Comparative Approaches to Energy Transition: Policy Guideline for Enhancing Thailand’s Path to a Low-Carbon Economy

Abstract

Thailand’s transition to a low-carbon economy faces significant challenges, including a dependency on fossil fuels, fluctuating energy costs, and limited policy clarity. This study conducts a comparative analysis of energy transition policies in Germany, Japan, Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore to derive actionable lessons that can be adapted to Thailand’s socio-economic and energy contexts. Using the Integrated National Energy Planning (INEP) framework and Network Governance Theory, the research identifies key strategies, such as setting clear and achievable renewable energy targets, establishing robust legal frameworks, fostering multi-stakeholder engagement, and encouraging decentralized governance. The findings highlight the importance of long-term vision, inclusive governance, and targeted investments in renewable technologies to accelerate energy transitions. This paper presents policy guidelines to enhance Thailand’s energy security and contribute to its climate goals by promoting public awareness and strengthening institutional capacities. By adapting these strategies, Thailand can align with global energy trends, reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, and advance toward a resilient and sustainable energy system, aligned with global energy trends while addressing its unique socio-economic context.

1. Introduction

As a Non-Annex I member of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Thailand has committed to advancing a low-carbon energy system. Since the first commitment period of 2012, the Thai government has steadily increased the share of renewable energy in its national energy mix. Key policies such as the 13th National Economic and Social Development Plan (2023–2027), the Power Development Plan (2015–2036), and the Energy Strategic Plan (2023), aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2030 [1] and ensure that at least 50% of new power generation capacity comes from renewable energy by 2050 [2]. Despite these efforts, Thailand faces significant challenges in fully realizing its energy transition goals. The World Economic Forum’s 2023 Energy Transition Index ranked Thailand 54th out of 120 countries, which reflects moderate progress but also indicates that there is considerable room for improvement [3]. While Thailand is set to embark on the long journey toward energy transition, it continues to struggle with fluctuating oil prices, reliance on imported fossil fuels, and entrenched hydrocarbon-based energy systems. These issues highlight the complexity of transitioning to a sustainable energy future.

While Thailand’s energy transition strategy reflects both ambitious targets and significant structural challenges, several studies highlight the country’s efforts and constraints in meeting its renewable energy targets, underscoring the complexity of transitioning to a sustainable energy model in a hydrocarbon-dependent economy. Researchers point out that Thailand’s energy landscape remains heavily dependent on natural gas, coal, and oil, which complicates the transition to renewables and exposes the country to market volatility and price fluctuations [4,5]. Additionally, the complexity of navigating Thailand’s bureaucratic landscape and securing consistent policy support for renewable investments presents further challenges [6]. Literature suggests that although policies to promote low-carbon technologies exist, they lack the cohesion needed to create a comprehensive, integrated approach to energy security and sustainability [7]. Furthermore, public awareness and community-level support for renewable energy initiatives remain limited, which could slow the transition and reduce acceptance of necessary lifestyle and behavioral changes [8,9].

Nevertheless, there are gaps in Thailand’s energy transition strategies. The ambitious targets set by the government may lack clear pathways for fully phasing out fossil fuels, and current policies do not sufficiently address the need to raise public understanding of the energy transition process. Although laws and regulations promoting low-carbon energy development have been enacted, the plan for fossil fuel phase-out remains vague. Crucially, without public awareness and understanding of the costs, benefits, and lifestyle changes that come with renewable energy, the success of Thailand’s energy transition could be relatively limited [10,11,12].

Given these challenges, this research seeks to answer the question: How can Thailand adapt global best practices in energy transition policy and governance to enhance its shift to a low-carbon energy system? While existing studies on Thailand’s energy transition have primarily focused on technological advancements and renewable energy capacity, there is insufficient research on the policy, governance, and public engagement aspects critical to ensuring a successful transition. Furthermore, although global energy transition models—such as Germany’s Energiewende and Japan’s post-Fukushima reforms—have been widely discussed, little exploration has been conducted on how these international best practices can be adapted to Thailand’s specific context. This gap highlights the need for comprehensive research that not only addresses Thailand’s immediate energy challenges but also provides actionable referent policy guidelines informed by global experiences. This study aims to contribute to the literature on Thailand’s energy transition by presenting an integrative approach that addresses both the structural and social challenges unique to Thailand’s energy landscape.

While previous studies have identified Thailand’s reliance on fossil fuels and the complexities of renewable energy adoption, this research extends beyond these observations by proposing a comprehensive policy framework based on Integrated National Energy Planning (INEP) and Network Governance Theory. This study analyzes and proposes actionable policy guidelines to enhance Thailand’s transition toward a low-carbon economy, drawing on comparative insights from Germany, Japan, Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore. By studying these nations’ best practices in energy transition policy and governance, the research adapts strategies to Thailand’s unique socio-economic context, offering specific recommendations to support Thailand’s shift toward a sustainable energy system. The study provides guidelines on fossil fuel phase-out policies, multi-stakeholder governance, and public engagement strategies that align with Thailand’s energy transition goals.

2. Research Methods

This study combines comparative analysis, thematic categorization, and conceptual frameworks (INEP and Network Governance Theory) to develop policy recommendations suited to Thailand’s energy context. Insights are drawn from five countries—Germany, Japan, Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore—selected based on their relevance and adaptability to Thailand’s energy transition goals. Five countries were selected for their relevance to Thailand’s energy transition goals, the countries’ performance in global energy transition indices, variation in energy contexts and governance models, varying levels of policy advancement, which provide a broad range of adaptable strategies, and the applicability of their transition strategies.

While the sample size is relatively small, it encompasses a diverse range of energy policies and developmental stages, providing a well-rounded perspective that is highly relevant to Thailand’s context. These countries were chosen based on specific criteria. Germany and Japan represent advanced economies with ambitious energy transition models and significant renewable investments, Australia offers insights into overcoming fossil fuel dependency, and Malaysia and Singapore provide regional perspectives relevant to Thailand’s socio-political and environmental landscape. By selecting these countries, the analysis emphasizes practical, adaptable lessons that align with Thailand’s socio-economic and energy transition needs.

The diversity within this sample also addresses different aspects of Thailand’s energy transition challenges. For instance, Germany and Japan provide frameworks for advanced policy mechanisms and public engagement, while Malaysia and Singapore demonstrate adaptable governance approaches in Southeast Asia. Grouping the countries based on their similarities to Thailand allows for the identification of specific policies and governance strategies that, despite economic or technological differences, can be adjusted to fit Thailand’s needs. It is important to note that while the insights are drawn from a limited sample, they serve as exploratory guidelines rather than universally applicable findings. This selective approach underscores the study’s focus on adaptability, allowing Thailand to benefit from these targeted, internationally inspired strategies.

2.1. Comparative and Thematic Analysis

Comparative analysis examines diverse energy transition models across the selected countries to identify common and unique strategies relevant to Thailand. This method highlights recurring themes like decentralized governance and public engagement, considering country-specific adaptations to assess their applicability to Thailand’s context. Within the comparative framework, thematic analysis categorizes insights from each case study systematically. Themes such as policy targets, regulatory frameworks, and economic incentives are identified and organized based on their potential contributions to Thailand’s energy transition. For instance, Germany’s decentralized governance model and Australia’s regional policies serve as key themes that may guide adaptations in Thailand’s governance approach. By organizing data into relevant categories, the thematic analysis provides a structured comparison, supporting the development of targeted policy recommendations for Thailand.

To clarify, thematic analysis is used to identify and categorize key themes across case studies. This process involves systematically reviewing qualitative data from each case to discern patterns related to energy policy, governance, financial incentives, public engagement, and technological advancements. Data are first segmented based on these categories, enabling a structured comparison. Themes are then refined and categorized according to their relevance to Thailand’s energy transition objectives. For instance, themes such as decentralized governance, public participation, and financial incentives emerge across multiple cases, providing a foundation for comparative insights and targeted policy recommendations for Thailand.

2.2. Integrated Analytical Framework

Insights from the comparative and thematic analyses are synthesized using the frameworks of Integrated National Energy Planning (INEP) and Network Governance Theory. INEP emphasizes inclusive energy planning that balances economic, social, and environmental priorities, aligning with Thailand’s needs. Network Governance Theory advocates for collaborative, decentralized decision-making, aiding in integrating multi-stakeholder governance. Together, these frameworks help adapt best practices to Thailand’s unique context, ensuring practical and context-sensitive recommendations.

The INEP framework, proposed by Meier and Munasinghe [13], emphasizes a holistic approach to energy policy that integrates economic viability, social equity, and environmental sustainability. This framework is particularly relevant to Thailand’s context, where balancing these three dimensions is critical to a successful transition. By emphasizing inclusive planning and community-oriented strategies, INEP encourages public and government participation in shaping policy incentives. Public engagement not only broadens support for renewable policies but also drives demand for incentives, such as targeted subsidies and FiTs. When communities are involved, they can influence the allocation of resources towards cost-saving measures that prioritize local needs, thus promoting equitable energy access across regions. Given Thailand’s need for a balanced, multi-dimensional approach to energy transition, this framework offers a comprehensive lens through which policy recommendations can be crafted.

Network Governance Theory further supports the role of public and government participation by examining how collaborative networks, rather than hierarchical structures, enhance policy efficiency and adaptability [14]. The Network Governance Theory, on the other hand, is particularly applicable in complex energy transition processes, where multiple stakeholders—including government, private sector, and civil society—must collaborate. The theory examines how collaborative networks function, offering insights into governance structures that are essential for managing energy transitions. In Thailand’s case, a networked governance approach can facilitate the formation of regional councils and community cooperatives, fostering a multi-stakeholder environment where policy incentives can be effectively tailored to local contexts. Such decentralized governance allows for flexibility in responding to regional variations in renewable potential and socio-economic needs, enabling more efficient resource distribution. By engaging multiple stakeholders—ranging from local government bodies to private enterprises and community groups—this approach helps streamline decision-making processes. For instance, a one-stop approval agency, underpinned by a networked governance model, would enable inter-agency collaboration, thereby reducing the bureaucratic complexities that often hinder renewable project approvals in Thailand.

Figure 1 summarizes the analytical process, illustrating how comparative analysis identifies strategies, thematic analysis categorizes them into actionable themes, and how these are interpreted through INEP and Network Governance Theory to form Thailand-specific policy recommendations. On the left, the framework highlights ‘transition strategy and policy’, with Integrated National Energy Planning (INEP) forming the foundation for unified processes like policy analysis, strategy formulation, and implementation aligned with Thailand’s low-carbon goals. Feedback loops create a dynamic, iterative structure that allows for policy adjustments. On the right, ‘transition governance’, based on Network Governance Theory, emphasizes decentralized and collaborative governance among government, private sector, and community stakeholders. Dashed lines connect both sides, indicating how governance structures reciprocally influence policy outcomes, reinforcing synergy between strategy development and governance.

The analytical framework also incorporates aspects of public participation, as seen in Germany’s Energiewende and Japan’s post-Fukushima reforms, where community engagement has been central to achieving energy policy goals. Public participation in renewable projects often correlates with higher efficiency gains and cost savings, as communities involved in energy decisions are more likely to support and maintain local projects. For Thailand, integrating public participation into energy policy not only amplifies public support but also helps reduce project costs. Local ownership of projects, as suggested by Network Governance Theory, can mitigate risks and distribute responsibilities, which in turn increases cost-efficiency. For example, community-owned solar farms managed under a regional energy council could leverage local insights to optimize operation and maintenance, reducing costs that would otherwise fall on centralized agencies.

By leveraging these frameworks and comparative analysis, Thailand can craft a governance model that supports energy transition goals through inclusive participation and collaborative networks. The combination of INEP’s holistic planning and Network Governance Theory’s multi-stakeholder coordination offers a strategic approach to operationalizing public participation. This model emphasizes the role of communities and local governments in driving policy incentives, achieving cost savings, and enhancing efficiency. With these mechanisms, Thailand’s energy transition can be both community-centric and adaptive, ensuring that policy frameworks are not only effective but also resilient against socio-economic and environmental challenges.

Data for this study were collected from multiple sources, including government reports, international energy databases, and case-specific policy analyses, ensuring comprehensive coverage of each country’s energy transition trajectory. Quantitative data on renewable energy investment, emission reductions, and policy effectiveness metrics were extracted for consistent cross-country comparisons. Primary sources included national energy reports, policy documents, and government publications, while secondary sources, such as academic papers, industry reports, and data from organizations like the International Energy Agency and UNFCCC, were also analyzed.

The time scope of data spans from 1997 to 2020, capturing major energy transitions and policy shifts. Analyses involved standardized metrics, such as renewable energy investments relative to GDP, emission reductions from 2005 levels, and policy adoption rates. Policy analysis was conducted to identify trends and patterns, which served as a referent policy guideline for developing tailored policy recommendations for Thailand’s energy goals. Semi-structured interviews with policymakers and experts from organizations such as Thailand’s Ministry of Energy and Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) provided additional insights into the governance and implementation challenges of Thailand’s energy transition. These data were triangulated and verified to ensure accuracy and reliability. A thematic content analysis was then conducted to uncover key trends, challenges, and governance mechanisms over time, shaping the development of Thailand-specific policy recommendations.

The selection of indicators for this study, including aspect-oriented transition planning variables, is grounded in their relevance to critical dimensions of energy transition: market dynamics, technological advancements, infrastructure development, socio-political factors, and normative influences. These variables were chosen to comprehensively capture the multifaceted nature of energy transitions, specifically focusing on how each aspect contributes to policy effectiveness, public acceptance, and sustainability.

For market dynamics, policies like subsidies, Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs), and carbon taxes are essential for shaping the economic environment that drives renewable energy adoption. These indicators reflect Thailand’s need for economic incentives to attract investment and reduce fossil fuel dependence. For technological advancements, investments in energy efficiency, smart grids, and renewable technologies are included to represent the technical innovations necessary for a sustainable energy system. This aligns with Thailand’s goals to improve grid stability and accommodate increased renewable integration. As for infrastructure development, indicators related to infrastructure (e.g., grid enhancements and renewable deployment) are crucial for addressing Thailand’s reliance on centralized fossil-fuel infrastructure. This selection focuses on how modernizing infrastructure can support the transition to decentralized, renewable energy sources. To highlight socio-political factors, public participation, local ownership, and demand management are key variables, as they reflect the importance of stakeholder engagement and community involvement. These elements are vital for fostering broad-based support and aligning energy policies with local needs and preferences in Thailand. Per normative influences, international cooperation, green certificates, and energy efficiency standards were selected to reflect global trends that shape national energy policies. This is particularly relevant for Thailand as it seeks to align with international climate commitments and integrate sustainability into its energy policy framework.

These variables were selected for their direct influence on Thailand’s energy transition objectives, ensuring a comprehensive approach that addresses economic, technical, social, and normative dimensions. By focusing on these aspects, the study aims to provide a holistic view of the factors critical to achieving a low-carbon energy system in Thailand.

3. Key Findings and Comparative Insights

To provide a structured comparison,

Table 1. Comparative overview of energy contexts, strategies, policy frameworks, and governance structures in selected countries.

Country	Energy Context	Transition Strategies	Policy Frameworks	Governance Structures
Germany	High reliance on renewables; transitioning from nuclear and coal	Energiewende; decentralized energy projects; public engagement	Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG); clear phase-out targets for nuclear and coal	Multi-level governance with strong local participation
Japan	Post-Fukushima energy security focus; nuclear reliance	Strategic Energy Plan; mix of renewables with nuclear for stability	Centralized framework with METI coordination; local initiatives post-Fukushima	Relatively centralized governance with local governments and local initiatives for resilience
Australia	High coal dependency; state-based renewable growth	State-led renewable targets; mixed progress across states	Renewable Energy Target (RET) varying across states	Fragmented governance; diverse state-level policies
Malaysia	Biomass focus; limited infrastructure for large renewables	National Renewable Energy Policy; emphasis on biomass and biogas	Centralized policy under SEDA, with limited regulatory oversight for renewables	Centralized governance, restricting local involvement in policy decisions
Singapore	Import-dependent; efficiency and innovation-focused	Diversification of sources; limited renewables due to space constraints	The Singapore Energy Story; focus on efficiency and waste-to-energy	Highly centralized governance through EMA to ensure decision-making efficiency

summarizes the comparative overview of primary energy contexts, strategies, policy frameworks, and governance structures of the selected case countries, highlighting the diversity in governance and policy structures across the countries studied and relevant insights for Thailand’s energy transition.

The analysis of energy transition strategies across several countries reveals a diverse range of approaches based on national contexts. By applying the Integrated National Energy Planning (INEP) framework [13], this section presents referent policy guidelines drawn from case studies and focuses on aspects like strategy formulation, governance models, and public engagement.

3.1. Strategy Formulation

Countries adopt a combination of action-oriented and aspect-oriented planning to drive their energy transitions. This approach is evident across case studies of Germany, Japan, Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore, where several common themes emerge regarding their strategies for navigating energy transitions. Action-oriented planning in energy transition focuses on establishing clear, measurable steps to implement policy goals effectively. This section outlines four primary elements crucial to this approach: setting defined targets, building regulatory frameworks, engaging stakeholders, and designing financial incentives.

3.1.1. Setting Clear and Long-Term Goals

A consistent element across all countries is the setting of clear, long-term goals for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adopting renewable energy. For example, Germany’s Energiewende highlights how interim targets can guide continuous progress [15], providing a clear roadmap for transitioning to a sustainable energy system. Such goals signal the seriousness of each nation’s commitment, offering stability and direction for policy development and implementation.

3.1.2. Establishing Legal and Regulatory Frameworks

A key driver of successful energy transitions is the presence of strong legal frameworks. Germany’s Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) is an example of how ambitious targets, coupled with legal certainty, create stability for stakeholders and attract investments. Legal frameworks also promote market efficiency, removing barriers and fostering competition through mechanisms like subsidies, tax incentives, and R&D grants [16,17]. Countries like Malaysia and Singapore have adopted and adapted advanced legal frameworks, such as Malaysia’s exploration of hydrogen fuel cell regulations from the U.S. and South Korea [18], to promote innovation and secure investment.

3.1.3. Engaging Public and Stakeholder Participation

The importance of public engagement and stakeholder participation is also evident across the countries studied. Engaging stakeholders in the energy transition is essential for multiple reasons: it facilitates collaboration and dialogue, which reduces public opposition to large-scale energy projects by anticipating stakeholder concerns through participatory project management approaches [19,20,21]. Germany’s Energiewende decentralized energy governance model highlights how involving the public and key stakeholders in decision-making processes enhances the acceptance and success of energy projects. Australia’s energy transition policies also prioritize community engagement to align national and local priorities, while Japan focuses on local initiatives and decentralized participation to empower communities and enhance resilience. Public buy-in is crucial for overcoming opposition to large-scale renewable projects and for fostering community ownership of energy initiatives.

3.1.4. Providing Economic and Financial Incentives

Shifting to renewable energy can stimulate economic growth and job creation, particularly in the renewable energy sector, as seen in Germany. However, it may also create regional disparities and sectoral shifts, requiring retraining programs for those impacted by job losses in fossil fuel industries. Effective economic policies, such as environmental taxes and subsidies, are crucial to mitigate negative impacts and ensure a just transition. For Thailand, balancing job creation in renewable sectors while managing the decline in fossil fuel industries is essential for maintaining public support and economic stability.

Decentralization in energy transition governance offers benefits such as local engagement, flexibility, and resilience. All five case studies highlight the value of local energy projects and distributed energy systems. Decentralization empowers communities through renewable energy cooperatives, increases innovation, and strengthens energy security by diversifying sources [22]. Thailand can learn from these models to adopt localized energy solutions that are tailored to the specific needs of its regions, improving both efficiency and public buy-in.

Apart from action-oriented strategy formulation, this research project also developed aspect-oriented planning based on the case studies. Aspect-oriented planning focuses on integrating various dimensions, e.g., market, infrastructure, technology, and social factors. Referent policy guidelines for energy transition concerning strategy formulation in terms of aspect-oriented planning suggest the following: market, technological, infrastructure-related, socio-political, and normative aspects.

Table 2. Aspect-oriented transition planning.

Aspect	Transition Policy or Measure	Intended Correlation to the Transition	Example of Implementation in Selected Case Countries
Market	subsidies, Feed-in-Tariffs, market incentives	positive	Germany: Extensive FiTs encourage investments in solar and wind
	carbon tax, tax credits	positive	Australia: Implementation of tax credits and regional carbon pricing to reduce fossil fuel reliance
	carbon pricing	negative	Singapore: Carbon pricing to drive corporate responsibility and reduce greenhouse gas emissions
	providing financial supports, funding, grants, loans	positive	Japan: Low-interest loans for energy-efficient technology and renewable energy installations
	green certificates or standards	positive	Malaysia: Green certificates to incentivize businesses to meet renewable energy standards
	removing fossil fuel subsidies	negative	Australia: Phasing out coal subsidies to shift focus toward cleaner energy sources
Technological	energy efficiency improvements	positive	Japan: Nationwide initiatives for energy-saving technologies post-Fukushima to improve resilience
	investment in advanced renewable energy technologies	positive	Germany: Significant investment in offshore wind and solar PV technologies as part of Energiewende
	technological integration combining renewable energy generation with smart grid technologies	positive	Singapore: Integration of smart grids to manage intermittent renewable sources efficiently
	research and development, investment, and innovation related to renewable energy sources	positive	Australia: Ongoing R&D in solar power and energy storage to support grid stability
	research and development, investment, and innovation related to fossil-fuels or nuclear phase-out	negative	Japan: Efforts to replace nuclear during nuclear phase-out with renewable sources resulted in increased reliance on fossil fuels
Infrastructure	scale up the deployment of renewable energy projects and enhance grid infrastructure	positive	Malaysia: Expansion of grid infrastructure to support biomass and solar projects in rural areas
	renovation and integration of (new) renewable energy tech to existing infrastructure, buildings	positive	Singapore: Renovation of grid systems to handle higher renewable energy penetration in urban areas
Socio-political	demand management	depends	Japan: Demand response initiatives to mitigate peak energy use
	stakeholder involvement	positive	Germany: Strong community ownership of renewable projects under Energiewende to enhance public engagement
	public/civic participation	positive	Australia: Public consultation in renewable project planning to align with community interests
	local ownership, local investments	positive	Germany: Role of local cooperatives in renewable energy projects
	incentives to promote renewable energy adoption and energy efficiency	positive	Singapore: Provide rebates for energy-efficient appliances to encourage sustainable consumption
	decentralized competitive forces	positive	Australia: Encourage competition among renewable providers to drive cost efficiency and innovation
Normative	green certificates or energy-efficiency standards	positive	Malaysia: Green certificates to promote sustainable practices in energy-intensive industries
	market incentives	positive	Germany: Market incentives for companies meeting renewable energy standards
	international cooperation or collaborations	positive	Japan: Partners with ASEAN for knowledge sharing in renewable technology and sustainable practices

outlines various policies and measures associated with the transition to renewable energy, their intended correlations with the transition, and examples of implementation in selected case countries.

Market-related policies such as subsidies, Feed-in-Tariffs (FiTs), market incentives, and carbon taxes positively influence the energy transition by lowering cost barriers for renewable technologies and encouraging their adoption. In contrast, carbon pricing and removing fossil fuel subsidies are viewed negatively due to the higher costs they impose on fossil fuel usage, indirectly promoting a shift to cleaner energy sources. For example, Singapore has implemented carbon pricing to drive corporate responsibility and reduce emissions, while Australia is phasing out coal subsidies to shift focus toward cleaner sources.

In the technological domain, improvements in energy efficiency, investments in advanced renewable technologies, and the integration of renewables with smart grids are seen as positive. Similarly, R&D investments in renewable energy are favorable, while those focused on fossil fuels or nuclear phase-out are perceived as negative. The negative impact on renewable investments comes from the resource demands of phasing out nuclear energy. Significant funds, expertise, and time are needed to decommission plants and manage waste, pulling resources away from renewables. Additionally, countries often rely on fossil fuels to fill the energy gap, which can shift funding and focus away from renewables, further delaying their growth. For instance, Japan’s nationwide initiatives post-Fukushima emphasize energy efficiency, while Germany invests heavily in offshore wind and solar technologies under its Energiewende policy. Singapore’s integration of smart grids enables efficient management of renewable intermittency. This reflects a strategic emphasis on advancing renewables while reducing dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear energy.

Infrastructure-related measures, such as scaling up renewable projects and enhancing grid infrastructure, are also viewed positively. Renovating existing infrastructure to accommodate new renewable technologies further supports the transition, highlighting the importance of modernizing systems to align with energy goals. For example, Malaysia is expanding grid infrastructure to support biomass and solar projects in rural areas, and Singapore is renovating grid systems to handle increased renewable energy penetration in urban areas.

Socio-political factors like stakeholder involvement, public participation, local ownership, and investments are positively correlated with the energy transition. Except for demand management, which is context-dependent, these factors emphasize the importance of social engagement and local initiatives in fostering renewable energy adoption. Germany’s community-owned renewable projects, central to its Energiewende, enhance public engagement, while Australia’s public consultations in renewable projects ensure alignment with community interests.

Normative measures—including green certificates, standards, and market incentives—also positively impact the transition. International cooperation and collaborations play a crucial role in promoting normative shifts by sharing resources, technologies, and best practices across countries. Financial and technical support from global development programs and institutions like the World Bank helps overcome financial barriers in deploying renewable energy solutions. For instance, Japan partners with ASEAN for knowledge sharing in renewable technology, while Malaysia uses green certificates to promote sustainable practices in energy-intensive industries. These measures set standards and provide incentives that guide market behavior toward renewable energy.

The alignment of market policies, technological advancements, infrastructure development, socio-political engagement, and normative measures significantly affects the pace and success of the energy transition. A nation’s ability to align these factors, depending on its internal energy context and readiness, will shape its strategic and comprehensive framework for a sustainable energy transition.

3.2. Policy Implementation

Effective energy transition requires the establishment of a robust policy framework. A well-structured national framework serves as a roadmap to navigate the complex challenges of shifting to sustainable energy systems. It outlines clear steps for transitioning from conventional to renewable energy sources and facilitates coordination among stakeholders such as government agencies, private entities, and the public [23].

A critical function of such frameworks is managing risks and maintaining economic stability. By identifying potential risks—technological, economic, and social—early on, proactive measures can be taken to mitigate them [24]. The framework also ensures alignment with environmental goals, like reducing carbon emissions, while promoting the adoption of advanced technologies. Additionally, it addresses social equity, ensuring that vulnerable communities benefit from the transition.

The case studies highlight diverse policy frameworks that directly address the challenges of energy transition in each country. Germany’s Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) provides a stable legal framework and financial incentives, such as Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs), which have successfully driven renewable energy adoption. However, Germany continues to face challenges related to grid stability and the integration of intermittent renewable sources, requiring further infrastructure investment and advanced grid management. Despite these hurdles, Germany remains a global leader in renewable energy deployment and achieved a 6.7% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the first quarter of 2024 compared to the same period in 2023 [25].

Australia’s Renewable Energy Target (RET), though effective at the state level, is hindered by reliance on coal and political resistance, limiting renewables to 27% of the electricity mix. In Japan, the post-Fukushima energy policies balance energy security with environmental goals by combining investments in solar energy with nuclear retention to meet supply needs, as outlined in Japan’s 2014 Strategic Energy Plan. Malaysia’s policy framework, centered on biomass and biogas through the National Renewable Energy Policy and Action Plan (NREPAP), leverages palm oil waste as a resource, although high initial costs and infrastructure limitations pose significant barriers. Singapore’s Energy Story strategy prioritizes diversification through solar and waste-to-energy initiatives to enhance energy security, though reliance on imported natural gas remains a vulnerability. The country also signed a nuclear cooperation agreement with the U.S. to explore advanced nuclear technologies and develop local nuclear expertise [26]. Each of these policies highlights unique approaches to navigating specific obstacles in renewable adoption and energy security.

The comparative analysis reveals that each country’s renewable energy policies are shaped by unique challenges and resources. Germany and Japan have achieved significant progress through comprehensive policies, while Australia and Malaysia face obstacles due to fossil fuel dependence and infrastructure limitations. Singapore’s focus on innovation holds promise, but its reliance on imported energy remains a key challenge. Thus, the success of renewable energy policies is closely linked to each country’s specific context.

3.3. Approaches to Energy Transition Governance

A key aspect of policy implementation is the governance of energy transitions. Case studies show that countries adopt unique governance approaches shaped by their economic, social, and environmental contexts. Germany and Australia emphasize multilevel stakeholder engagement, Japan focuses on post-disaster reforms, Malaysia prioritizes sustainable biomass utilization, and Singapore integrates energy security with waste-to-energy (WTE) technologies. These approaches reflect the need to tailor energy transition strategies to local conditions and challenges.

Germany, Australia, Japan, Malaysia, and Singapore each employ distinct governance models suited to their national priorities. Germany emphasizes consensus management and multi-level governance, promoting transparency and collaboration across government layers. Australia follows a multi-institutional approach, using network administrative organizations to efficiently manage governance across levels. Japan’s strategy centers on post-disaster reforms, with a lead organization overseeing policy integration and resource allocation. Malaysia’s governance, led by central bodies like the Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA), focuses on sustainable energy initiatives. Singapore’s Energy Market Authority (EMA) coordinates energy policies, leveraging WTE technologies and renewable energy projects through a centralized model.

The governance models in Germany and Australia are influenced by efforts to decentralize the energy sector, while Japan, Malaysia, and Singapore follow more centralized approaches. In Japan, agencies like the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) centrally coordinate initiatives such as the Basic Energy Plan. Malaysia’s lead organizations steer policies toward sustainability, ensuring efficient policy execution. Singapore’s EMA oversees energy policies, coordinating with stakeholders to support smart grids, renewable energy, and WTE initiatives. Japan, Malaysia, and Singapore are characterized by “lead organization-governed networks” due to their unified national strategies. This model offers centralized coordination, efficient resource mobilization, and effective stakeholder collaboration—crucial for achieving sustainable and resilient energy systems. Centralization supports long-term planning and addresses the urgent demands of climate change.

For countries in the early stages of energy transition, this governance model presents several advantages: it enables swift decision-making, minimizes delays seen in decentralized models, enhances coordination among stakeholders, and ensures effective resource allocation to critical projects. Additionally, it maintains a strategic focus on long-term goals like reducing carbon emissions and promoting renewable energy, essential for sustainable energy transitions and combating climate change.

3.4. Strategies for Public Understanding and Community Engagement

Public understanding and community engagement are crucial for successful energy transitions. This section explores strategies drawn from Germany and Japan to enhance public comprehension and involvement in energy transitions. Key strategies include (1) public participation and stakeholder engagement, (2) educational campaigns and communication, (3) community energy projects, and (4) policy design and economic incentives.

Firstly, public participation and stakeholder engagement are critical, as demonstrated by Germany’s Energiewende. It fostered broad-based support by including various stakeholders, such as citizen cooperatives and NGOs, in decision-making. Citizen cooperatives led community-based renewable energy projects, increasing public support by allowing individuals to invest in local initiatives. NGOs advocated for sustainable policies, educated the public, and held the government accountable. This collaboration aligned diverse interests, fostering social equity and environmental sustainability, which were key to Energiewende’s success [27]. The inclusive approach also built transparency, trust, and collective ownership.

Secondly, educational campaigns and communication are essential for garnering public support by informing citizens about the benefits of renewable energy. In Germany, comprehensive public campaigns and deliberation forums strengthened support for Energiewende [28]. Similarly, Japan used media channels to communicate the necessity of energy transition, shaping public attitudes toward renewable energy [29].

Thirdly, community energy projects empower local populations by involving them in renewable energy planning, financing, and management. In Germany, these initiatives gave residents a sense of ownership, enhancing social acceptance of renewable energy. Japan emphasized decentralization, allowing local governments to tailor energy policies to specific regional needs, thereby improving public engagement and understanding.

Lastly, well-designed policies and economic incentives are vital for encouraging participation. Germany’s Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) provided Feed-in Tariffs, reducing financial risks for renewable energy producers and attracting investments. Japan offered tax incentives, subsidies, and low-interest loans to reduce the cost of renewable energy investments, boosting both public and private sector involvement.

Considering approaches and strategies for public understanding and community engagement, Germany and Japan’s approaches reveal that inclusive stakeholder participation, educational campaigns, community energy projects, and well-designed policies with economic incentives are key components. Germany emphasizes broad stakeholder involvement through community-based renewable energy projects and advocacy for sustainable policies. Educational campaigns in both countries highlight the importance of informing citizens about the benefits of renewable energy and building supportive attitudes. Community energy projects, such as Germany’s initiatives and Japan’s decentralization efforts, empower local populations by involving them in renewable energy planning, financing, and management. Policy design and economic incentives, such as Germany’s Renewable Energy Sources Act and Japan’s financial incentives, reduce investment risks, encouraging greater participation from both public and private sectors.

3.5. Contextualizing Comparative Lessons for Thailand

While the study draws on energy transition models from Germany and Japan, it is essential to recognize the structural and contextual differences that impact the applicability of these strategies in Thailand. Germany’s Energiewende and Japan’s post-Fukushima reforms provide valuable frameworks for renewable energy policy and public engagement, yet the direct application of these models may not be feasible due to Thailand’s unique socio-political and economic landscape.

Instead of direct adoption, Thailand can selectively adapt certain aspects of these countries’ approaches. For example, Germany’s emphasis on community engagement through decentralized renewable projects offers a model for increasing local buy-in and participation in Thailand. Similarly, Japan’s focus on resilience and energy security aligns well with Thailand’s need to reduce dependence on imported fuels, especially in rural and off-grid areas. Given Thailand’s differing regulatory environment, economic constraints, and social dynamics, it is more realistic to view these international strategies as inspirations for tailored solutions. For instance, while Germany’s ambitious renewable targets provide a model, Thailand may need to prioritize incremental goals that account for its current reliance on fossil fuels and imported energy. In this context, Germany’s and Japan’s policies serve as adaptable frameworks rather than prescriptive models, offering general principles—such as decentralized governance, public engagement, and resilience planning—that can be customized to fit Thailand’s conditions.

This adaptive approach highlights the importance of considering Thailand’s socio-economic and policy structures. For example, decentralized energy models may require modifications in Thailand due to its centralized governance style. Additionally, Japan’s heavy reliance on nuclear energy may not be suitable for Thailand, but the focus on energy security and the phased transition to renewables could inspire similar priorities. This study acknowledges that while lessons from these countries provide valuable insights, their practical implementation in Thailand will require thoughtful adaptation and localized modifications.

4. Energy Transition Policy Guidelines for Thailand

Section 4 focuses on Thailand’s current energy transition landscape and specific challenges that hinder progress toward a sustainable energy model. Thailand remains highly dependent on fossil fuels, which poses both economic and environmental risks. Regulatory fragmentation and overlapping jurisdictions create inefficiencies in policy implementation, complicating the approval processes for renewable projects. Additionally, limited public engagement and low awareness of renewable energy benefits have slowed community support for clean energy initiatives. To address these challenges, this section proposes targeted improvements, such as establishing a centralized regulatory body to streamline renewable project approvals, enhancing public engagement through community-led renewable energy projects, and implementing incremental policy incentives like targeted Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs) to encourage investment in rural areas. Drawing on successful examples from Germany, Japan, and Australia, these recommendations are adapted to fit Thailand’s energy context, aiming to reduce fossil fuel dependency, improve policy cohesion, and build stronger public support for renewable energy.

4.1. Energy Transition and Thailand’s Energy Security

Thailand’s energy landscape is predominantly fossil-fuel-based, with natural gas accounting for approximately 62% of the primary energy supply for power generation, followed by petroleum and coal, which together make up around 90% of the energy mix [30]. Renewable energy sources, including solar and hydropower, currently contribute around 10% of power generation, as seen in Figure 2 [31]. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, as of 2023, Thailand’s total emissions were estimated at approximately 243 million tons of CO₂ equivalent, with the power sector and transport sector responsible for two-thirds of these emissions [30].

Energy consumption in Thailand varies by sector. The industrial sector, consuming about 30% of total energy, has seen growth in chemical and non-metallic mineral industries [33]. Apart from energy consumption, the sector also dominates electricity consumption, as seen in Figure 3. The transportation sector remains heavily reliant on diesel, while the residential and commercial sectors are influenced by rising temperatures and increased air conditioning use [34]. In response to rising energy demand and the need for sustainability, Thailand has introduced energy policies and plans. The Thailand Integrated Energy Blueprint (TIEB) seeks to improve energy security and mitigate environmental impacts by promoting efficiency and increasing renewable energy share [35]. The government has also set ambitious targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions via renewable energy and efficiency measures [36].

Thailand’s energy policy focuses on diversifying energy sources, enhancing efficiency, and expanding renewable use. Key policies include the Power Development Plan (PDP), Alternative Energy Development Plan (AEDP), and Energy Efficiency Plan (EEP). The PDP balances energy security with sustainability, while the AEDP targets an increased share of renewables like solar, wind, and biomass. Both plans aim to increase the share of renewable energy in power generation to 51% [37]. The EEP aims to reduce energy consumption through efficiency improvements across sectors. These targets provide a foundation for transition scenarios that prioritize investments in renewable infrastructure, subsidy frameworks, and grid modernization. By setting these goals, Thailand’s policymakers can assess the financial implications and potential benefits of different energy transition pathways, enabling effective prioritization of policy actions and subsidies.

The energy sector’s regulatory framework involves multiple stakeholders, with the Ministry of Energy leading policy formulation. The Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO) coordinates national energy policy, while the Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency (DEDE) promotes renewable energy and efficiency. The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) oversees electricity and gas regulation. Additionally, state-owned enterprises such as the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) and the Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA) manage electricity generation and distribution.

Thailand’s energy transition is driven by economic, environmental, technological, and policy factors. The fluctuating cost of fossil fuel imports contrasts with the long-term economic benefits of renewables, which stimulate growth, create jobs, and attract investment. Environmentally, Thailand’s commitment to cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20–25% by 2030 pushes the shift toward renewables, improving air quality and sustainability. Technological advances, such as improved solar panels and wind turbines, enhance efficiency and reduce costs, allowing Thailand to leapfrog traditional systems. International initiatives, such as the Alternative Energy Development Plan and global cooperation, support the country’s renewable energy adoption. Thus, the transition to renewable energy addresses environmental and economic challenges while leveraging technological advancements and international cooperation.

4.2. Prospects for Renewable Energy in Thailand

Thailand has significant potential for harnessing various forms of renewable energy. Solar energy, in particular, is promising due to the country’s geographical location, which provides high solar insolation levels year-round. Studies indicate that the central and northeastern regions are especially suitable for solar farms [38]. Wind energy also holds potential, particularly in coastal and high-altitude areas, with the southern and eastern regions benefiting from consistent wind speeds, making them ideal for wind farms [39]. Additionally, biomass and biogas offer substantial opportunities, particularly through agricultural residues such as rice husks, sugarcane bagasse, and palm oil residues. However, it is essential to consider the trade-offs in biomass utilization, as using these resources for power generation, biogas, or synthetic fuels simultaneously may not be feasible due to resource limitations and sustainability concerns. Small and micro-hydropower projects also have potential, particularly in the northern and western regions, where numerous rivers and streams could support hydropower generation [40].

To promote renewable energy development, the Thai government has implemented various policy initiatives, including the Alternative Energy Development Plan (AEDP), which aims to increase the share of renewable energy to 30% of the total energy mix by 2036, in line with its commitment under the Paris Agreement [2]. Incentives such as Feed-in Tariffs (FITs) and tax breaks attract both local and foreign investment, ensuring the economic viability of renewable energy projects. The private sector is also actively involved, with companies like BCPG Public Company Limited and Energy Absolute leading investments in the sector, demonstrating the profitability of renewable energy ventures. Investment opportunities, particularly in solar and wind energy, are growing thanks to the supportive policy environment and rising demand for sustainable energy sources.

4.3. Energy Transition and Its Impact on Energy Security

The transition to renewable energy can significantly enhance Thailand’s energy security by reducing dependency on imported fuels, stabilizing energy supplies, and providing economic and social benefits. Since renewable energy technologies rely predominantly on local resources, this shift decreases the need for foreign oil and gas. This not only strengthens energy security but also has economic advantages, as funds previously used for fuel imports can be redirected toward domestic development. Moreover, diversifying energy sources through renewables ensures supply stability, as renewable resources, unlike fossil fuels, are not subject to depletion or geopolitical risks. Integrating various renewable sources also fosters a more resilient grid.

Advances in energy storage, such as batteries and, where feasible, pumped hydro, are key to managing the intermittency of renewable energy. These systems store excess energy produced during peak times for use during periods of low production, ensuring a consistent energy supply. Nevertheless, while pumped hydro has potential, its applicability in Thailand depends on the availability of suitable sites and infrastructure, including large-scale dams, which are currently limited. As mentioned, the transition to renewable energy not only bolsters energy security but also drives economic growth and job creation. The renewable energy sector offers employment in manufacturing, installation, maintenance, and research. Solar and wind industries, for example, have seen notable job growth, benefiting both urban and rural communities. In rural areas, renewable energy projects can stimulate local economies, creating stable, well-paying jobs and improving infrastructure and services. Urban areas also benefit from reduced pollution and improved public health. Additionally, decentralizing energy production through small-scale renewable projects empowers local communities by giving them control over energy resources and costs, promoting resilience and sustainability.

4.4. Challenges and Barriers to Energy Transition in Thailand

One significant economic and financial barrier to Thailand’s energy transition is the high upfront investment costs of renewable energy projects. Despite long-term cost benefits, the substantial capital required for renewable technologies deters investors and developers. Initial expenses for equipment, installation, and infrastructure are prohibitively high, creating a considerable barrier. Additionally, accessing financing and subsidies is a critical challenge. While governmental initiatives, such as the Energy Efficiency Revolving Fund (EERF) and the ESCO Fund, exist, these are often insufficient or difficult to access. Small companies, in particular, struggle with securing funds due to limited collateral and stringent financial institution requirements [41]. The risk-averse nature of lenders, coupled with financial mechanisms that do not fully cover the scope of renewable projects, further limits broader adoption. This financial constraint hampers the growth of Thailand’s renewable energy sector, making it challenging to meet energy transition goals.

Technically, Thailand’s infrastructure is heavily reliant on fossil fuels, making the integration of renewable energy sources costly and complex. Solar and wind energy’s intermittent nature necessitates advanced storage solutions and smart grid technology for stability. While efforts to improve waste-to-energy (WtE) technologies and biomass use are underway, these technologies are still developing. Achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 requires rapid deployment of renewables and massive investment. Effective policies are essential to support technological advancements and attract investment. Thailand’s Alternative Energy Development Policy (AEDP) aims to increase energy production from crop residues, but usage remains below potential. Expanding electricity capacity to meet security and environmental goals will require careful planning and significant investment.

Policy inconsistencies and regulatory challenges also impede Thailand’s energy transition. Despite policies like the AEDP, implementation is often inconsistent. Bureaucratic inefficiencies arise due to multiple agencies with overlapping responsibilities, causing delays and increased costs for developers. For example, one agency may approve renewable projects while another handles environmental assessments, resulting in fragmented approaches [42]. Subsidies and incentives, critical for renewable projects’ viability, frequently change, creating instability. This unpredictability deters long-term investment. Regulatory hurdles, such as complex approval processes and inadequate grid infrastructure, further complicate renewable energy development, raising costs and risks.

Social and cultural resistance also plays a role. Public awareness and acceptance of renewable energy technologies are low, often due to misinformation or concerns about health and environmental impacts. Waste-to-energy plants, for instance, face strong opposition over pollution fears [43]. Furthermore, vested interests in the fossil fuel industry, which benefits financially and politically from existing infrastructure, actively lobby against renewable energy initiatives [44]. Overcoming these barriers requires comprehensive public engagement campaigns to raise awareness about renewable energy’s benefits, addressing concerns through community involvement and emphasizing long-term environmental and economic gains. By tackling misinformation and involving the public, Thailand can gain greater support for its renewable energy projects, easing the transition from fossil fuels.

4.5. Prospects and Challenges of Adapting Global Strategies in Thailand

This section applies policy guidelines derived from a comparative analysis to Thailand’s energy transition. The guidelines outline key steps for effective policy formulation and implementation, drawing from case studies and best practices in Germany, Japan, Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Key considerations include setting clear goals, establishing legal frameworks, engaging stakeholders, addressing economic impacts, and promoting decentralization. By adopting best practices from global models and tailoring them to Thailand’s context, effective energy transition strategies can be developed.

Setting long-term targets for renewable energy adoption, greenhouse gas reduction, and phasing out fossil fuels is fundamental for Thailand. Clear goals provide stability and direction, which is crucial for attracting investments in renewable energy. By setting similar targets, Thailand can ensure consistent progress, signaling its commitment to decarbonizing its energy system. This will stimulate economic growth, create jobs, and enhance energy security, positioning Thailand as a regional leader in renewable energy development.

Establishing robust legal frameworks is equally essential. Legal structures should remove market barriers and incentivize renewable energy investments through mechanisms such as subsidies, tax incentives, and Feed-in Tariffs, similar to Germany’s Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) [16]. Such frameworks create a stable environment for renewable energy projects, attracting both domestic and international investors and thus accelerating growth in the sector.

Engaging a broad range of stakeholders—from local communities to private investors—is crucial for fostering collaboration and gaining public support. Germany’s Energiewende emphasizes societal engagement and decentralized energy systems, highlighting the need for inclusivity [19]. Thailand can benefit from similar strategies by involving local communities in planning and implementation, thus building a foundation of support and reducing conflict. Engaging private investors ensures adequate financial backing and innovation, driving a dynamic energy transition.

Addressing the economic impacts of the transition is key to maintaining stability. Policies should mitigate regional disparities and support sectors shifting from fossil fuels to renewables. Implementing environmental taxes and renewable energy subsidies can facilitate this shift by making fossil fuels more expensive [45]. Combined with targeted support for vulnerable regions and sectors, Thailand can ensure a more equitable transition, sharing the benefits of renewable energy across society.

Promoting decentralization enhances local engagement and resilience. Encouraging local renewable energy cooperatives and decentralized governance enables communities to meet their unique needs and reduce reliance on centralized grids [46]. These cooperatives allow communities to collectively invest in and manage renewable projects, retaining benefits such as cost savings, job creation, and reduced environmental impact. For Thailand, this approach strengthens energy security, empowers communities, and fosters local innovation.

By integrating these guidelines, Thailand can develop a comprehensive energy transition strategy that fosters renewable energy adoption, economic stability, and sustainable growth. This strategy should leverage technological advancements, regulatory frameworks, and economic incentives, focusing on solar, wind, and biomass energy to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. Economic stability can be achieved through green job creation, investment in renewable infrastructure, and diversification of the energy portfolio. Sustainable growth entails balancing environmental protection with economic development, aligned with international commitments such as the Paris Agreement. This positions Thailand as a leader in global energy transition, ensuring long-term economic and environmental benefits.

Regarding approaches to energy transition governance,

Table 3. Comparative analysis of energy transition strategies: lessons for Thailand.

Theme	Germany	Japan	Australia	Malaysia	Singapore	Lessons for Thailand
Policy frameworks	Energiewende provides strong legal certainty with clear targets (e.g., phasing out nuclear, GHG reduction by 2050)	Post-Fukushima shift focuses on energy security and renewables but retains nuclear energy	Renewable Energy Target (RET) lacks consistency across states, limiting effectiveness	National Renewable Energy Policy focuses on biomass but has weak regulatory oversight	The Singapore Energy Story emphasizes diversification and efficiency, not rapid adoption of renewables	Adopt clear, long-term goals like Germany but balance them with energy security concerns, as seen in Japan
Governance structures	Decentralized governance, with strong local and municipal participation	Centralized governance through METI, with some local initiatives post-Fukushima	Fragmented governance across states, leading to uneven progress	Centralized governance through SEDA, limiting local involvement	Highly centralized governance through EMA, ensuring efficiency in decision-making	Consider elements of Germany’s decentralized approach to foster local participation and public buy-in
Economic strategies	Strong use of subsidies, Feed-in Tariffs, and taxes to support renewable energy investments	Heavy reliance on subsidies and Feed-in Tariffs, balancing energy costs with security	Political resistance to transition from coal, though states with favorable policies have seen growth in renewables	Biomass and biogas projects are supported by subsidies, but high upfront costs deter wider adoption	Focus on energy efficiency and innovation due to the lack of natural resources	Use subsidies and incentives, like Germany, to attract investment while balancing energy security, as in Japan
Public engagement	Strong public support via community-owned projects, fostering widespread acceptance	Public engagement increased post-Fukushima but is still limited compared to Germany	Divided public opinion, with some regions supporting renewables and others resistant due to coal reliance	Public engagement is low, with decisions made top-down, limiting public participation	Public participation is minimal, with the government focusing on efficiency campaigns	Increase public participation through community-owned projects like Germany’s Energiewende model
Technological innovation	Heavy investments in smart grids, solar, wind, and energy storage	Focus on energy efficiency, solar power, and nuclear energy post-Fukushima	Advances in solar and wind tech, but grid integration remains a challenge	Focus on biomass, but large-scale solar and wind projects are underdeveloped due to infrastructure limitations	Investment in energy-efficient technologies but limited space for large renewable projects	Prioritize investment in solar, wind, and energy storage while exploring regional cooperation like Singapore

Note: In this table, “energy security” refers to Thailand’s efforts to ensure a stable, affordable, and sustainable energy supply while reducing dependency on imported fossil fuels. This includes enhancing resilience against global energy market fluctuations, diversifying energy sources through renewables, and maintaining reliable access for all regions. Energy security for Thailand emphasizes minimizing supply disruptions, promoting local energy independence, and reducing vulnerability to external economic and geopolitical risks.

provides a comparative analysis of energy policies, governance structures, economic strategies, public engagement, and technological innovation in five case studies and identifies key lessons that can be applied to Thailand’s own energy transition. It highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each nation’s strategy, offering insights into how Thailand can balance long-term goals, governance models, economic incentives, public participation, and technological advancement.

Germany’s Energiewende policy provides strong legal certainty with clear long-term targets, such as phasing out nuclear power and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. However, this decision reflects complex trade-offs, as Germany opted to retain coal power due to its economic significance, which has contributed to its standing as one of the largest CO₂ emitters among industrial countries. This choice highlights the challenges in balancing economic interests with environmental goals. Japan, post-Fukushima, shifted focus to energy security and renewables while retaining nuclear energy. Australia’s Renewable Energy Target (RET) suffers from state-level inconsistencies, and Malaysia’s National Renewable Energy Policy, while focusing on biomass, lacks regulatory strength. Singapore’s Energy Story prioritizes diversification and efficiency over rapid renewable adoption. Thailand should adopt long-term goals like Germany’s but balance them with energy security, as Japan does.

In governance, Germany’s decentralized approach encourages local and municipal participation. Japan’s governance is centralized through METI, with increased local initiatives post-Fukushima. Australia’s fragmented governance leads to uneven progress across states, while Malaysia and Singapore maintain highly centralized systems through SEDA and EMA, respectively. Thailand could benefit from incorporating Germany’s decentralized model to foster public buy-in.

In terms of economic strategies, economically, Germany employs a mix of subsidies, Feed-in Tariffs, and taxes to drive renewable energy investment. Japan relies on similar subsidies while balancing energy security. In Australia, political resistance to coal transition persists, though states with favorable policies see renewable growth. Malaysia supports biomass and biogas with subsidies, but high upfront costs hinder broader adoption. Singapore focuses on energy efficiency and innovation due to limited natural resources. The lesson for Thailand is to use subsidies and incentives to attract investment, as in Germany, while balancing energy security, like Japan.

Public engagement in Germany is strong, supported by community-owned projects that drive widespread acceptance. Japan increased engagement post-Fukushima, though it remains limited compared to Germany. Australia’s public opinion is divided between coal and renewables, while Malaysia and Singapore have low public involvement due to top-down governance. Thailand could enhance public participation by adopting community-owned models like Germany’s.

In terms of technology, Germany invests heavily in smart grids, solar, wind, and energy storage. Japan focuses on energy efficiency, solar, and nuclear power post-Fukushima. Australia has made strides in solar and wind but struggles with grid integration, while Malaysia’s focus on biomass is hampered by infrastructure limitations for large-scale solar and wind. Singapore prioritizes energy efficiency but faces space constraints for renewables. Thailand should prioritize photovoltaic (PV) solar, wind, energy storage, and grid infrastructure investments to support a balanced and resilient energy transition. Additionally, exploring regional cooperation, as seen in Singapore, could further enhance Thailand’s energy stability and integration.

However, while the case studies offer valuable lessons, the specific strategies related to ambitious policy targets, governance decentralization, large-scale public engagement, and high-tech infrastructure may not be immediately workable in Thailand without substantial adaptations to its local context. Based on the comparative analysis, several elements from the energy transition strategies of other countries might not work for Thailand due to its unique socio-economic and energy context.

First, Germany’s ambitious targets, such as phasing out nuclear energy and setting very high greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals, may not be feasible for Thailand. Thailand still heavily relies on fossil fuel imports, and moving too aggressively toward renewable energy without a gradual, balanced approach could disrupt its energy security. Similarly, Japan’s reliance on nuclear energy as a key component of its low-carbon strategy might not align with Thailand’s energy priorities, considering the potential social and environmental concerns that could arise around nuclear power in Thailand. Thailand should thus set incremental goals that are ambitious but realistic based on its current energy mix.

In terms of governance structures, Germany’s decentralized model, which relies on strong local and municipal participation, could face challenges in Thailand. The Thai energy governance system is currently more centralized, and it may not be ready for such decentralization without significant structural changes. On the other hand, Singapore’s highly centralized model—which is effective due to its small size and governance style—might limit flexibility for large-scale public participation if applied to Thailand, where public engagement and local-level involvement are crucial for successful energy transition.

When considering economic strategies, Germany’s approach, which involves significant long-term investments and extensive subsidies, may be too costly for Thailand to implement in the short term. Thailand might struggle to secure sufficient funding to provide the same level of financial incentives as Germany. Additionally, Australia’s fragmented governance—where different states manage their energy policies—could create inefficiencies if adopted in Thailand, where a centralized system would likely work better to ensure consistent policy application nationwide.

Public engagement models, such as Germany’s deep involvement of citizens in decision-making and community-owned renewable energy projects, may be difficult to replicate in Thailand. Thailand currently lacks the same level of public awareness and infrastructure to support widespread community ownership. Moreover, Singapore’s minimal public participation approach could also prevent a successful energy transition in Thailand if applied without sufficient efforts to raise public awareness and engage communities.

Lastly, in terms of technological innovation, Germany’s heavy investments in advanced technologies, such as smart grids and large-scale energy storage, may be too expensive for Thailand to implement in the near future. While these technologies are crucial for stabilizing the grid with high renewable penetration, Thailand may need to prioritize more cost-effective solutions initially, such as targeted grid management upgrades, community solar projects, hybrid systems in remote areas, and robust energy efficiency programs. These measures would support renewable integration while aligning with Thailand’s financial and infrastructural constraints. Additionally, Singapore’s focus on waste-to-energy technologies might not align with Thailand’s strategic priority to expand its solar and wind energy sectors, which hold more potential for long-term energy security.

While international energy transition strategies offer valuable insights, Thailand may face significant challenges in implementing some of these approaches due to unique political and economic constraints. Politically, Thailand’s centralized governance structure could limit the effectiveness of decentralized models like Germany’s, which rely on strong local engagement and public participation. Additionally, the country’s energy policy environment has historically been shaped by vested interests in fossil fuels, which may resist the adoption of extensive renewable initiatives. Economically, Thailand’s ability to fund large-scale renewable projects, like those in Germany or Japan, may be limited by budgetary constraints and competing financial priorities. The high upfront costs of renewable infrastructure, coupled with the need for substantial subsidies and incentives, may strain national resources, particularly in a developing economy. These limitations underscore the need for Thailand to adapt international models thoughtfully, emphasizing gradual and regionally specific strategies that align with its socio-economic context.

4.6. Strategic Policy Recommendations

To address the challenges and barriers in Thailand’s energy transition, a multi-faceted approach involving policy enhancements, economic incentives, technological advancements, and public engagement is essential. The following recommendations are derived from analyses of five case studies.

4.6.1. Policy and Regulatory Framework Enhancements

Establishing comprehensive and consistent energy policies is crucial for driving the transition to a sustainable energy system. These policies must integrate environmental, social, and economic objectives to ensure balanced progress. A well-designed policy framework can promote renewable energy adoption and conservation practices, which are vital for combating climate change and resource depletion. Effective policies should address environmental protection, social equity, and economic development holistically. For example, provisions could include job creation in renewable energy sectors, subsidies for low-income households to adopt energy-efficient technologies, and stringent regulations to reduce carbon emissions. Incentives like tax credits or grants can accelerate investment in renewable energy, while regulations mandating energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances can promote conservation efforts.

Thailand can improve renewable project efficiency by creating regional energy councils under the Ministry of Energy. These councils would enable localized decision-making for projects under 50 MW, improving responsiveness to community needs while reducing delays. Each council would include stakeholders from local governments, industry, and the community, enhancing transparency and accountability. The Network Governance Theory underscores the importance of such multi-stakeholder councils, which facilitate collaboration and decentralized governance. For example, a Northern Thailand Energy Council could oversee solar and biomass projects in Chiang Mai, tailoring energy policies to meet local needs while streamlining approvals. This model reflects elements of Germany’s Energiewende, where local governments play a critical role in renewable project implementation.

A one-stop approval agency could further streamline Thailand’s renewable energy projects by consolidating permits and regulatory processes under a single entity. This agency, working with environmental and energy regulatory bodies, would expedite project approvals by coordinating all necessary permits. Similar agencies in Singapore have demonstrated reduced approval times, making renewable investments more attractive by minimizing red tape. Establishing a centralized approval body would support Thailand’s energy goals by reducing the time required to launch projects, providing a clearer pathway for renewable investors, and enhancing regulatory coherence.

4.6.2. Economic and Financial Strategies

Financial incentives and subsidies play a critical role in promoting renewable energy by mitigating initial costs and risks that deter investment. Tax credits, grants, and low-interest loans reduce upfront costs, while subsidies make renewable energy competitive with fossil fuels by lowering production costs. These measures enhance the financial attractiveness of renewable energy projects.

To promote renewable energy adoption in rural areas, Thailand could implement targeted Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs) with an incremental approach for small-scale solar and biomass projects. By offering higher tariffs for solar and biomass projects in these areas, Thailand can attract private sector interest and support local economies. This approach aligns with the Integrated National Energy Planning (INEP) framework, which emphasizes equitable economic benefits across regions. FiTs could be set higher for projects in regions with substantial solar exposure or agricultural by-products, for instance in the northeastern region, thus attracting investment while promoting local ownership. Studies indicate that rural FiTs can create local jobs and foster economic development by circulating energy revenue within communities. Additionally, tariffs could be adjusted based on project location and renewable technology, ensuring incentives align with regional strengths, such as higher tariffs for biomass projects in agricultural areas where crop waste is abundant. A pilot program could offer enhanced FiTs for solar installations under 10 MW, run by community cooperatives. These projects could not only address local energy needs but also generate steady revenue for the community, fostering self-sufficiency and reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels.

Access to affordable financing is essential for Thailand to scale up renewable energy, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in rural areas. Implementing a scheme similar to Malaysia’s Green Technology Financing Scheme (GTFS) could lower the financial barriers for SMEs by providing low-interest loans, partial loan guarantees, or interest rate rebates. Malaysia’s GTFS has successfully enabled renewable projects across the country by mitigating financial risks for businesses. Thailand could adapt this model of flexible loan terms to support SMEs in regions with renewable potential, such as in agricultural provinces suited for biomass projects. By partnering with state-owned banks, Thailand could offer favorable loan terms that incentivize local businesses to invest in renewable energy. This financing model could also prioritize community-owned projects, allowing rural communities to become stakeholders in their local energy production.

For large-scale projects, Thailand could develop a public–private partnership (PPP) fund with ASEAN co-funding, which would allow for the pooling of resources from both public and private sectors across the ASEAN region. A regional PPP fund would enable Thailand to pursue ambitious projects such as cross-border solar and wind farms, enhancing both energy security and regional cooperation. Germany’s Energiewende and Singapore’s PPP models illustrate the effectiveness of these collaborative funding mechanisms. Thailand could work with countries like Laos and Cambodia to develop solar energy corridors, co-financing infrastructure projects that benefit multiple countries. Through ASEAN collaboration, Thailand can leverage regional expertise and share costs while advancing its energy transition goals and strengthening regional energy networks. Similarly, energy-efficiency standards reduce energy consumption, indirectly boosting demand for cleaner energy sources and encouraging innovation. By positioning itself as a regional renewable energy hub, Thailand can attract foreign investment and strengthen its role in ASEAN’s energy landscape.

To further attract private investment, Thailand could introduce renewable energy investment tax credits, which would allow companies to offset a portion of their renewable project costs against their tax liabilities. By offering higher credits for solar and biomass projects that directly replace fossil-fuel processes, Thailand would align incentives with its energy security goals. Additionally, to address potential policy inconsistencies, the tax credits could be structured as multi-year commitments, guaranteeing businesses a set level of credits over a defined period. Thailand’s adaptation could focus on underserved regions by offering tax credits for projects in areas with high solar and wind potential, such as Chachoengsao or Songkhla. Moreover, implementing a progressive credit system, which increases tax credits for businesses that meet specified renewable energy milestones, could encourage continual investment in renewable technology upgrades. By providing tax incentives, Thailand can draw in foreign direct investment (FDI) and encourage domestic companies to expand their renewable energy portfolios. This tax credit program could also incorporate local employment targets, ensuring that projects contribute to both energy goals and local economic development.

Issuing green bonds earmarked for renewable energy projects would allow Thailand to attract international and institutional investors interested in sustainable financing. Singapore’s issuance of green bonds has successfully attracted global investors to fund large-scale projects. Thailand could follow suit by issuing green bonds for specific renewable projects, such as solar farms in the Eastern Economic Corridor or wind farms in coastal areas. By collaborating with ASEAN financial institutions, Thailand could make these green bonds appealing to investors focused on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals, potentially lowering borrowing costs. These bonds could include tax exemptions or enhanced yields for investors who reinvest in Thailand’s renewable sector, creating a virtuous cycle of funding for green infrastructure. To further address initial high costs, Thailand could partner with ASEAN institutions to guarantee part of the bond’s value, making it more appealing to ESG-focused investors who prioritize sustainable returns.

Finally, to foster local support for renewable energy, Thailand could implement subsidies for community-owned renewable energy projects. Community ownership models, as seen in Australia’s community solar programs, allow rural residents to co-own solar installations and benefit financially. By providing upfront subsidies covering up to 50% of project costs, paired with low-interest loans for the remaining expenses, communities can invest in solar, biomass, or small-scale hydropower projects without bearing prohibitive financial risks. Thailand could create a subsidy program for community-owned solar and biomass projects in off-grid areas like Mae Hong Son. These subsidies would help residents receive dividends or electricity bill credits, reinforcing local buy-in and creating economic opportunities. A community energy program could be managed by the Ministry of Energy and could include training initiatives to ensure local capacity for long-term project sustainability.

4.6.3. Technological and Infrastructure Development

Investment in research and development (R&D) for renewable technologies is key to advancing clean energy. Prioritizing R&D can improve the efficiency of solar panels, wind turbines, and other systems, making them more affordable and effective. Infrastructure development is equally important for reliability and resilience, including transmission lines, substations, and energy storage facilities. To enhance energy reliability and energy access in remote regions, as well as to manage renewable intermittency, Thailand could adopt a phased deployment of smart microgrids that could utilize solar power, particularly in areas with high solar potential like the northeast, supported by battery storage systems, to ensure consistent supply even in isolated locations. This phased approach will allow Thailand to manage upfront costs and refine the technology in a practical context before scaling up. By partnering with the private sector for funding and technology, Thailand could establish flexible microgrid solutions capable of integrating additional renewable sources, like biomass, as needed.

Expanding renewable energy access through community solar programs, co-funded by local governments and private partners, can further encourage adoption in rural areas. These programs would empower communities to install solar panels on public buildings such as schools and community centers, providing local access to clean, affordable energy. Australia’s community solar initiatives highlight the potential for co-ownership models to drive local support and engagement. In areas like Chachoengsao and Chiang Rai, Thailand could pilot community solar farms with initial government grants covering installation costs. Private sector partners could also benefit from tax incentives and branding opportunities for their involvement, while community stakeholders would benefit from reduced electricity costs. Such projects could integrate with local agricultural operations, enabling multi-functional land use where crops and solar panels coexist harmoniously while maximizing land utility. By promoting local ownership, Thailand would not only diversify its energy mix but also build public support for renewable energy.

To support increased renewable energy deployment, Thailand should put more emphasis on grid modernization with smart technologies, implementing advanced management systems, including smart meters, sensors, and real-time data analytics. These technologies are essential for managing the variability of solar and wind energy while maintaining grid stability. Singapore’s smart grid infrastructure offers a practical example, using data-driven approaches to maintain efficiency. Thailand could begin with urban centers like Bangkok, gradually expanding smart grid technologies to suburban and rural areas. Additionally, introducing a grid flexibility incentive program would encourage large energy consumers to align their usage patterns with renewable generation, further stabilizing the grid and promoting efficient resource use.

Moreover, investment in energy storage technologies is crucial to manage the intermittency associated with renewable sources. Battery storage systems can store excess energy from solar or wind, releasing it when demand is high or renewable generation is low. Germany’s adoption of battery storage alongside its renewable projects highlights the importance of this technology for ensuring a steady supply. Thailand could start with pilot storage projects in high-potential areas like the wind farms in Nakhon Ratchasima and the solar installations in Prachuap Khiri Khan. The government could attract investment in storage by offering tax credits and supporting public–private partnerships where private operators manage storage facilities with government backing. This approach would help ensure grid reliability while advancing Thailand’s renewable energy goals.

To optimize energy production across diverse regions, hybrid renewable systems, which combine solar, wind, and biomass, could provide a balanced, reliable energy supply. Japan’s experience with hybrid systems showcases how combining multiple renewables can maximize output and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. Thailand could implement hybrid systems in regions where renewable resources vary, such as solar and biomass in the agricultural north. Establishing hybrid energy development zones, with specific incentives for projects that integrate multiple renewable technologies, would promote innovation and allow Thailand to tailor its energy infrastructure to regional strengths.

Lastly, Thailand should invest in research and development (R&D) for localized renewable technologies to develop solutions suited to its specific climate and needs. By collaborating with universities, research institutions, and international partners, Thailand could focus on innovations like high-efficiency solar panels or small-scale hydropower suited for rural areas. Malaysia’s focus on renewable R&D illustrates the value of developing locally adapted technologies that enhance project feasibility and cost-effectiveness. Thailand could establish a national renewable energy research fund managed by the Ministry of Energy to support local R&D initiatives. By providing tax credits for private companies partnering with Thai universities, the government can foster a robust renewable technology sector that strengthens domestic capacity and drives sustainable growth.

4.6.4. Public Engagement and Awareness Programs

Public acceptance of renewable energy is critical to the success of energy transition policies. Campaigns educating the public on the benefits of renewable energy can create a supportive environment for policy initiatives. Stakeholder engagement is also crucial, ensuring local communities, industry stakeholders, and policymakers participate in discussions, fostering trust and collaboration. Community-owned solar or wind projects can enhance public support by providing local economic benefits and fostering a sense of responsibility toward sustainable practices.

Public engagement and community benefit schemes provide an effective way to align renewable projects with local development goals. To foster widespread public support for renewable energy, Thailand could introduce community benefit schemes that reinvest a portion of revenue from renewable projects into local services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure. These schemes would ensure that communities hosting renewable projects directly benefit, building goodwill and promoting public acceptance. Germany’s Energiewende initiative shows how community benefit models can strengthen local ties and gain public support. By reinvesting a portion of revenue from renewable projects into local services, Thailand can demonstrate that renewables directly benefit communities. For example, a wind farm could allocate 5–10% of its revenue to fund school infrastructure and health clinics, fostering public acceptance and reducing opposition. This approach aligns renewable projects with community priorities and demonstrates the positive local impact of renewable energy development.

Creating a renewable energy ambassador program would help increase public awareness of the benefits of renewables and further enhance public engagement by training local leaders to advocate for renewable energy. Under this program, local leaders and NGO representatives could receive training from the Ministry of Energy to educate their communities. These ambassadors could host workshops, distribute informational materials, and address community concerns in accessible, relatable terms. By highlighting cost savings, environmental benefits, and energy independence, ambassadors could help foster a pro-renewable mindset in rural communities. Given Thailand’s need to improve renewable literacy in rural areas, such a program could be tailored to rural provinces, where ambassadors would work directly with communities to build awareness and support for renewable energy projects. Ambassadors in rural provinces like Ubon Ratchathani could hold town hall meetings to explain the benefits and logistics of local renewable initiatives, answer questions, and share success stories from similar projects worldwide. By empowering trusted community figures, this program would make renewable energy more approachable and address any misconceptions or resistance at a grassroots level.

In addition, educational programs integrated into school curriculums, community workshops, and seminars can increase understanding of renewable technologies, their environmental benefits, and their role in enhancing energy security. For instance, to build a foundation for renewable energy awareness, Thailand could implement sustainability education programs in schools. These programs would incorporate renewable energy topics into the curriculum, engaging students with hands-on activities and interactive lessons on sustainability and climate change. Japan’s environmental education initiatives provide a practical model, integrating sustainability education into schools to cultivate environmental responsibility from an early age. Thailand could adapt this approach by introducing renewable energy clubs and competitions where students participate in projects such as building small-scale solar devices or designing sustainable communities. By involving young people, Thailand can foster a generation that values renewable energy and understands its role in addressing climate challenges.

Furthermore, public awareness campaigns focused on renewable energy’s benefits could be rolled out through social media, public events, and partnerships with local businesses where targeted campaigns can engage the public and promote sustainable practices. Thailand could collaborate with local businesses to introduce “eco-friendly” certifications for shops, restaurants, and hotels that commit to renewable energy or sustainability practices. Public events could feature renewable technology demonstrations, interactive exhibits, and panel discussions with experts. By making these campaigns visible and accessible, Thailand can build momentum for renewable energy and encourage public participation in the energy transition.

The case studies also provide valuable insights into successful public awareness campaigns that Thailand could adopt. For instance, Germany’s Energiewende employed comprehensive public campaigns, including informational sessions, community meetings, and interactive exhibits to educate citizens about the benefits of renewable energy and to address common concerns. Japan, following the Fukushima disaster, launched widespread public outreach efforts to rebuild trust in renewable energy, utilizing media, workshops, and collaboration with local governments to inform citizens about renewable safety and environmental benefits. In Australia, initiatives such as the ‘Solar Citizens’ campaign used social media and public events to promote renewable energy and advocate for supportive policies, reaching diverse audiences and encouraging grassroots support. Adapting similar approaches, Thailand could deploy a combination of media outreach, community-led workshops, and educational events to foster a positive perception of renewable energy, particularly in rural areas where understanding of these technologies may be limited.

Thailand could also establish community renewable energy cooperatives that allow residents to invest in and co-own local renewable energy projects. This model empowers communities to take an active role in their energy future, with members receiving dividends or electricity bill credits based on project performance. For example, solar cooperatives in agricultural regions like Chiang Mai could enable farmers and residents to collectively own and benefit from solar installations by sharing both the financial rewards and responsibilities. By supporting local ownership, Thailand can foster a sense of pride and ownership in renewable projects, aligning energy initiatives with community interests and promoting sustained public support. By addressing these key areas—policy and regulatory framework, economic incentives, technological development, and public engagement—Thailand can build a strong foundation for the successful implementation of its renewable energy policies.

To effectively translate policy recommendations into a comprehensive action plan, it is essential to move from broad thematic strategies to a structured timeline that prioritizes achievable, targeted goals. By organizing the recommendations into short-term and long-term actions, the plan shown in

Table 4. Proposed action plan for Thailand’s energy transition.

Time Frame	Action	Description
Short-term actions (1–3 years)	Establish regional (provincial) energy councils	Create councils under the Ministry of Energy for localized decision-making on renewable projects under 50 MW, with stakeholders from local governments, industry, and communities to ensure faster approvals and stronger community engagement
	Pilot community-owned renewable projects	Launch pilot solar and biomass projects in rural areas with subsidies covering 50% of initial costs to address local energy needs and foster economic development and community ownership
	Implement targeted Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs)	Introduce FiTs with higher rates for renewable projects in underserved regions, adjusting rates based on project location and technology to attract investment, particularly in high-potential areas, i.e., the northeast
	Establish a one-stop approval agency	Create a centralized agency to streamline the approval process for renewable projects by coordinating with environmental and regulatory bodies to reduce bureaucracy and expedite project timelines
	Renewable energy awareness campaigns	Initiate a public education campaign on renewable energy benefits, targeting rural areas and community leaders through workshops, media, and partnerships with local influencers to promote a supportive mindset toward renewables
Long-term actions (4–10 years)	Scale up decentralized renewable systems	Expand community-owned renewable cooperatives and microgrids in regions with strong renewable potential Aim for community cooperatives to supply at least 20% of the region’s energy needs by Year 10
	Public–private partnership (PPP) fund for regional projects	Develop a regional PPP fund co-financed by ASEAN for cross-border projects, such as solar and wind corridors, to foster cooperation with Laos, Cambodia, and neighboring countries, enhancing regional energy security
	Introduce green bonds for large-scale renewables	Issue green bonds for large-scale renewable projects, offering tax exemptions for ESG-focused investors Focus on supporting projects in the Eastern Economic Corridor, such as wind and solar farms in Chachoengsao and Songkhla
	Grid modernization and smart infrastructure	Invest in smart grid technologies in high-demand urban centers like Bangkok, with gradual expansion to suburban and rural areas Use real-time data systems to manage renewable energy integration and optimize energy distribution
	Develop hybrid renewable energy zones	Establish zones integrating solar, wind, and biomass energy in regions with diverse renewable resources Provide incentives for projects that combine multiple renewable technologies to enhance energy output and reliability

presents a practical pathway to implementation, allowing Thailand to address immediate challenges while laying the groundwork for sustainable, long-term progress. The short-term actions emphasize foundational steps—such as establishing regional energy councils, piloting community-owned projects, and implementing targeted policies like Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs)—that build local capacity and regulatory efficiency. Meanwhile, the long-term actions focus on scaling and integrating these initial efforts into broader initiatives, including decentralized renewable systems, regional partnerships, and advanced infrastructure, to ensure Thailand’s energy transition is resilient and adaptive to future needs. This dual approach provides a clear, measurable framework to implement the thematic policy recommendations within practical time horizons, ensuring that each action aligns with Thailand’s socio-economic and energy objectives.

5. Conclusions

This research aims to explore how Thailand should strategize its policy planning and public engagement to facilitate a smooth energy transition toward a low-carbon system. To address this, a comparative analysis of five countries—Germany, Japan, Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore—provides insights into successful energy transition strategies. An analytical framework was designed to investigate fossil fuel phase-out strategies, policy planning for decarbonization, and public understanding approaches. This framework employs Integrated National Energy Planning (INEP) as well as Network Governance Theory to develop referent policy guidelines for Thailand’s energy transition.

Findings highlight the importance of clear, coherent policy frameworks integrating energy security, equity, and sustainability. Key findings include the importance of clear and coherent policy frameworks that integrate energy security, equity, and sustainability. Public engagement and stakeholder participation emerge as critical components, with successful transitions involving broad-based support and community involvement. Financial mechanisms and technological innovations are also pivotal, enabling countries to navigate the economic and technical challenges of energy transition. The study highlights that while each country’s approach is shaped by its unique context, shared strategies such as multi-level governance, public–private partnerships, and regional cooperation can significantly enhance the effectiveness of energy transition efforts.

For Thailand, the research highlights the need for comprehensive policy formulation with clear, long-term goals for renewable energy adoption, greenhouse gas reduction, and fossil fuel phase-out. Drawing on Germany’s Energiewende and Japan’s post-Fukushima reforms, the study highlights the value of ambitious yet achievable targets, robust legal frameworks, and inclusive stakeholder engagement. A tailored approach, balancing national priorities and the unique socio-economic landscape, is critical for Thailand’s energy transition. By learning from global experiences and adapting strategies to fit its context, Thailand can develop a resilient, sustainable energy strategy, ensuring long-term energy security and contributing to global climate efforts.

While this study provides valuable insights into Thailand’s energy transition strategy through comparative analysis and tailored recommendations, it has some limitations. The selection of five case study countries, while diverse, may not fully capture the range of global energy transition strategies, especially from emerging economies. Additionally, the reliance on qualitative data and thematic analysis offers depth but could be complemented by quantitative assessments in future research, such as cost–benefit analyses of specific policies. Finally, this study primarily addresses high-level policy recommendations, leaving room for future research to examine socio-political challenges at the community level and explore the integration of advanced technologies, such as energy storage and smart grids, to enhance Thailand’s energy infrastructure.