Researcher
Roman Vakulchuk
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Roman Vakulchuk is head of the Research Group for Climate and Energy and a senior researcher at NUPI. He holds a PhD degree in economics obtained from Jacobs University Bremen, Germany. He publishes on energy transition, geopolitics of critical materials, climate change, investment policy, business climate, economic transition and integration, trade, good governance and China’s Belt and Road (BRI) infrastructure.
His geographical specialization is Ukraine, the countries of Central Asia, Kazakhstan in particular, Myanmar and the other countries of Southeast Asia. Vakulchuk advised government institutions in Central Asia, Southeast Asia and Europe and consulted more than 30 international organizations (e.g., Norad, the MFA of Norway, Asian Development Bank, Natural Resource Governance Institute, OECD, the World Bank) on economic reform, climate change and energy governance. He speaks English, Russian, Ukrainian, German, French and Norwegian.
Expertise
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersBrunei Darussalam: How to Build an Investment Climate for Renewable Energy?
Brunei Darussalam has yet to make major progress in renewable energy and become an attractive destination for investors. Only 0.05% of Brunei’s electricity came from renewable energy sources, while 99.95% was based on fossil fuels. In 2014, the country set a renewable energy target of 10% in the power generation mix by 2035. To reach the target, it needs to increase the share of renewables by 0.66% every year from 2020 to 2035. The country still needs to adopt a regulatory regime to scale up the development of renewable energy, particularly solar energy, which is more abundant than wind energy. We propose five actions to build the investment climate for renewable energy in Brunei Darussalam: prioritise renewable energy in the governance system; adopt and implement key legislation; mobilise domestic investors; improve market entry for foreign investors.
Renewable energy and geopolitics: A review
This article reviews the literature on the geopolitics of renewable energy. It finds that while the roots of this literature can be traced back to the 1970s and 1980s, most of it has been published from 2010 onwards. The following aggregate conclusions are extracted from the literature: renewable energy has many advantages over fossil fuels for international security and peace; however, renewable energy is thought to exacerbate security risks and geopolitical tensions related to critical materials and cybersecurity; former hydrocarbon exporters will likely be the greatest losers from the energy transition. Many of the reviewed publications share some weaknesses: a failure to define “geopolitics”; an unwarranted assumption that very little has been published in the field previously; limited use of established forecasting, scenario-building or foresight methodologies; a lack of recognition of the complexity of the field; a lack of theorisation. Most authors do not distinguish between the geopolitical risks associated with different types of renewable energy, and only a few distinguish clearly between the geopolitics of the transitional phase and the geopolitics of a post-energy transition world. A disproportionately large part of the literature is dedicated to critical materials and cybersecurity, while only a small part concerns the decline of former fossil fuel powers. Among those publications that do discuss the decline of fossil fuels, there is also an over-focus on oil producers and a lack of attention to the countries that rely heavily on coal, for example Australia, China, Germany, Indonesia, Poland and the United States.
The GeGaLo index: Geopolitical gains and losses after energy transition
This article presents the GeGaLo index of geopolitical gains and losses that 156 countries may experience after a full-scale transition to renewable energy. The following indicators are considered for inclusion in the index: fossil fuel production, fossil fuel reserves, renewable energy resources, governance, and conflict. Some of these represent potential gains; some represent losses; and some the capacity of countries to handle changes in geopolitical strength. Five alternative versions of the index are developed to work out the optimal design. First, the energy resource indicators are combined with equal weights to create two simple versions of the index. Next, governance and conflict indicators are included to create three more complex versions of the index. The index provides useful pointers for strategic energy and foreign policy choices: geopolitical power will be more evenly distributed after an energy transition; Iceland will gain most; Russia may be one of the main holders of stranded geopolitical assets; China and the USA will lose more geopolitically than foreseen by other analyses. The index also indicates a lack of emphasis in parts of the literature on space for renewable energy infrastructure and on domestically sourced coal for the current strength of countries such as China and the United States.
Ukraine's energy transition in a new political landscape
The presidential and parliamentary elections earlier this year resulted in a massive shift of power in Ukrainian politics. How is this affecting the energy sector in Ukraine?
Is this Russia's Kodak moment? Russian perspectives on the energy transition (KODAK)
This project will examine whether Russian energy actors are aware of the possibility of swift decarbonization of the global energy supply, what consequences they think it would have for demand for Rus...
New CADGAT Data Reviews on 261 Belt and Road (BRI) Projects in Central Asia
One of the main observations from the research is that nobody really knows what a BRI project is and what it is not.
Pathways that Changed Myanmar
Matthew Mullen’s book provides an impressively detailed and systematic account of how ordinary citizens in Myanmar pursued various pathways to bring about change in a conflict-prone country that was experiencing deep economic stagnation and where polarization in society had been maintained by military rulers for decades. In many ways, the book provides solid ground from which we can understand the recent history of the country’s transformation.
BRI in Central Asia: People-to-People Projects
Along with financing hard infrastructure projects, Beijing also promotes soft power projects in the form of people-to-people initiatives. However, such projects are low priority within the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in Central Asia. The Confucius Institutes, which appear to be an important vehicle for Chinese soft power in the region, are not directly linked to BRI and were launched before and independently of BRI.
BRI in Central Asia: Agriculture and Food Projects
This data article looks at Chinese investment in agriculture and food production in Central Asia. It shows that the agricultural sector projects have low priority within the Belt and Road Initiative. Kazakhstan is the biggest recipient of Chinese investment in agriculture and food projects in Central Asia.
BRI in Central Asia: Finance and IT Projects
China and its Central Asian counterparts pursue finance and IT projects for both commercial and strategic reasons. As this data article shows, transparency is limited and exact information on the size of their investments is only partly available. In the financial sector, China cooperates most closely with Kazakhstan among the Central Asian countries.