Investments in renewable energy in the most developed OECD countries and the Western Balkan countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study analysed the trends in the development of the renewable energy sector and the possibilities of transferring the successful experience of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to the Western Balkans. The methodological basis of the study included a comparative analysis of statistical data, the construction of dynamic tables of investments and energy consumption, and the generalisation of institutional and political mechanisms for stimulating the development of renewable energy sources. The study made a quantitative comparison of investments in the five leading countries the US, Germany, Japan, France and Canada. In the United States, investment grew from USD 4.2 billion in 2000 to a peak of USD 257.1 billion in 2024. Similarly, in Germany, this figure increased from USD 2.8 billion to USD 30.5 billion, and in Japan from USD 1.6 billion to USD 22.1 billion over the same period. The study demonstrated the presence of a general upward trend, despite certain fluctuations in years of economic crises or political instability. The report also analysed investments in renewable energy in the Western Balkan countries of Albania, North Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 2000, the volume of investments in Albania was only EUR 20 million, and in 2024 it reached EUR 218 million. In North Macedonia, this figure grew from EUR 30 million in 2000 to EUR 218 million in 2024. Despite the overall positive dynamics, there is greater variability and volatility in investment across the region, which is indicative of structural problems. Based on the results obtained, the author formulated recommendations for adapting the policies of the OECD countries to the conditions of the Western Balkans. The study proposed to prioritise the stabilisation of the regulatory environment, the creation of effective government support programmes, the attraction of international financial institutions and the formation of a regional energy market. The importance of establishing regional cooperation and developing partnerships with developed countries to facilitate technology transfer was also stressed. The study can be used as an analytical basis for developing strategies for a sustainable energy transition and ensuring the region’s energy security in the long term
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".