoting economic growth and social development while addressing environmental challenges. For instance, the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) World Energy Outlook series has consistently emphasized the need for low-carbon transitions, infrastructure upgrades, and technological innovation to achieve sustainable energy goals [26,27,28].

A recent thematic analysis of SED identified four interrelated themes: access to affordable modern energy services, sustainable energy supply, sustainable energy consumption, and energy security. These themes collectively support the overarching goal of advancing sustainability within energy systems [1].

Access to affordable modern energy services is fundamental to sustainable development, addressing energy poverty and promoting social equity. Modern energy services, such as electricity for lighting, cooking, and economic activities, are critical for improving living standards and enabling economic growth [17]. Expanding access, particularly in rural and remote areas, requires investments in decentralized energy systems and RES technologies to ensure affordability and environmental sustainability [1].

Sustainable energy supply emphasizes transitioning to low-carbon and RES to reduce environmental impacts and dependence on depleting fossil fuels. Initiatives such as the UN’s SE4ALL and SDG7 underscore the importance of diversifying energy sources, enhancing infrastructure, and internalizing the true costs of energy, including environmental and health externalities [17,29].

Sustainable energy consumption focuses on energy efficiency and conservation to meet rising global demand while minimizing environmental harm. The policies to promote efficient technologies, consumer education, and equitable pricing mechanisms are critical for changing consumption patterns [1]. However, challenges like “rebound effects”, where efficiency gains lead to increased overall energy use, must be managed carefully [30,31].

Finally, energy security, a long-standing concern, ensures the reliability and resilience of energy systems. Diversifying energy sources, reducing dependence on fossil fuel imports, and decentralizing energy generation are essential strategies for achieving this goal while simultaneously addressing climate change [20].

2.2. Energy Ecosystems in Retrospect

To bridge the gap between SED and EE, it is crucial to see how each addresses overlapping yet distinct challenges. SED emphasizes outcome-oriented goals—affordability, availability, reliability, and environmental compatibility—while the EE framework highlights the underlying processes and relationships among actors and institutions that must coevolve to achieve these goals. By mapping SED’s thematic dimensions onto the supplier–producer–distributor–consumer nexus, one can better observe where systemic bottlenecks (e.g., grid constraints, regulatory hurdles) disrupt SED outcomes and how integrated ecosystem thinking might resolve them.

2.2.1. Evolutionary Economics, the Macro–Meso–Micro Framework, and the Ecosystem Metaphor

Evolutionary economics offers a dynamic lens to understand the complexities of socioeconomic systems, diverging from the static assumptions of classical and mainstream and conventional neoclassical paradigms [32]. It conceives economic processes as evolutionary, marked by continuous innovation, adaptation, and institutional coevolution [32,33]. Veblen’s critique of classical economics laid the foundation for this perspective, proposing that economic behaviors are shaped by institutions and cumulative habits, akin to biological evolution [34]. His pioneering work emphasized that institutions evolve to address systemic inefficiencies, introducing adaptive behaviors and routines. Similarly, Schumpeter advanced this view with his concept of “creative destruction”, where entrepreneurial innovation disrupts established economic equilibriums, fostering economic renewal and technological progress [35]. Schumpeter’s entrepreneur is not merely a profit maximizer but a transformative agent driving systemic change [36].

Nelson and Winter [32] built on these perspectives by rejecting the reductionist models of neoclassical economics. They introduced concepts such as routines and capabilities, treating firms as entities navigating an uncertain and evolving environment rather than static profit-maximizing units. The ecosystem metaphor, borrowed from biology, provides a rich conceptual framework to analyze these dynamics. First introduced by Tansley [37], the term “ecosystem” emphasized the interdependence of organisms within a shared environment. This concept was later adapted to the business domain, with Moore pioneering the idea of business ecosystems [13,38]. Firms within these ecosystems function similarly to biological species, coevolving within networks of competition and cooperation. This metaphor captures the interconnectedness and adaptability of economic actors, highlighting the systemic consequences of individual and collective actions [39]. Iansiti and Levien expanded on this analogy, identifying keystone species as pivotal to the stability and health of ecosystems [40]. (In energy systems, analogous roles are played by utilities, RES pioneers, and regulators that shape the overall trajectory of the ecosystem [41].)

EEs epitomize the principles of evolutionary economics and the ecosystem metaphor, operating as dynamic and interconnected systems that adapt to changing environmental, technological, and institutional contexts [3,4,14,42,43,44,45]. The ecosystem metaphor underscores the importance of balance and diversity within systems, where overdependence on a single actor or resource can destabilize the entire network [46,47]. For example, the reliance on fossil fuels has historically created vulnerabilities in energy systems, prompting a shift toward diversified and resilient RES portfolios [48,49]. Additionally, EEs embody the ecological principle of resource efficiency, wherein waste streams from one process serve as inputs for another [43,50]. This aligns closely with industrial ecology principles, which emphasize circularity and sustainability. Practical examples include utilizing excess heat from industrial operations for district heating or converting organic waste into biogas for energy production. Such practices not only optimize resource flows but also significantly reduce environmental impacts [43,50].

The integration of macrolevel, mesolevel, and microlevel perspectives offers a comprehensive framework for understanding evolutionary dynamics. At the macrolevel, the international political economy defines the global context in which energy systems function. For instance, the influence of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) on oil markets exemplifies how macroeconomic forces can shape energy availability, pricing, and geopolitics [51]. Such macrolevel dynamics establish the regulatory and economic frameworks that define the boundaries for mesolevel and microlevel actors. The Paris Agreement and global decarbonization targets further highlight the significance of macrolevel imperatives in shaping the energy transition [52]. Additionally, macrolevel policies like RES subsidies and carbon pricing create conditions conducive to microlevel innovations and mesolevel collaborations [53]. These policies must strike a balance between rapid decarbonization goals and the need to maintain system stability and affordability [54]. Achieving this balance necessitates collaborative governance, which involves engaging stakeholders across the supplier–producer–distributor–consumer nexus to develop integrated energy solutions. These interconnected dynamics are further explored in the subsequent subsection.

The mesolevel bridges macrolevel imperatives with microlevel actions, encompassing networks, clusters, and ecosystems. This level captures the institutional and industrial dynamics within regions or sectors that operationalize macrolevel policies [55]. For instance, regional energy initiatives such as the development of distributed energy systems or RES clusters exemplify how mesolevel dynamics mediate macrolevel trends [56]. These ecosystems foster innovation and facilitate collaboration among stakeholders, including governments, firms, and research institutions [57]. Regional adaptations to global shifts, such as the transition to RES, demonstrate how mesolevel interactions play a pivotal role in transforming macrolevel policies into actionable outcomes [58].

At the microlevel, individual firms, entrepreneurs, and households act as agents of change [59]. Schumpeter’s notion of the entrepreneur is particularly relevant here, as microlevel actors introduce innovations that can ripple across the mesolevel and macrolevel [60,61]. Technological advancements, such as in energy storage or decentralized energy systems, exemplify how microlevel initiatives can transform entire systems [62]. For instance, advancements in energy storage are considered pivotal to the broader adoption of RES, addressing the challenges posed by their intermittent nature and accelerating their integration [63,64]. Moreover, innovations in RES technologies, digital platforms, and smart grids are reshaping traditional energy systems into adaptive, interconnected networks [65,66,67]. Distributed energy resources, such as rooftop solar and community wind projects, exemplify how technological innovation enables greater flexibility and local resilience [56]. Smart grids further enhance these capabilities, allowing real-time optimization of energy flows and integration of diverse resources [68]. These microlevel innovations are driven by responses to macrolevel pressures, such as regulatory incentives for RES adoption, and mesolevel opportunities, including collaborations within local energy networks [69].

The interplay between these levels underscores the coevolutionary nature of socioeconomic systems. Macrolevel policies influence mesolevel structures, which in turn shape microlevel behaviors [3,4]. Feedback loops emerge as microlevel innovations—such as advancements in energy efficiency technologies—reshape mesolevel ecosystems and inform macrolevel strategies [3,4]. This multilevel perspective is critical for understanding the complex adaptive systems that characterize EEs [3,4].

2.2.2. The Supplier–Producer–Distributor–Consumer Nexus

EEs comprise a diverse array of actors, including suppliers, producers, distributors, and consumers, each playing a critical role in the system’s functionality and evolution [3,4,14]. Suppliers provide essential resources such as fossil fuels, RES technologies, and components for energy systems. They serve as critical touchpoints between larger geopolitical and geoeconomic entities, anchoring the international political economy of energy [26,70,71,72,73,74,75]. Producers transform these resources into usable energy, spanning applications from large-scale power plants to decentralized solar installations [26,76,77,78,79,80]. Distributors facilitate the efficient delivery of energy to consumers, navigating the increasingly complex logistics associated with distributed generation and smart grid integration [81,82,83,84]. Consumers, once viewed as passive energy users, have evolved into active participants—or “prosumers”—who contribute to energy generation and influence demand patterns through their choices and behaviors [26,76,85,86,87,88,89,90] (Figure 1).

This supplier–producer–distributor–consumer nexus exemplifies the interdependence and coevolutionary dynamics of EEs [13]. Each actor operates within a broader adaptive network, responding to and influencing the behaviors of others [91]. Suppliers adapt to the growing demand for sustainable energy inputs, investing in technologies like advanced solar panels or biofuels [56]. Producers innovate to enhance efficiency and reduce emissions, responding to consumer preferences and regulatory incentives [92]. Distributors adopt smart grid technologies to accommodate the decentralized nature of modern energy systems, improving flexibility and resilience [68]. Consumers, empowered by technological advancements, play an increasingly active role in shaping the ecosystem through their decisions and behaviors. Functioning as “prosumers”—both producers and consumers—they contribute to and influence the system’s evolution [93,94].

All the above considerations should be placed within a comprehensive multilevel framework, in which macrolevel dynamics (the international political economy of energy, incorporating global, demographic–environmental, cultural, cognitive, and economic factors) intersect with mesolevel processes (EEs that connect suppliers, producers, distributors, and consumers) and microlevel agents (individual energy firms). These interactions also depend on robust university–industry–government linkages, which help align policy initiatives and catalyze innovation in the energy sector [95].

In summary, SED’s broad objectives and the EE framework’s focus on interdependent actors converge by highlighting how each segment of the energy chain—supply, production, distribution, and consumption—can either facilitate or hinder a sustainable transition. Adopting a macro–meso–micro perspective allows a deeper understanding of where emergent technologies, policy shifts, and social acceptance either reinforce or offset each other [3,14].

3. Methodology

This study employs a case study design to critically and narratively analyze how Greece’s energy transition might benefit from integrating SED with an EE framework. The case study approach is suitable because it facilitates an in-depth investigation of contemporary phenomena—in this case, the interplay of macrolevel, mesolevel, and microlevel energy dimensions within Greece’s distinct socioeconomic and geographic context [96]. I adopt an integrative and critical stance by combining multiple data sources (secondary historical data that primarily cover 2010–2024 and 16 expert interviews) and iteratively comparing them with the theoretical constructs of SED and EEs from a macro–meso–micro perspective [3].

Why a case study for Greece? Greece’s unique energy vulnerabilities, rapid renewable energy expansion, and recent regulatory reforms present an illustrative microcosm where global SED ideals confront real-world institutional and infrastructural constraints. Investigating this interplay can yield broader lessons for countries with analogous challenges (e.g., strong import dependence, historical reliance on fossil fuels, structural economic limitations). Special attention was also paid in Europe’s case, as Greece is part of Europe and the EU.

Accordingly, to address RQ1 and RQ2, this study combines historical energy data with expert interviews, investigating perceived gaps and synergies across the macrolevel, mesolevel, and microlevel. Specifically, RQ1 focuses on how mesolevel EEs interact with SED objectives, while RQ2 highlights current trends and structural challenges arising from this interplay, primarily in the Greek context and secondarily in Europe. By anchoring these findings in the macro–meso–micro framework, I illustrate how top–down policy goals converge—or clash—with local-level initiatives and grassroots entrepreneurial efforts.

3.1. Sampling and Expert Interviews

To enrich and validate secondary data findings, 16 semi-structured expert interviews were conducted in June 2024. A snowball sampling technique was employed, wherein initial participants recommended additional informants in the energy sector until theoretical saturation was reached. While snowball sampling can introduce bias by relying on existing networks, it was chosen to access a diverse pool of high-level experts (e.g., top executives, policymakers, and academics) who have direct involvement in Greece’s energy ecosystem [97,98]. To preserve confidentiality, specific personal details or identifiers are withheld. However, in summary, the 16 interviewees comprised seven senior executives from key energy firms, six tenured and one non-tenured academic specializing in energy-related research, and two politicians with governmental or opposition-party roles in energy. One senior executive also participates in a major national party, thus holding a dual capacity.

The participants represent complementary perspectives (government, academia, and industry), ensuring multiple viewpoints [57,59]. This diversity mitigates some of the limitations inherent in snowball sampling, although it must be acknowledged that certain stakeholder groups (e.g., NGOs, local community organizations) may be underrepresented.

3.2. Data Collection Process and Instruments

Building on a qualitative approach combining secondary and respective primary evidence [99,100,101,102,103,104], secondary data were first organized into macro–meso–micro dimensions of Greece’s energy landscape—ranging from macrolevel factors (international political economy of energy) to mesolevel dynamics (EE frameworks) and microlevel indicators (energy entrepreneurship). All data sources are listed in Appendix A, Appendix B and Appendix C.

Then, a series of guiding questions were developed that cover macrolevel themes (global energy shifts, EU decarbonization, climate agreements), mesolevel themes (supplier, producer, distributor segments in Europe and Greece), and microlevel themes (Greek energy market liberalization and associated trends). The interviews also addressed policy solutions for bridging these levels. The indicative questions used during the interviews are as follows:

• Macrolevel questions:
  • Global shifts and new players: “In your view, why are new players focusing on solar and wind gaining geopolitical clout compared to traditional fossil-fuel producers?”
  • Long-term global outlook: “How do you foresee the energy sector evolving globally by 2050, and why?”
  • Demographic–environmental context: “The EU and Greece have moderate performance in meeting the Paris Agreement temperature goals for 2030. Why do you think that is?”
  • Cultural acceptance: “There seems to be increasing acceptance of nuclear energy in Europe nowadays. What do you think explains this trend?”
  • Political stability: “Greece ranks low on political stability measures. Why do you think that continues?”
  • Financing renewables in developed vs. developing regions: “Investments in renewables for developed countries and China are set to rise significantly by 2030, while those in many developing nations lag. Why might that be?”
  • Energy storage: “Battery energy storage investments in the EU are lower compared to the US and China. Why do you think this disparity exists?”
  • Environmental research and development (R&D) in Greece: “Greece shows low performance in environmental technologies and public R&D investments. What factors do you believe contribute to this?”
• Mesolevel questions:

  9.

  Suppliers and price volatility: “What do you see as the main drivers of recent extreme fluctuations in fossil-fuel prices?”

  10.

  Greek fossil-fuel dependence: “Why does Greece fail to produce sufficient domestic fossil-fuel resources and depend on particular external suppliers?”

  11.

  Producers and renewables: “The EU and Greece show higher shares of renewable capacity than much of the world. What do you think accounts for this?”

  12.

  Convergence in electricity production: “Recent data show that per capita electricity generation in Greece is converging with the EU average. Why do you think this is happening?”

  13.

  Distributors and digital platforms: “Greece lags in digital energy platforms but has relatively complete fossil-fuel infrastructure. What factors do you see behind this discrepancy?”

  14.

  Productivity in fuel trading: “Fuel trading in Greece has lower labor productivity than other energy segments. Why might this be so?”

  15.

  Consumers—energy use per capita: “We also see recent convergence between the EU and Greece in energy use per person. What do you attribute this to?”

• Microlevel questions:

  16.

  Revenue increases in Greek energy firms: “Despite the reduced market share of the Public Power Corporation (ΔΕH), overall revenues in the Greek energy sector have risen. Why might that be?”

  17.

  Patents and innovation: “Energy-related patents in Greece have declined recently. What underlying reasons do you see?”

• Integrative policy level:

  18.

  Industry–government–university cooperation: “What do you believe should be the main directions for a new energy policy in Greece and the EU today?”

Questions about energy accessibility and affordability (e.g., Q8 on R&D investments, Q14 on productivity affecting consumer prices) highlight how broader macroconditions or mesoconditions shape the cost and reach of sustainable energy. Sustainability threads appear in Q11, Q3, and Q2, linking broader decarbonization and environmental targets to the local capacity for renewables. Energy security is implicitly assessed via Q9 (price volatility), Q10 (fossil-fuel dependency), and Q6–Q7 (broader shifts in financing and technology). EE macro–meso–micro alignment surfaces by separating global forces (Q1–Q8) from local supplier–producer–distributor–consumer dynamics (Q9–Q15) and firm-level innovation questions (Q16–Q17).

The interviews were manually coded rather than processed through specialized qualitative software. This approach was chosen due to the manageable number of interviewees [105]. The coding scheme grouped responses by reference to supply (SU), production (PR), distribution (DI), and consumption (CO), and now they are correlated with SED principles (affordability, sustainability, energy security, and access). Experts’ statements were then mapped to the relevant dimension and node, enabling an integrated analysis (Section 4). All raw data are available upon request.

3.3. Limitations and Transferability

Several methodological constraints warrant caution. First, snowball sampling—while effective for recruiting high-level experts—may exclude certain marginalized or less-connected groups. Second, this study’s single-case focus on Greece (with a secondary emphasis on Europe) limits the direct generalization of findings to other contexts with different socioeconomic or geographic characteristics. Third, the rapidly evolving nature of the energy sector means some data may become outdated quickly, despite efforts to include recent sources. Finally, the qualitative emphasis provides a richer contextual understanding but lacks formal modeling and rigorous quantitative validation. Future research could integrate advanced algorithms or composite indices to evaluate each level’s performance more systematically.

4. Results

4.1. The Sustainable Energy Mix in Greece

The sustainable energy mix of Greece reflects significant progress, as documented in the Renewable Energy Statistics 2023 report by the IRENA ([76], pp. 228–229). A marked shift in several indicators was observed during the years 2020–2021, highlighting key trends in energy production and consumption (Figure A1).

The production of primary energy from RES in Greece demonstrated substantial growth across most categories. Solar energy production increased from 16,009 to 18,904 terajoules (TJ), while wind energy achieved a remarkable rise from 33,516 to 37,739 TJ. Hydroelectric and marine sources also experienced significant expansion, growing from 12,037 to 21,252 TJ. Geothermal and other RES remained relatively stable, reflecting a strategic emphasis on scaling up solar and wind energy production.

Biofuels showed mixed trends: solid biofuels increased from 31,028 to 32,944 TJ, while liquid biofuels and biogas exhibited slight decreases. These changes highlight Greece’s focus on expanding key RES sectors while navigating challenges in diversifying other renewable resources.

Energy imports and exports during this period revealed intriguing dynamics. Solid biofuel imports increased slightly, while liquid biofuel imports rose significantly, from 4655 to 5177 TJ. Conversely, liquid biofuel exports declined sharply, indicating a rise in domestic consumption or changes in trade dynamics. Overall, the total energy supply from RES increased from 151,867 to 166,057 TJ, reflecting Greece’s intensified commitment to RES development.

While electricity consumption surpassed production, resulting in an increase in system losses from 61,802 to 78,243 TJ, the production of electricity from RES showed significant improvement. Measured in gigawatt–hours (GWh), renewable electricity production increased from 17,554 to 22,137 GWh, underscoring the successful expansion of Greece’s RES capacity. Despite challenges in system efficiency and energy loss management, the data reveal a country steadily advancing its RES infrastructure, particularly in the solar and wind sectors ([76], pp. 228–229).

Further insights into Greece’s energy mix reveal substantial changes in consumption patterns (Figure A2). Total final energy consumption from RES increased from 135,659 to 149,521 TJ, marking a notable 10.2% growth. Wind energy consumption saw an extraordinary rise, from 11,857 to 19,127 TJ, representing an increase of over 61%. Solar energy consumption also grew, with photovoltaic energy rising from 33,015 to 33,964 TJ and solar thermal energy increasing from 15,769 to 17,013 TJ.

Geothermal energy and other RES displayed minor fluctuations, with geothermal energy dropping from 122 to 181 TJ and other RES declining slightly from 16,191 to 18,406 TJ. Biofuels, however, showed consistent growth: solid biofuels rose from 30,398 to 31,607 TJ, liquid biofuels increased from 9697 to 10,365 TJ, and biogas showed a slight dip from 1518 to 1445 TJ.

The household sector remains the largest consumer of RES, experiencing modest growth from 64,929 to 70,830 TJ. Direct use of RES also increased, from 73,410 to 77,800 TJ, emphasizing the continued reliance on RES for meeting energy needs.

In the industrial sector, consumption grew moderately from 22,107 to 23,254 TJ, indicating the gradual adoption of RES in production processes. The trade and services sector demonstrated a strong commitment to RES, with consumption rising significantly from 34,558 to 40,034 TJ.

These shifts reflect Greece’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions and transitioning to a more sustainable energy portfolio. The significant growth in RES production and consumption, particularly in solar and wind energy, demonstrates the country’s efforts to meet its climate goals. However, challenges remain, including managing system inefficiencies and further integrating RES into all sectors. Continued investments in renewable infrastructure, coupled with targeted policies to enhance energy efficiency, will be essential to sustaining Greece’s progress in its energy transition ([76], pp. 228–229).

4.2. The Direction of the Greek Energy System Based on Recent Literature

This section presents a selective synthesis of recent literature to outline the trajectory of Greece’s energy system. While not exhaustive, it highlights key studies that shed light on the challenges, opportunities, and strategic priorities shaping Greece’s transition from fossil fuels to RES.

According to the Greece 2023 Energy Policy Review by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) [15], Greece is actively reducing its reliance on lignite, a form of coal, by decommissioning lignite-fired power plants. This initiative is a central component of the country’s broader strategy to decrease greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. This lignite phase-out represents a significant commitment to transitioning toward cleaner energy sources.

Vasilakos [12] identifies critical energy transition challenges and developmental priorities for Greece’s energy sector over the next decade. Meeting the EU’s 2030 climate goals will require substantial investments, with the National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) of 2019 estimating a need for €35 billion by 2030. Approximately two-thirds of this funding is allocated to energy efficiency, RES, and electricity transmission infrastructure, including storage solutions. However, the transition faces significant obstacles, including complex legislative and administrative procedures that slow the deployment of RES. Streamlining these processes is essential to accelerate Greece’s energy modernization efforts.

Psarros and Papathanassiou [106], in their study of electricity storage requirements to support increased renewable energy penetration in Greece’s power system, emphasize the importance of integrating RES effectively into the grid. They highlight the need for short- and medium-duration storage solutions, such as lithium-ion batteries and pumped hydro storage, to enhance grid flexibility and reliability. Such measures are critical to accommodating the growing share of renewables in the energy mix.

Greece’s solar energy development has been particularly notable. Solar energy accounted for 12.6% of the country’s total electricity generation in 2022, up from just 0.3% in 2010, reflecting rapid growth driven by government incentives, declining equipment costs, and high solar irradiation levels. As detailed in recent analyses [107], the NECP targets an expansion of solar photovoltaic capacity to 14.1 GW by 2030 and 34.5 GW by 2050, further cementing solar power as a cornerstone of Greece’s renewable energy strategy. Large photovoltaic parks under development in Western Macedonia and Thessaly, expected to begin operations by 2025, exemplify this trajectory and its alignment with national sustainability goals. These advancements underscore solar power’s pivotal role in Greece’s decarbonization strategy and efforts to replace fossil fuels with RES [107].

Boulogiorgou and Ktenidis [108] and Katsaprakakis et al. [109] explore the role of energy communities in driving Greece’s energy transition, particularly on its islands. These community-led initiatives promote the adoption of RES, fostering social acceptance and local economic development. The studies demonstrate how decentralized, community-based approaches can complement national efforts to achieve energy sustainability.

Nikas et al. [110] examine barriers to and consequences of a solar-based energy transition in Greece, focusing on the economic and social dimensions of the shift to a low-carbon energy system. Their findings highlight the importance of addressing uncertainties related to economic conditions, technological advancements, and public acceptance to ensure a sustainable and equitable transition.

Vlachou and Pantelias [111], in their analysis of Greece’s energy transition with a focus on the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), emphasize the need for comprehensive policies. They advocate for enhancing regulatory frameworks, providing financial support for RES projects, and fostering research and innovation to overcome technological barriers. Such policies are essential to address the multifaceted challenges of the energy transition and ensure its long-term success.

In summary, while this selection of recent literature is not exhaustive, it underscores the complexity of Greece’s energy transition. Addressing infrastructural, regulatory, economic, and social challenges through targeted investments and policies is critical to achieving national energy and climate objectives. The integration of renewable energy, advancements in solar and storage technologies, community engagement, and robust policy frameworks will be pivotal in Greece’s journey toward a sustainable energy future.

4.3. Sustainable Energy Development in Greece

4.3.1. Access to Affordable Modern Energy Services

Greece’s position in sustainable energy innovation highlights critical disparities. The nation ranks last in “knowledge development and diffusion” in the Global Energy Innovation Index (GEII), underscoring gaps in research and technological advancements (Figure A3). However, its performance in “entrepreneurial experimentation and market formation” (18th place) indicates an ability to foster clean energy startups and drive market-level transformation. Despite these advances, Greece lags in “societal legitimacy and international collaboration” (30th place), revealing challenges in gaining public trust and global partnerships ([112], pp. 14–15).

4.3.2. Sustainable Energy Supply

Greece has made substantial progress in diversifying its energy supply. Historically reliant on oil and coal, the energy mix now features significant contributions from renewables. Electricity generation by source demonstrates in particular a clear diversification (Figure A4). Between 1990 and 2022, Greece significantly reduced its dependence on coal (from 25 TWh to 5 TWh) and oil (from 8 TWh to 3 TWh), while expanding wind (11 TWh) and solar (7 TWh) energy contributions. By comparison, the EU’s solar energy generation surged to 207 TWh and wind to 420 TWh, reflecting parallel transitions [79].

Per capita electricity generation trends highlight Greece’s recovery from economic disruptions (Figure A5). After peaking at 5654 kWh in 2007, Greece’s per capita electricity generation declined sharply during its financial crisis, bottoming at 4635 kWh in 2014. Recent years show improvement, with 5041 kWh per capita in 2022, though still below the EU average of 6286 kWh [78].

In 2022, Greece’s reliance on low-carbon electricity sources reached 43.17%, a substantial improvement from just 5.09% in 1990 (Figure A6). This growth aligns with broader European trends, where the EU’s low-carbon electricity share rose from 43.02% in 1985 to 59.99% in 2022 [77].

4.3.3. Sustainable Energy Consumption

Between 1965 and 2022, energy consumption in the EU and Greece saw significant changes. In 1965, the EU relied mainly on oil (3844 TWh) and coal (4558 TWh), with minimal renewable energy use (Figure A7). By 2022, oil and coal consumption decreased, while nuclear energy rose to 1523 TWh, and renewables like solar and wind expanded to 540 TWh and 1096 TWh, respectively. Greece showed a later but rapid adoption of renewables, shifting from heavy reliance on oil (187 TWh) and coal (94 TWh) in 1990 to notable increases in wind (28 TWh) and solar energy (18.6 TWh) by 2022 [88].

Energy use per capita also evolved, with the EU averaging 25,394 kWh in 1965 and peaking at 43,787 kWh in 2006 before dropping to 36,129 kWh in 2022 (Figure A8). Greece, starting at 9283 kWh in 1965, peaked at 35,850 kWh in 2003, then recovered to 30,410 kWh by 2022 [85]. European countries showed wide disparities in per capita energy consumption (Figure A9), with Iceland leading at 165,871 kWh due to its geothermal resources, while Greece remained below the EU average, reflecting differences in energy policies, resources, and efficiency measures [85].

4.3.4. Energy Security

Energy security has become a critical challenge for Greece, with risks exceeding the EU average since 2010 (Figure A10). Historically, Greece enjoyed lower energy security risks than the EU, particularly during the 1980s and 1990s, but this position eroded due to economic instability and reliance on imported energy. Strengthening domestic energy production and diversifying energy sources are essential to reducing these vulnerabilities and stabilizing long-term supply. Greece’s energy security has fluctuated over time. According to the International Index of Energy Security Risk, Greece had a risk score of 973 in 1980, which improved significantly by 1995, reflecting economic reforms and diversification efforts. However, by 2010, the score rose above the EU average due to the economic crisis, highlighting vulnerabilities linked to energy imports and investment deficits [113].

4.3.5. Synthesis

Greece’s progress in SED reflects a multidimensional trajectory. Key achievements include the following:

• Access to affordable modern energy services: While Greece has expanded energy access, affordability remains an issue, particularly for vulnerable populations. Limited technological innovation and international collaboration hinder further advancement, as evidenced by its low ranking in the Global Energy Innovation Index.
• Sustainable energy supply: Significant strides have been made in reducing reliance on coal and oil, transitioning to renewable energy sources like solar and wind. Renewable energy now constitutes 43.17% of Greece’s electricity production, reflecting a clear pivot toward sustainability in line with EU trends.
• Sustainable energy consumption: Greece’s energy consumption patterns show a notable shift, with wind and solar energy replacing traditional fossil fuels. However, per capita energy use remains below the EU average, signaling potential for further improvements in efficiency and renewable integration.
• Energy security: Energy security remains a critical challenge, with Greece’s dependency on energy imports exceeding the EU average. Strengthening domestic production, diversifying supply sources, and addressing systemic inefficiencies are essential to mitigate risks.

Overall, Greece has made commendable progress in diversifying its energy mix and adopting renewables. However, ensuring affordability remains challenging, especially for vulnerable demographics and remote regions. Additionally, bridging technology gaps in emerging trends like battery storage or digital energy platforms demands targeted public and private R&D investments (e.g., the Greek Government’s NECP update).

4.4. The Greek Energy Ecosystem

The Greek EE can be understood through the interrelated processes of supply, production, distribution, and consumption—each shaped by the broader international political economy of energy. This section integrates and synthesizes key data (Figure A11, Figure A12, Figure A13, Figure A14, Figure A15, Figure A16, Figure A17, Figure A18, Figure A19, Figure A20, Figure A21, Figure A22, Figure A23, Figure A24, Figure A25 and Figure A26) and expert feedback to illustrate how macrolevel shifts (e.g., global fossil fuel price fluctuations, decarbonization policies, geopolitical tensions) interact with mesolevel and microlevel dynamics (e.g., local infrastructure, firm behavior, consumer patterns).

4.4.1. Energy Supply

According to data from the IEA ([26], pp. 282–294), the total global energy supply rose from 5.413 EJ in 2010 to 6.320 EJ in 2022—an increase of about 16.8% (Figure A11). This upward trajectory is more pronounced in RES, which grew by approximately 74.4%, indicating an accelerating global transition toward low-carbon alternatives. While North America’s overall supply growth was modest (1.9%), the region has significantly increased its RES capacity (+45.5%). Even more notable is China’s 48.8% overall energy supply growth and a 223.9% jump in renewables, reflecting rapid industrialization paired with an expanding RES portfolio. The EU, despite a 12.9% decline in total energy supply, boosted its renewable energy supply by 44.2%, underscoring the EU’s continued commitment to clean energy initiatives. However, regions like Central/South America demonstrated decreases in both total supply and RES supply, suggesting fluctuating political or economic conditions. Meanwhile, Russia presents a stark contrast: following economic sanctions amid geopolitical conflicts, its total energy supply plummeted (from 285 EJ to 34 EJ), as did its renewable supply (from 7 EJ to 1 EJ).

Fossil fuel price indices exhibit significant volatility and global interdependence (Figure A12). For instance, Brent crude soared from 17.95 (1976) to 136.38 (2008), dropped to 58.67 (2020), then rebounded to 142.08 (2022) [72]. Parallel patterns appear in Northwest Europe’s coal prices and the UK NBP (ICIS) natural gas index, both surging after 2020. This turbulence reflects a mix of geopolitical tensions, supply chain disruptions, and the push for RES [72].

Global crude oil prices and oil consumption also show a steady upward trend over the decades, punctuated by sharp spikes (e.g., 1970s oil crises, 2008 financial crash) and dips (e.g., 2020 pandemic) (Figure A13 and Figure A14) [70,74]. Although RES use accelerates worldwide, data confirm persistent high oil consumption, driven by population growth and industrial expansion. Similar trajectories appear in natural gas price trends (Figure A15), with major hubs—Germany, the Netherlands, Japan–Korea, and the US—experiencing notable surges in 2021–2022 [73].

For Greece, net energy imports from 2020 to 2025 (Figure A16) illustrate an ongoing realignment of supply sources: declining reliance on solid fossil fuels, steady (yet decreasing) imports of oil, and rising imports of natural gas (more than doubling by 2025) ([75], pp. 196–197). While imports of RES remain relatively small, this shift underscores the gradual pivot away from coal and the stronger emphasis on gas and diversified RES. The import-dependency data (Figure A17) confirm Greece’s heavy reliance—above 100% in some categories (e.g., certain oil products)—reflecting the chronic vulnerability in securing stable and affordable fossil-fuel supply ([75], pp. 196–197).

4.4.2. Energy Production

Global investment in RES has more than doubled in terms of installed capacity between 2013 and 2022 (Figure A18). In Europe, capacity rose from about 419,000 MW to over 700,000 MW, while the EU-27 similarly expanded its renewable capacity. Greece, starting from a smaller baseline, nearly doubled its RES capacity over the same period, aligning more closely with broader European decarbonization targets [76].

In terms of actual renewable electricity production, global output rose from about 5 million GWh in 2013 to nearly 8 million GWh in 2021 (Figure A19). Europe’s share also increased significantly, with a notable surge after 2019–2020. The ratio of renewables in global electricity capacity jumped from 27.2% to 40.3% (2013–2022), and in Europe from 38.1% to 53.8% (Figure A20). Similar growth appears in renewables’ share of electricity generation (Figure A21). Greece even surpassed the European average in certain years, indicating strong potential in solar and wind generation, although network limitations (e.g., grid capacity, energy storage) still cap the overall output [76].

4.4.3. Energy Distribution

Distribution infrastructure profoundly shapes how energy moves from producers to consumers. In electricity (Figure A22), Greece maintains an extensive 110–500 kV grid, interconnecting major regions and including strategic DC lines to facilitate cross-border exchanges ([82], p. 104). Nonetheless, 47 island communities remain non-interconnected, primarily relying on diesel-based generation with high operational costs. Recent and ongoing interconnection projects (e.g., the Crete–mainland link) aim to reduce diesel consumption and scale up RES integration [82].

Greece’s oil infrastructure (Figure A23) encompasses four major refineries near Athens and Corinth, critical ports (e.g., Piraeus, Thessaloniki), and smaller pipelines linking refining facilities to airports and neighboring countries ([82], p. 150). Despite modest domestic production (e.g., the offshore Prinos field), these storage and refining operations create a robust supply chain for domestic consumption and export [82].

Natural gas infrastructure (Figure A24) includes the transmission system managed by the Hellenic Gas Transmission System Operator—“Διαχειριστής Εθνικού Συστήματος Φυσικού Aερίου (ΔΕΣΦA)”—along with the LNG regasification terminal at Revithoussa and the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP), which crosses northern Greece en route to Italy ([82], p. 131). The new Greece–Bulgaria Interconnector (IGB) further diversifies supply routes and strengthens regional energy security. As discussed in Section 4.5, expert interviews confirm that these projects expand Greece’s strategic role in Southeast Europe’s natural gas corridor, yet they also highlight the necessity of additional storage capacity and enhanced flexibility.

From an economic perspective, fuel trading in Greece involves high employment shares but relatively low added value per employee ([84], p. 51). By contrast, refining figures demonstrate higher labor productivity. Technological upgrades and digitalization may boost productivity and transparency in fuel trading (e.g., clearer pricing mechanisms), although local resistance to large-scale grid expansions remains a hurdle ([84], p. 51).

4.4.4. Energy Consumption

Global final energy consumption climbed from 3.827 EJ in 2010 to 4.424 EJ in 2022—a 15.6% increase (Figure A25). Industry use nearly doubled worldwide, while the buildings and transport sectors also grew ([26], pp. 282–294). Patterns vary regionally: North America’s total consumption rose modestly (about +3.5%), whereas Asia–Pacific (particularly China and India) soared due to rapid industrialization. Europe’s total final energy consumption slightly declined, reflecting improved efficiency and slower economic growth in certain periods ([26], pp. 282–294).

Focusing on fossil fuel demand (Figure A26), the global requirement for oil, gas, and coal all rose (2010–2022). Oil demand jumped from 871 to 965 million barrels/day globally, and natural gas from about 3326 to 4159 billion cubic meters—an increase of 25% ([26], pp. 282–294). China remains the largest coal consumer, while North America’s coal use has sharply dropped by more than half. For Greece, these macrolevel trends translate into sustained dependence on imported oil and gas but a simultaneous impetus to reduce lignite usage in favor of RES, consistent with EU decarbonization goals ([26], pp. 282–294).

4.5. Synthesis with the Help of Expert Feedback

To capture grounded theoretical understanding on how EEs manifest in Greece,

Table 1. Key themes identified by experts.

I. Supply (SU)

Geopolitical shifts and energy prices {SU1}|Dependence on external energy sources {SU2}|Lack of domestic energy production {SU3}|Regulatory and bureaucratic barriers {SU4}|Market manipulation and limited competition {SU5}|Impacts of European energy policies {SU6}|Speculation and market volatility {SU7}

II. Production (PR)

Environmental sensitivity of Europe versus Eurasia {PR1}|Challenges of Greece’s digital energy transition {PR2}|Geographic advantage of Greece for RES {PR3}|Renewable energy investments during economic recovery {PR4}|Network capacity and renewable energy production {PR5}|Decarbonization and adaptation of the energy mix {PR6}|Economic interests and renewable energy investments {PR7}|Impacts of reduced demand for fossil fuels {PR8}

III. Distribution (DI)

Gradual transition of the Greek energy market from immaturity to maturity {DI1}|Importance of digital transformation for further evolution of the energy market {DI2}|Influence of economic crises and market dominance on energy strategies {DI3}|High investment costs for smart grids and local opposition {DI4}|Impact of generational gaps in digital literacy on the energy market {DI5}|Lack of clear communication about energy costs and benefits {DI6}|Low productivity and diversification due to fuel market saturation {DI7}|Reduced labor demand in the energy sector due to technological improvements {DI8}|Complex and opaque pricing mechanisms in fuel trading {DI9}

IV. Consumption (CO)

Increased risk due to dependence on energy imports {CO1}|Outsourcing and lack of storage systems {CO2}|National versus European energy policies {CO3}|Impacts of climate change on energy consumption patterns {CO4}|Technological changes in energy consumption {CO5}|Economic factors and energy consumption {CO6}|Different heating sources across Europe {CO7}|Recent increase in energy usage {CO8}|Increased focus on electricity {CO9}

summarizes interview feedback from the 16 experts, coded as {SU}, {PR}, {DI}, and {CO}. Their perspectives complement the secondary research findings (Figure A11, Figure A12, Figure A13, Figure A14, Figure A15, Figure A16, Figure A17, Figure A18, Figure A19, Figure A20, Figure A21, Figure A22, Figure A23, Figure A24, Figure A25 and Figure A26) and illuminate how macrolevel shifts, mesolevel collaboration, and microlevel behaviors converge to shape Greece’s energy future.

I. Supply (SU): Experts emphasized how macrolevel geopolitical volatility {SU1}, {SU7}, and the EU’s decarbonization policies {SU6} are driving Greece’s search for more resilient and diversified energy sources. They noted persistent import dependence {SU2}, regulatory bottlenecks {SU4}, and limited domestic fossil-fuel extraction {SU3}—all factors that heighten vulnerability to price shocks. Consolidated market power among a few dominant players {SU5} further constrains affordable access, underscoring the need for a more open and competitive energy supply framework that aligns with SED’s affordability dimension.

II. Production (PR): Participants stressed the mesolevel role of infrastructure and innovation in enabling Greece’s energy transition. They highlighted the country’s rich wind and solar resources {PR3}, yet also flagged the grid’s limited capacity {PR5} and slow adoption of digital tools {PR2} as obstacles to fully exploiting renewables. Economic recovery has spurred increased private investment in renewable energy {PR4}, accelerating coal-phaseout efforts {PR6}. This momentum suggests that Greece’s production landscape is evolving in line with SED’s emphasis on clean, reliable energy supply, but bridging systemic gaps in technology, regulation, and financing will be essential for long-term ecosystem vitality.

III. Distribution (DI): Turning to mesolevel networks and institutions, experts described Greece’s transition from an immature, state-dominated energy market {DI1, DI3} to one that is gradually integrating smart grids, net metering, and online tariff systems {DI2}. However, high investment costs for such upgrades {DI4} and uneven digital literacy {DI5} slow adoption, while opaque tariff structures {DI6, DI9} reinforce consumer mistrust. These perspectives echo the EE framework’s premise that distribution channels need to coevolve with production and consumption patterns. Overcoming local resistance and clarifying costs versus benefits are critical to embedding modern energy technologies in ways that align with SED’s accessibility and consumer engagement objectives.

IV. Consumption (CO): Experts pointed to rising electricity demand due to shifts in heating and cooling needs {CO4} and technological changes such as electrification of mobility {CO5}. Nevertheless, income-level pressures {CO6} and fragmented policy coordination between national and EU strategies {CO3} create uncertainty about the pace of this transformation. The lack of robust energy storage systems {CO2} also heightens the vulnerability of end users, as do the enduring reliance on imports {CO1} and differences in regional heating sources across the EU {CO7}. Expert views thus highlight SED’s equity challenge at the consumption level: ensuring that new energy technologies and pricing structures truly benefit all user segments, rather than exacerbating energy poverty.

These observations are echoed in expert statements spanning the macrolevel (international political economy), mesolevel (EEs), and microlevel (energy entrepreneurship). For instance, one interviewee emphasized that “the EU sets ambitious targets for decarbonization, but each member state’s infrastructure and policy environments differ. We keep adopting new directives, yet local bureaucracy and grid limitations remain”. According to a pertinent mesolevel concern, “We see significant investments in solar and wind, but the distribution of this energy is hampered by older grid lines and insufficient large-scale storage options”. At the microlevel, another view highlighted that “Greek SMEs and local entrepreneurs struggle to innovate because they lack specialized financing or advanced R&D labs. Our patent numbers remain low, not due to a shortage of ideas but because structural support is minimal.”

Bringing together these expert observations and the secondary data reveal how macrolevel drivers (e.g., EU energy directives, geopolitical tensions) set the overarching conditions for Greece’s energy evolution, while mesolevel structures (grid capacity, policy frameworks, and institutional collaborations) and microlevel actions (consumer choices, firm innovations) coevolve to form a dynamic “ecosystem”. Overall, the findings indicate the following:

• Affordability and innovation: While Greece shows progress in broadening renewable capacity, many experts see innovation (particularly digital and grid-related) lagging—hindering greater cost competitiveness and stable supply. This underscores an urgent need for R&D support, regulatory clarity, and international partnerships to boost Greece’s place in the “knowledge development and diffusion” aspect of SED.
• Grid modernization and mesolevel coordination: Investments in the electricity grid, regional interconnectors, and digital distribution are pivotal to balancing supply, demand, and energy security. Here, public–private partnerships and agile regulation—mesolevel catalysts—can help overcome local resistance and high infrastructure costs.
• Policy harmonization and equity: Experts echoed the misalignment between national policies and EU-wide goals, as well as the importance of transparent pricing and targeted subsidies for vulnerable groups. A more synchronized policy approach can amplify the benefits of the EE framework—i.e., suppliers, producers, distributors, and consumers all adapting in tandem—while fulfilling SED imperatives for social equity.

In sum, this expert-driven feedback reinforces the central proposition of this paper: the EE framework provides a valuable mesolevel tool for operationalizing SED principles in Greece. By viewing supply, production, distribution, and consumption not as isolated activities but as interdependent nodes within a complex adaptive system, policymakers and practitioners can more effectively design policies, investments, and governance mechanisms that push toward an inclusive, secure, and resilient energy transition.

5. Discussion

This study aimed to address two primary research questions: (1) Why is the integration of SED with the EE framework crucial for Greece’s energy transition? and (2) Where is the Greek energy system headed in light of these integrated paradigms? By synthesizing secondary research data with expert feedback and incorporating a macro–meso–micro policy framework, this discussion elucidates the multifaceted dynamics shaping Greece’s energy landscape and provides actionable policy recommendations.

5.1. RQ1: Why Integrate the SED Concept with the EE Framework?

The rationale for merging SED with the EE framework becomes clear when one considers the multidimensional nature of energy transitions. From an SED perspective, the global discourse has recognized that affordability, access, environmental stewardship, and energy security must be pursued in tandem to ensure resilient growth [1]. Nevertheless, these objectives often stall due to fragmented institutional and policy approaches [2,20]. By contrast, an EE framework—which conceptualizes energy systems through the supplier–producer–distributor–consumer nexus—highlights how each node coevolves within a dynamic network [4,13,14].

Findings from the Greek case confirm that neither macrolevel mandates (for example, EU decarbonization targets) nor microlevel entrepreneurial efforts (local solar or wind projects) alone suffice to yield transformative outcomes. Interviewees pointed to bottlenecks in grid capacity, bureaucratic red tape, and limited domestic technology innovation as persistent barriers. These stumbling blocks resonate with Gunnarsdottir et al. [1], who underscore the continued shortfall in bridging policy ambition with on-the-ground enactment of SED. The EE perspective helps address these mismatches by uncovering the mesolevel processes—regional infrastructure initiatives, stakeholder alliances, and digital upgrades—that convert macrolevel policies into concrete outcomes [3,14]. The interplay is visible in Greece’s efforts to interconnect its islands and modernize its transmission systems, aligning with the synergy principle at the heart of ecosystem analysis [13,39].

Moreover, the EE framework elucidates how each segment of the energy chain influences the other: for instance, high import dependency in the supply segment constrains distribution investments and can exacerbate consumer costs, undermining SED’s affordability and security dimensions. As evolutionary economics argues, systems must be understood through co-adaptive behaviors, rather than through isolated policy or market corrections [32,35]. Aligning SED and EEs thus potentially allows policymakers to balance high-level commitments with granular ecosystem responses, improving the potential for more equitable and sustainable outcomes.

A recent policy proposal for Greece by Chatzinikolaou and Vlados [114] envisions creating the “Institutes of Local Development and Innovation” (ILDIs) at the meso–micro level to unify local governance, educational institutions, and businesses. These ILDIs could provide open-access consulting services—functioning as “business clinics”—and coordinate existing innovation infrastructures (e.g., incubators, technology parks, research centers), as well as financial stakeholders, effectively bridging top–down SED targets with grassroots entrepreneurial capacity. Such ILDIs could provide a direct mechanism for operationalizing SED–EE integration in less developed regions.

5.2. RQ2: Where Is the Greek Energy System Headed?

For 2024–2025, preliminary figures show significant expansion in Greece’s renewable energy sector, with new solar and wind projects projected to yield notable gigawatt capacity additions. In 2024 alone, Greece reportedly added a record 2.9 GW of solar, bringing total operational solar capacity to 10 GW (e.g., [115,116,117]). Meanwhile, the country continues to expand its energy storage infrastructure through strategic investment, subsidy programs, and demonstration projects, targeting 3 GW of storage by 2030 to bolster grid stability and renewable integration [118,119,120,121,122].

Recent policy reviews suggest that Greece’s energy trajectory is broadly aligned with the EU’s push for decarbonization, featuring an ambitious phase-out of lignite and a strategic tilt toward renewables [12,15,106]. The present study’s findings confirm significant strides in wind and solar capacity, reflecting a purposeful reduction in coal-fired generation (Figure A1 and Figure A2). Greece’s low-carbon electricity share of over 40% demonstrates this positive momentum. However, interview data and energy security indicators also reveal structural vulnerabilities, including high import dependence, insufficient storage, and consumer price sensitivities that pose risks to long-term resilience.

Comparisons to the relevant literature highlight both opportunities and potential pitfalls. On one hand, recent works underscore the intensification of solar deployment, spurred by declining technology costs and favorable irradiation [107]. These advances parallel IEA assessments [26] affirming that global renewables growth creates favorable market conditions. On the other hand, Greece lags in fostering continuous innovation and knowledge diffusion—an essential feature for building new energy technologies [112]. With its low ranking in global energy innovation indices, Greece risks remaining a consumer rather than a pioneer in emerging clean energy solutions.

Experts emphasized that unlocking the next phase of Greece’s energy transition hinges on mesolevel improvements in grid modernization and policy coordination. Ambitious goals to interconnect non-interconnected islands, build more robust cross-border natural gas corridors, and enhance the storage and distribution network all testify to the need for cohesive, forward-looking strategies [106]. These endeavors echo calls by Psarros and Papathanassiou [106] for short- and medium-duration storage solutions, pivotal for absorbing renewable intermittency. Furthermore, the complexity of administrative procedures—highlighted by Vasilakos [12]—continues to slow renewable energy investments, pointing to a pressing need for institutional streamlining and clearer stakeholder engagement.

A central perspective from the interviews was the growing recognition of “prosumers” as catalysts of bottom–up change, reflecting broader European developments in distributed energy and community-led projects [92,109]. As distribution networks mature and digital tools expand, consumers have more control over self-generation and energy efficiency measures. This evolution enhances public acceptance of renewables, reduces energy poverty, and can help stabilize local grids. In particular, the challenges facing less developed NUTS2 regions necessitate tailored SED policies to prevent widened socioeconomic disparities. Nonetheless, it also demands clear regulatory frameworks and supportive financial incentives to ensure equitable participation and cost sharing.

5.3. Toward a Resilient and Inclusive Path: Macro–Meso–Micro Policy Directions

At the macrolevel, Greece must continue to align its national energy policies with broader EU decarbonization targets to ensure a cohesive and supportive regulatory environment. This involves reinforcing national commitments to phase out lignite and other fossil fuels, expanding renewable energy incentives, and implementing comprehensive carbon pricing mechanisms. Additionally, Greece should enhance its participation in EU-wide initiatives such as the European Green Deal and the Recovery and Resilience Facility, leveraging these platforms to secure funding and technical support for large-scale renewable projects [16,123]. Strengthening national policies to reduce bureaucratic red tape will accelerate the deployment of renewable energy technologies and improve overall policy coherence, thereby fostering a stable and predictable investment climate essential for long-term sustainability.

On the mesolevel, Greece should focus on developing robust regional energy infrastructures and fostering collaborations among key stakeholders, including government agencies, private enterprises, and research institutions. Investment in grid modernization and the expansion of cross-border interconnectors will enhance energy distribution efficiency and reliability, facilitating the integration of intermittent renewable energy sources like solar and wind. Regional clusters dedicated to renewable energy innovation can serve as hubs for technological advancements and knowledge sharing, driving local economic growth and job creation. Additionally, establishing public–private partnerships (PPPs) will be crucial in financing and managing infrastructure projects, ensuring that mesolevel initiatives are both economically viable and environmentally sustainable [57]. By promoting regional cooperation and infrastructure development, Greece can create resilient energy networks that support the broader national and EU energy objectives.

At the microlevel, empowering consumers and fostering innovation are crucial for Greece’s sustainable energy transition. Policies should promote the adoption of decentralized energy solutions, such as rooftop solar panels, community wind projects, and energy storage systems. Providing financial incentives—including grants, low-interest loans, and publicly offered consulting services [4]—can reduce barriers for individual households and small businesses investing in renewable technologies. Additionally, implementing educational programs and awareness campaigns will enhance digital literacy and consumer engagement, enabling prosumers to actively participate in energy generation and management. Supporting startups and small enterprises through innovation grants and incubator programs will stimulate technological advancements and cultivate a dynamic ecosystem for sustainable energy solutions. By focusing on consumer empowerment and grassroots innovation, Greece can develop a more inclusive and adaptable energy system that meets diverse local needs.

To achieve a resilient and inclusive energy future, Greece must adopt an integrated macro–meso–micro policy framework that bridges the aforementioned levels. This framework should emphasize coordinated policy alignment across different governance tiers, ensuring that national objectives are effectively translated into regional initiatives and local actions. Strategic investments in renewable infrastructure, coupled with supportive regulatory measures, will create a synergistic environment where large-scale projects and individual innovations can coexist and reinforce each other. Furthermore, fostering multi-stakeholder governance mechanisms will facilitate collaboration and resource sharing among policymakers, businesses, and communities, enhancing the system’s overall adaptability and resilience. By embracing a holistic approach that integrates diverse policy directions, Greece can address systemic gaps, promote social equity, and strengthen its capacity to navigate the complexities of the global energy transition.

While this paper focuses primarily on Greece (and secondarily on Europe), many of the identified challenges—such as high import dependence, regulatory hurdles, public acceptance of renewables, and limited financing—apply to other regions pursuing SED. The macro–meso–micro framework presented here can also be adapted to lower- or middle-income contexts seeking inclusive energy transitions, provided it is tailored to local institutions and sociopolitical conditions [4].

6. Conclusions

This study underscored the critical importance of integrating SED with an EE framework to effectively navigate Greece’s energy transition. The first key takeaway highlighted that while SED sets essential objectives such as affordability, access, environmental stewardship, and energy security, these goals cannot be fully achieved without the holistic perspective provided by the EE framework (Figure 2). By examining the interdependencies among suppliers, producers, distributors, and consumers, the EE framework enables a comprehensive approach that addresses systemic barriers like grid capacity limitations and bureaucratic inefficiencies.

The second major understanding revealed Greece’s strategic shift towards diversification and renewable energy adoption, aligning with EU decarbonization goals. Despite significant progress in wind and solar energy capacities, Greece faces structural challenges, including high import dependence on natural gas and inadequate energy storage solutions.

Building on these points, the novel integrative perspective advanced in this paper—which synthesizes the macro–meso–micro “lenses” of SED with the energy supplier–producer–distributor–consumer ecosystemic nexus—extends prior approaches that typically focus only on policy targets at the macrolevel or entrepreneurial actors at the microlevel. Specifically, this study clarifies how mesolevel dynamics (e.g., grid modernization, investment coordination, and local stakeholder collaboration) can either facilitate or hinder the achievement of SED objectives. This synthesis of theoretical concepts and practical insights offers an original framework for policymakers, firms, and communities to co-design more resilient, equitable, and innovation-driven energy policies and projects.

Overall, the proposition is for a three-tier (macro–meso–micro) analysis that aligns SED outcomes (e.g., affordability, consumption patterns, security) with the supplier–producer–distributor–consumer nexus. This approach highlights how infrastructures, stakeholder collaborations, and firm-level innovations collectively determine the success or failure of high-level policies. By showcasing a practical proposal—such as the ILDIs—it is suggested that bridging meso–micro institutional gaps can accelerate SED objectives.

To overcome these hurdles, this study proposed a macro–meso–micro policy framework that emphasizes coordinated policy alignment, investment in renewable infrastructure, fostering public–private partnerships, and empowering energy firms through innovation and strategic enhancements. These policy directions are designed to create a resilient, sustainable, and inclusive energy future for Greece, positioning it as a regional leader in the energy transition. Strengthening region-specific strategies will foster the inclusive development of both mature and lagging areas, addressing persistent energy poverty risks. By investing in innovation and aligning with EU targets, Greece can leverage its nascent economic recovery to ensure a more equitable energy transition.

This study is not without its limitations. The primary focus on Greece may constrain the generalizability of the findings to other national contexts with differing economic, geographic, and policy environments. Nevertheless, I consider most of the findings to be applicable to national–regional socioeconomic systems with comparable dynamics and competitive contexts. Additionally, the reliance on specific data sources may have excluded pertinent information that could further enrich the analysis.

Despite this integrated approach, further research could involve comparative studies with multiple nations—particularly those facing similar vulnerabilities—by clarifying whether the proposed framework can be readily generalized or must be tailored. Future work could broaden the range of data sources and stakeholder interviews (e.g., policymakers, industry leaders, community groups) to gain deeper insights into the real-world application of macro–meso–micro energy policy frameworks. Extending beyond Greece would also help identify best practices and innovative solutions for diverse energy landscapes, ultimately refining and validating the integrated policy approach.