MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

China’s Energy Security: A Review of Current Landscape, Policy Framework and Future Pathways

2025· review· en· W4415166346 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenghua An

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Economics Management and Political Sciences · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy securityChinaGeopoliticsDiversification (marketing strategy)Sustainable developmentEnergy supplyEnergy policyEnergy (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surrounded by the tense and unstable regional situations, China’s pursuit of energy security has become increasingly central to accomplishing its long-term economic and geopolitical policies that aim to achieve consistent and sustainable development. Ever since the Cold War, the international oil price has been highly dependent on ongoing regional disputes, such as the Gulf and Russia-Ukraine wars, soaring global awareness of energy security and further heightening China’s perception of its own energy vulnerability. Therefore, this paper investigates the current landscapes of China and its plans for securing energy supply through qualitative analysis of policies, data, and international cooperation projects. Domestically, China has adopted strategies including technological innovation, industrial upgrading, and energy system diversification to reduce structural vulnerabilities. Externally, to reduce overreliance on specific suppliers, it secured long-term contracts globally and expanded infrastructures along Belt and Road routes. Further, by employing case studies like the China-Russia Energy Partnership, this study explores the benefits and limitations of existing approaches and seeks to develop possible advice to strengthen China’s energy resilience. Ultimately, this article argues that a mixed approach that integrates and balances domestic innovation with strategic international engagement is essential for China’s long-term energy security.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Economics Management and Political SciencesSame topicGlobal Energy Security and PolicyFrench-language works237,207