Conceptualising the Sustainable Energy Security Dimensions of Malaysia: A Thematic Analysis through Stakeholder Engagement to Draw Policy Implications
Abstract
:1. Introduction
Exploring the Concept of Securitisation of Energy through Copenhagen School Theory
2. Methods
2.1. Stages of Data Collection
2.2. Stakeholder Selection and Justification
2.3. Designing the Research Instrument
2.4. Grounded Theory Approach of Qualitative Data Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Survey
- Over-dependence on fossil fuel.
- Not moving towards self-sufficiency when it comes to energy production in own country or any source of clean energy technology.
- As of 2011, oil reserves are expected to last for the next 25 years and gas reserves for 39 years.
- The current power production and demand trends show that Malaysia has a reserve margin that will last only a few years. This calls for further investment, research, and development in the country’s power sector to meet the ever-increasing energy demand. The government’s diversification policy and power sector expansion plan emphasise the incorporation of renewable energy sources (RESs) and other less CO2 emitting sources like nuclear into the national energy mix.
- The primary energy demand growth rate is 6.3%. The latest import and export data for 2018 are collected from the Malaysia Energy Statistics Handbook 2020 [48].
- ⮚
- Petroleum Products: Import- 55.2% and Export-44.8%, hence net importer of petroleum products.
- ⮚
- Crude Oil: Import- 38.1%, Export- 61.9%; hence net exporter of crude oils.
- ⮚
- Coke and Coal: Import- 100%, Export-0%; hence all the coal is imported.
- ⮚
- Natural Gas: LNG Export- 75.6%, LNG Import- 4.0%, Piped Natural Gas Import- 16.3%, Piped Natural Gas Export- 4.1%; hence net exporter of LNG and net imported of piped NG.
- The final energy consumption growth rate between 2009–2019 was 3.1% and 2020—4.11 Exajoule (EJ), consumption by fuels only 0.04 EJ RES—0.18 EJ Hydro, Oil and Gas (1.38 EJ and 1.37), and coal 1.14 EJ [49].
- Total final energy consumption will rise from 59.88 Mtoe in 2017 to 177.18 Mtoe in 2050 under BAU, a 3.3% annual growth rate. Natural gas usage will have the best Average Annual Growth Rate (AAGR) of 3.7% to 2050. From 2017 to 2050, oil consumption will rise from 28.27 Mtoe to 82.17 Mtoe (a 3.3% annual increase), coal demand will rise 3.2% each year, and power demand will rise from 12.60 Mtoe to 34.23 Mtoe (a 3.2% annual increase) (an AAGR of 3.1%). Demand for alternative fuels, such as biodiesel, is anticipated to rise from 0.38 Mtoe to 0.53 Mtoe, representing a 1.0% annual growth rate [50].
3.2. Emerging Themes from the Semi-Structured Interviews
- Renewable Energy.
- Fossil Fuels.
- Applicability of Technology.
- 4 A’s of Energy Security.
- Environmental Sustainability.
- Economic Development.
- The Role of Governance.
3.2.1. Renewable Energy
3.2.2. Fossil Fuels
3.2.3. Applicability of Technology
3.2.4. The 4 A’s Dimensions of Energy Security
3.2.5. Environmental Sustainability
3.2.6. Economic Development
3.2.7. The Role of Governance
3.3. Implementation of the Securitisation Framework
- ⮚
- Securitising actors: The ministry of energy, energy commission of Malaysia, SEDA and other regulatory bodies that are directly in charge of the decision making of the energy policies of Malaysia.
- ⮚
- Referent objects: The dimensions and the themes of ES discussed in Section 3.2 can be classified into this category. However, not all the indicators within these dimensions are a part of this cluster, e.g., energy availability, energy price and affordability, the depletion of natural resources are some of the key referent objects that are existentially threatened and has the chance of regrouping and survival.
- ⮚
- Once the securitising actor has succeeded in convincing the relevant stakeholders engaged in this study and the essential bodies that a referent object is existentially threatened, they can proceed to the next stage. Only then can extraordinary measures be disposed of. This is followed by identifying the speech act.
- ⮚
- Speech Act: In this case, the speech act is the gap in ES policy within Malaysia’s energy policy structure. It is the discursive representation of the issue that can be identified as an existential threat to ES.
3.4. Indicator Mapping Process
4. Conclusions and Policy Implications
4.1. Energy Policy Implications
4.2. Recommendations from Malaysia’s Context
- The increase in the share of RE in the TPES and power generation will be the key in deciding whether there will be a reduction in the dependency on fossil fuels as the only form of energy source.
- The successful implementation of the objectives mentioned in the policy documents, including the most recent “REPORT ON PENINSULAR MALAYSIA GENERATION DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2020 (2021–2039)” by Energy Commission Malaysia, (2020) will be vital towards shaping a sustainable future for Malaysia. Most of the energy policies in place need to achieve their targets at the same time to make sure that ES challenges are mitigated.
- Environmental sustainability needs to be at the forefront of the energy trilemma if ES is to be improved.
- The ESI needs to be developed following the indicator mapping process explained in Section 3.4 and the dimension selection process from the emerging themes to ensure that the term ES can be quantified to reflect upon the overall performance over a period.
- A combination of qualitative (stakeholder engagement and survey) and quantitative (ESI development) analysis needs to be carried out in parallel to ensure that the data generated are validated throughout the process. A futuristic approach of system dynamic modelling of the dimensions and different ES scenarios can also be studied, as carried out by S. Shadman et al., (2021) [16] to develop a causal relationship between indicators and dimensions.
- An overall gap assessment is recommended for the current body of work on ES for Malaysia. This assessment requires a collaborative effort between stakeholders who are in the decision-making position for ES policies with ES researchers to create a framework that involves both qualitative and quantitative assessment of ES. The current gap has been identified to be the depth of research and engagement with experts to identify the dimensions of ES, which this research has tried to fulfil successfully and with depth in research and the methods.
4.3. Recommendations from a Global Context
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
Appendix A
References
- Dincer, I.; Rosen, M.A. A worldwide perspective on energy, environment and sustainable development. Int. J. Energy Res. 1998, 22, 1305–1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, D.; Tewary, T. Techno-economic assessment and optimization of a standalone residential hybrid energy system for sustainable energy utilization. Int. J. Energy Res. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.E.; Mokhtar, M.; Mohd Hanafiah, M.; Abdul Halim, A.; Badusah, J. Rainwater harvesting as an alternative water resource in Malaysia: Potential, policies and development. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 126, 218–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashari, H. Energy Security, Energy Efficiency, and Energy Dialogue; Parliment of Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2013; p. 26. [Google Scholar]
- Winzer, C. Conceptualizing Energy Security. Energy Policy 2012, 46, 36–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Azzuni, A.; Breyer, C. Definitions and dimensions of energy security: A literature review. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Energy Environ. 2018, 7, 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shepard, J.U.; Pratson, L.F. Hybrid input-output analysis of embodied energy security. Appl. Energy 2020, 279, 115806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tongsopit, S.; Kittner, N.; Chang, Y.; Aksornkij, A.; Wangjiraniran, W. Energy security in ASEAN: A quantitative approach for sustainable energy policy. Energy Policy 2016, 90, 60–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kucharski, J.; Unesaki, H. A Policy-oriented Approach to Energy Security. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2015, 28, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kamyk, J.; Kot-Niewiadomska, A.; Galos, K. The criticality of crude oil for energy security: A case of Poland. Energy 2021, 220, 119707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nair, K.; Shadman, S.; Chin, C.M.M.; Sakundarini, N.; Hwa Yap, E.; Koyande, A. Developing a system dynamics model to study the impact of renewable energy in the short- and long-term energy security. Mater. Sci. Energy Technol. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dincer, I.; Acar, C. A review on clean energy solutions for better sustainability. Int. J. Energy Res. 2015, 39, 585–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Safari, A.; Das, N.; Langhelle, O.; Roy, J.; Assadi, M. Natural gas: A transition fuel for sustainable energy system transformation? Energy Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 1075–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zakaria, Z.; Kamarudin, S.K.; Wahid, K.A.A. Fuel cells as an advanced alternative energy source for the residential sector applications in Malaysia. Int. J. Energy Res. 2020, 45, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hosseini, S.E.; Abdul Wahid, M. The role of renewable and sustainable energy in the energy mix of Malaysia: A review. Int. J. Energy Res. 2014, 38, 1769–1792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ludin, N.A.; Mustafa, N.I.; Hanafiah, M.M.; Ibrahim, M.A.; Asri Mat Teridi, M.; Sepeai, S.; Zaharim, A.; Sopian, K. Prospects of life cycle assessment of renewable energy from solar photovoltaic technologies: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 96, 11–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shadman, S.; Chin, C.M.M.; Sakundarini, N.; Yap, E.H. Quantifying the Impact of Energy Shortage on Malaysia’s Energy Security Using a System Dynamics Approach; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 143–154. [Google Scholar]
- Dharfizi, A.D.H.; Ghani, A.B.A.; Islam, R. Evaluating Malaysia’s fuel diversification strategies 1981–2016. Energy Policy 2020, 137, 111083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, Z.W.; Goh, K.L. Natural gas industry transformation in Peninsular Malaysia: The journey towards a liberalised market. Energy Policy 2019, 128, 197–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Energy Commission Malaysia Report on Peninsular Generation Development Plan 2019; Energy Commission of Malaysia: Putrajaya, Malaysia, 2020; Volume 2019, p. 10.
- Yergin, D. Ensuring Energy Security. Foreign Aff. 2006, 85, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krupa, J. The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. AAG Rev. Books 2014, 2, 60–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gasser, P. A review on energy security indices to compare country performances. Energy Policy 2020, 139, 111339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahid, E.J.M. Energy security in Malaysia: A quantitative analysis. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 400–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sahid, E.J.M.; Siang, C.C.; Peng, L.Y. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science Enhancing energy security in Malayia: The challenges towards sustainable environment Enhancing energy security in Malayia: The challenges towards sustainable environment. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci 2013, 16, 12120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yusoff, N.Y.M.; Bekhet, H.A. Developing and evaluating the sustainable energy security index and its performance in Malaysia. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2020, 10, 444–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharifuddin, S. Methodology for quantitatively assessing the energy security of malaysia and other southeast asian countries. Energy Policy 2014, 65, 574–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foo, K.Y. A vision on the opportunities, policies and coping strategies for the energy security and green energy development in Malaysia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 1477–1498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khattak, M.A.; Lee, J.K.; Khairul, A.B.; Tan, X.H.; Amirul Syafiq, O.; Afiq Danial, A.R.; Lailatul Fitriyah, A.S.; Kazi, S. Global Energy Security and Malaysian Perspective: A Review. Prog. Energy Environ. 2018, 6, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Shadman, S.; Chin, C.M.M. The role of current and future renewable energy policies in fortifying Malaysia’ s energy security: PESTLE and SWOT analysis through stakeholder engagement. Prog. Energy Environ. 2021, 16, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- Securitization and State Encroachment on the Energy Sector: Politics of Exception in Poland’s Energy Governance—Science Direct. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519306536?via%3Dihub#bib67 (accessed on 14 October 2021).
- Szulecki, K. Securitization and state encroachment on the energy sector: Politics of exception in Poland’s energy governance. Energy Policy 2020, 136, 111066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wæver, O. Politics, security, theory. Secur. Dialogue 2011, 42, 465–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stritzel, H. (Ed.) Securitization Theory and the Copenhagen School BT—Security in Translation: Securitization Theory and the Localization of Threat; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2014; pp. 11–37. ISBN 978-1-137-30757-6. [Google Scholar]
- Emmers, R. Securitization. In Contemporary Security Studies; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Özcan, S. Securitization of Energy through the Lenses of Copenhagen School. West East J. Soc. Sci. 2013, 2, 57–72. [Google Scholar]
- Shadman, S.; Chin, C.M.M.; Sakundarini, N.; Yap, E.H.; Velautham, S. Methodological Review of Malaysia’s Energy Security Measurement: A Systems Approach using Stakeholder Engagement. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 1092, 012032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sovacool, B.K.; Drupady, I.M. Examining the small renewable energy power (SREP) program in Malaysia. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 7244–7256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mouraviev, N. Energy security in Kazakhstan: The consumers’ perspective. Energy Policy 2021, 155, 112343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fusch, P.I.; Ness, L.R. Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. Qual. Rep. 2015, 20, 1408–1416. [Google Scholar]
- Lillis, A.M. A framework for the analysis of interview data from multiple field research sites. Account. Financ. 1999, 39, 79–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turner, D.W. Qualitative interview design: A practical guide for novice investigators. Qual. Rep. 2010, 15, 754–760. [Google Scholar]
- Charmaz, K. Introducing qualitative methods. In Constructing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed.; Sage: London, UK, 2014; ISBN 9780857029133. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, P.; Luke, M.; Bellini, J. A Grounded Theory Analysis of Cultural Humility in Counseling and Counselor Education. Couns. Educ. Superv. 2021, 60, 73–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charmaz, K. Grounded Theory in Global Perspective: Reviews by International Researchers. Qual. Inq. 2014, 20, 1074–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chun Tie, Y.; Birks, M.; Francis, K. Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. SAGE Open Med. 2019, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hesse-Biber, S.N.; Leavy, P. Approaches to Qualitative Research: A Reader on Theory and Practice; Hesse-Biber, S.N., Leavy, P., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2004; ISBN 0195157753. [Google Scholar]
- Energy Comission Malaysia Malaysia Energy Statistics Handbook. Available online: https://www.st.gov.my/en/contents/files/download/116/Malaysia_Energy_Statistics_Handbook_20201.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2021).
- Looney, B. Statistical Review of World Energy globally consistent data on world energy markets. and authoritative publications in the field of energy. Rev. World Energy Data 2021, 70, 8–20. [Google Scholar]
- Zulkifli, Z. Malaysia Country Report. In Proceedings of the 17 th AsiaConstruct Conference; 2021; pp. 170–190. Available online: https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiOg8CVv-zzAhWsF6YKHUsfBOgQFnoECBAQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eria.org%2Fuploads%2Fmedia%2FBooks%2F2021-Energy-Outlook-and-Saving-Potential-East-Asia-2020%2F18_Ch.11-Malaysia.pdf&usg=AOvVaw02r9wDaB8c0Uz1nQxv2GPx (accessed on 20 October 2021).
- Journal, I. Skype interviewing: The new generation of online synchronous interview in qualitative research. Qual. Res. 2014, 1, 9–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acar, C. A comprehensive evaluation of energy storage options for better sustainability. Int. J. Energy Res. 2018, 42, 3732–3746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaya, F.; Şahin, G.; Alma, M.H. Investigation effects of environmental and operating factors on PV panel efficiency using by multivariate linear regression. Int. J. Energy Res. 2021, 45, 554–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olatomiwa, L.; Mekhilef, S.; Huda, A.S.N.; Sanusi, K. Techno-economic analysis of hybrid PV–diesel–battery and PV–wind–diesel–battery power systems for mobile BTS: The way forward for rural development. Energy Sci. Eng. 2015, 3, 271–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vaka, M.; Walvekar, R.; Rasheed, A.K.; Khalid, M. A review on Malaysia’s solar energy pathway towards carbon-neutral Malaysia beyond Covid’19 pandemic. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 122834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, J.H.; Alameri, S.A. Harmonizing nuclear and renewable energy: Case studies. Int. J. Energy Res. 2020, 44, 8053–8061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kardooni, R.; Yusoff, S.B.; Kari, F.B. Renewable energy technology acceptance in Peninsular Malaysia. Energy Policy 2016, 88, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sabry, A.H.; Hasan, W.Z.W.; Sabri, Y.H.; Ab-Kadir, M.Z.A. Silicon PV module fitting equations based on experimental measurements. Energy Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 132–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fadaeenejad, M.; Radzi, M.A.M.; Fadaeenejad, M.; Zarif, M.; Gandomi, Z. Optimization and comparison analysis for application of PV panels in three villages. Energy Sci. Eng. 2015, 3, 145–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Izzah, N.; Aziz, H.A.; Hanafiah, M.M. Contents List available at RAZI Publishing the potential of palm oil mill effluent (pome) as a renewable energy. Acta Sci. Malaysia 2017, 1, 9–11. [Google Scholar]
- Hanafiah, M.M.; Huijbregts, M.A.J.; Hendriks, A.J. The Influence of Nutrients and Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the Ecological Footprint of Products. Sustainability 2010, 2, 963–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zakaria, Z.; Kamarudin, S.K.; Abd Wahid, K.A.; Abu Hassan, S.H. The progress of fuel cell for malaysian residential consumption: Energy status and prospects to introduction as a renewable power generation system. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 144, 110984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hannan, M.A.; Begum, R.A.; Abdolrasol, M.G.; Hossain Lipu, M.S.; Mohamed, A.; Rashid, M.M. Review of baseline studies on energy policies and indicators in Malaysia for future sustainable energy development. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 94, 551–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sutrisno, A.; Nomaler, Ӧ.; Alkemade, F. Has the global expansion of energy markets truly improved energy security? Energy Policy 2021, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salehi, A.A.; Ghannadi-Maragheh, M.; Torab-Mostaedi, M.; Torkaman, R.; Asadollahzadeh, M. An overview of sustainable energy development by using cogeneration technology and opportunity for improving process. Int. J. Energy Res. 2020, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pronińska, K.; Księżopolski, K. Baltic Offshore Wind Energy Development—Poland’s Public Policy Tools Analysis and the Geostrategic Implications. Energies 2021, 14, 4883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Şen, Z. Innovative methodologies in renewable energy: A review. Int. J. Energy Res. 2019, 43, 5621–5658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yildiz, I. Review of climate change issues: A forcing function perspective in agricultural and energy innovation. Int. J. Energy Res. 2019, 43, 2200–2215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, V.; Dincer, I.; Rosen, M.A. Investigation of new mechanical heat pump systems for heat upgrading applications. Int. J. Energy Res. 2018, 42, 3078–3090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szulecki, K. When Energy Becomes Security: Copenhagen School Meets Energy Studies. Utkast Present. Danish Inst. Int. Stud. 2016, 1–29. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kacper-Szulecki/project/When-energy-becomes-security-The-Copenhagen-School-meets-energy-studies/attachment/583ebaa108aef5af880132f7/AS:434087853858816@1480506017192/download/Szulecki+Energy+Securitization+COPENHAGEN+Jun2016.pdf?context=ProjectUpdatesLog (accessed on 20 October 2021).
- McDonald, M. Securitization and the Construction of Security. Eur. J. Int. Relat. 2008, 14, 563–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Balzacq, T. The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency, Audience and Context. Eur. J. Int. Relat. 2005, 11, 171–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stritzel, H. Towards a Theory of Securitization: Copenhagen and Beyond. Eur. J. Int. Relat. 2007, 13, 357–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balzacq, T. Securitization Theory: How Security Problems Emerge and Dissolve. Available online: http://www.onacademic.com/detail/journal_1000039846514510_381d.html (accessed on 1 October 2021).
- Park, H.; Bae, S. Quantitative Assessment of Energy Supply Security: Korea Case Study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahid, E.J.M.; Sin, T.C. Energy security in ASEAN region: A case study of Malaysia energy security performance with renewable energy implementation. J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci. 2019, 61, 190–201. [Google Scholar]
- Malik, S.; Qasim, M.; Saeed, H.; Chang, Y.; Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. Energy security in Pakistan: Perspectives and policy implications from a quantitative analysis. Energy Policy 2020, 144, 111552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yao, L.; Chang, Y. Energy security in China: A quantitative analysis and policy implications. Energy Policy 2014, 67, 595–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdullah, F.B.; Iqbal, R.; Hyder, S.I.; Jawaid, M. Energy security indicators for Pakistan: An integrated approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 133, 110122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martchamadol, J.; Kumar, S. An aggregated energy security performance indicator. Appl. Energy 2013, 103, 653–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kruyt, B.; van Vuuren, D.P.; de Vries, H.J.M.; Groenenberg, H. Indicators for energy security. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 2166–2181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erahman, Q.F.; Purwanto, W.W.; Sudibandriyo, M.; Hidayatno, A. An assessment of Indonesia’s energy security index and comparison with seventy countries. Energy 2016, 111, 364–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, D.; Shi, S.; Yu, Q. Evaluation of sustainable energy security and an empirical analysis of China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ang, B.W.; Choong, W.L.; Ng, T.S. A framework for evaluating Singapore’ s energy security. Appl. Energy 2015, 148, 314–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sovacool, B.K.; Mukherjee, I.; Drupady, I.M.; D’Agostino, A.L. Evaluating energy security performance from 1990 to 2010 for eighteen countries. Energy 2011, 36, 5846–5853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sovacool, B.K. Assessing energy security performance in the Asia Pacific, 1990-2010. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 17, 228–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, G.; Liu, L.C.; Han, Z.Y.; Wei, Y.M. Climate protection and China’s energy security: Win-win or tradeoff. Appl. Energy 2012, 97, 157–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, D.; Tian, S.; Fang, L.; Xu, Y. A functional index model for dynamically evaluating China’s energy security. Energy Policy 2020, 147, 111706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Zhou, K. A framework for evaluating global national energy security. Appl. Energy 2017, 188, 19–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Source | Definition |
---|---|
[6] | “Feature (measure, situation, or status) in which a related system functions optimally and sustainably in all its dimensions, freely from any threats.” |
[7] | “ES not only relies on the global flow of primary and secondary energies but also on the trade of goods and services produced using energy.” |
[8] | “Enough energy supply (quality and quantity) to meet all requirements at all times of all citizens in affordable and stable price, and it also leads to sustained economic performance and poverty alleviation, a better quality of life without harming the environment.” |
[9] | “Assessing various types of risk in the energy system.” |
[10] | “The energy supply to a nation must be adequate and reliable, and energy prices must be affordable to the population.” |
[11] | “Sufficient availability of energy at all times at an affordable price to ensure consumer satisfaction coupled with a gradual improvement in environmental sustainability to ensure better ES.” |
Sampling | Instrument/Tool | Data Collection Procedure |
---|---|---|
Selection of stakeholders and interviewees from government organisations, private sector, and research institutions. | Designing Semi-Structured Questions for Interview of stakeholder Quantitative data collection from energy data and reports published in the public domain by the ministry and regulatory bodies. | Conducting Semi-Structured Interviews
Transcription of the interviews that were recorded. |
Selection of survey participants from employees within the public and private energy sector in Malaysia | Google Survey with simple ES indicator-based true/false questionnaire. | Documentation of the overall survey results in the form of a percentage of true/false recorded. |
Stakeholder | Organisation |
---|---|
1 | Energy Commission, Malaysia |
2 | Energy Commission, Malaysia |
3 | Energy Studies Institute, National University of Singapore |
4 | UiTM Energy and Facilities and UiTM Solar Power, Malaysia |
5 | Energy Studies Institute, National University of Singapore |
6 | Saab-NTU Joint Lab, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore |
7 | Tenaga Nasional Berhad Malaysia |
8 | Agilent Technologies, Malaysia |
9 | University of Technology Sydney, Australia |
10 | Energy Studies Institute, National University of Singapore |
11 | Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia |
12 | Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia |
13 | Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, Malaysia |
14 | Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA), Malaysia |
15 | Tenaga Nasional Berhad Malaysia |
16 | Single Buyer, Malaysia |
Stakeholder Interview Questions | |
---|---|
1 | How would you define Energy security? |
2 | Why is it important for us to address Energy Security challenges and their impacts? |
3 | Is there any specific energy policy that addresses the Energy Security of your country? What more can be added to the existing policies to address the energy security of Malaysia? |
4 | Socio-economy, Environmental Sustainability, and Energy Availability are listed as 3 key dimensions of Energy security that we can name. Is there any other dimension that can be added and why? |
5 | Can you suggest ways to improve the Energy Security scenario and tackle the challenges of Malaysia and other ASEAN countries? |
6 | What are your thoughts on quantifying energy security using an energy security index and system dynamics modelling? What other ways can you suggest quantifying the energy security of Malaysia? |
Question 7: | |
---|---|
Cause: Increase in country’s unemployment | Effect: Decrease in energy consumption |
Agree: 55% | Disagree: 45% |
Question 26: | |
Cause: Decrease in environmental impact | Effect: Decrease in energy consumption |
Agree: 56.7% | Disagree: 43.3% |
Question 27: | |
Cause: Decrease in energy consumption | Effect: Decrease in renewable resources in the energy mix |
Agree: 53.3% | Disagree: 46.7% |
Indicators | [24] | [26] | [27] | [76] | [8] | [77] | [78] | [79] | [80] | [81] | [82] | [83] | [84] | [85,86] | [87] | [88] | [89] | SCORE (1–18) | SELECTION |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Primary energy supply per capita (TPES/pop) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 6 | Yes | |||||||||||
Electrification level | ✓ | ✓ | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
Net-import to consumption ratios (all energy sources) | ✓ | ✓ | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
Reserve/Production ratio (R/P) of oil | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 11 | Yes | ||||||
R/P of natural gas | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 11 | Yes | ||||||
R/P of coal | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 9 | Yes | ||||||||
Coal import dependency ratio | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 4 | ||||||||||||||
Oil import dependency ratio | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 5 | |||||||||||||
Total primary energy supply over GDP (TPES/GDP) | ✓ | ✓ | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
Energy self-sufficiency ratio | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 7 | Yes | ||||||||||
Fossil fuel primary consumption | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
Renewables Consumption (TWh) | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
Share of imports in coal, oil, and gas supply (%) | ✓ | ✓ | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
Availability factor of conventional thermal electricity | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
Availability factor of non-thermal electricity | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
Access to clean fuel (%) | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
Final Energy Consumption Per capita (TFEC/pop) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 5 | Yes | ||||||||||||
Resource Estimates or Reserves | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 4 | ||||||||||||||
Total primary energy production per capita (TPEP/pop) | ✓ | ✓ | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
TFEC/GDP | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
Fuel mix of TPES | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 3 | |||||||||||||||
Total Energy production/Total energy consumption | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
Diversification of energy supply | ✓ | 1 |
Year | Population (POP) (‘000 People) | Total Primary Energy Supply (ktoe) | Reserve of Crude Oil and Condensates (Billion Barrels) | Reserves of Natural Gas Trillion Standard Cubic Feet (TSCF) | Reserves of Coal in (Short Tons) | Production of Crude Oil (ktoe) | Production of Natural Gas (ktoe) | Production of Coal (ktoe) | Total Energy Production (Mtoe) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2006 | 26,550 | 67,021 | 5.254 | 87.95 | 34,386 | 65,752 | 569 | 92.23 | |
2007 | 27,058 | 72,389 | 4.316 | 88.925 | 198.42 | 33,967 | 64,559 | 576 | 92.04 |
2008 | 27,568 | 76,032 | 5.458 | 88.01 | 198.42 | 34,195 | 67,191 | 791 | 95.22 |
2009 | 28,082 | 74583 | 5.517 | 87.968 | 198.42 | 32,747 | 64,661 | 1348 | 88.76 |
2010 | 28,589 | 76809 | 5.799 | 88.587 | 198.42 | 32,163 | 71,543 | 1511 | 88.39 |
2011 | 29,062 | 79289 | 5.858 | 89.988 | 198.42 | 28,325 | 69,849 | 1838 | 86.83 |
2012 | 29,510 | 86,495 | 5.954 | 92.122 | 198.42 | 29,115 | 62,580 | 1860 | 86.04 |
2013 | 30,214 | 90,730 | 5.85 | 98.32 | 198.42 | 28,576 | 64,406 | 1824 | 91.75 |
2014 | 30,709 | 92,487 | 5.792 | 100.662 | 198.42 | 29,545 | 63,091 | 1694 | 93.44 |
2015 | 31,186 | 92677 | 5.907 | 100.413 | 198.42 | 32,440 | 67,209 | 1614 | 95.22 |
2016 | 31,634 | 96525 | 5.03 | 87.762 | 198.42 | 33,234 | 69,673 | 1522 | 96.41 |
2017 | 32,023 | 98298 | 4.727 | 82.897 | 198.42 | 32,807 | 71,140 | 1884 | 95.84 |
2018 | 32,382 | 99,873 | 98.25 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Shadman, S.; Hanafiah, M.M.; Chin, C.M.M.; Yap, E.H.; Sakundarini, N. Conceptualising the Sustainable Energy Security Dimensions of Malaysia: A Thematic Analysis through Stakeholder Engagement to Draw Policy Implications. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12027. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112027
Shadman S, Hanafiah MM, Chin CMM, Yap EH, Sakundarini N. Conceptualising the Sustainable Energy Security Dimensions of Malaysia: A Thematic Analysis through Stakeholder Engagement to Draw Policy Implications. Sustainability. 2021; 13(21):12027. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112027
Chicago/Turabian StyleShadman, Saleh, Marlia Mohd Hanafiah, Christina May May Chin, Eng Hwa Yap, and Novita Sakundarini. 2021. "Conceptualising the Sustainable Energy Security Dimensions of Malaysia: A Thematic Analysis through Stakeholder Engagement to Draw Policy Implications" Sustainability 13, no. 21: 12027. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112027
APA StyleShadman, S., Hanafiah, M. M., Chin, C. M. M., Yap, E. H., & Sakundarini, N. (2021). Conceptualising the Sustainable Energy Security Dimensions of Malaysia: A Thematic Analysis through Stakeholder Engagement to Draw Policy Implications. Sustainability, 13(21), 12027. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112027