Open Innovation for Green Transition in Energy Sector: A Literature Review

Abstract

The main objective of this article is to conduct a literature review on the use of open innovation (OI) for green transition to identify tools and methods that can make green transition more effective, efficient, and socially acceptable. This review is accompanied by an attempt to answer the following research questions: R1. How can open innovation be used in the economy and by individual entities to achieve the goals of the green transition? R2. How can individual stakeholders be activated and motivated to participate in the process of creating open innovation for the green transition? and R3. What are the real effects of using open innovation on a macroeconomic, social, and individual scale? The results allow concluding that OI is used by enterprises, cities, regions, and entire economies. Among the methods of activating and motivating individual stakeholders to engage in the process of creating OI for green transition, the following can be selected: (1) internal resources and competencies (knowledge management, internal programs, open leadership, trust, complementarity of resources); (2) partnership characteristics (modern business models, involvement of partnership intermediaries, strengthening relationships with suppliers and customers, involvement of prosumers, cooperation with universities and research institutions); (3) external legal and regulatory conditions (protection of intellectual property rights, pro-innovation and pro-environmental education systems, creation of a legal framework for cooperation between science and business); and (4) external technical and organizational solutions (online platforms, social media, Living Labs, external sources of knowledge). The most frequently mentioned individual effects of open innovation in the energy sector include: improved efficiency, effectiveness and competitiveness in environmental management and the implementation of sustainable development, as well as the use of modern technologies. At the economic level, OI supports investment and economic growth. It can also have a positive impact on reducing energy poverty and developing renewable energy sources, including in emerging economies. This form of innovation also promotes social integration and the creation of social values. The findings of this review can be utilized by scholars to identify current and future research directions. They may also prove valuable for practitioners as both an incentive to engage in open innovation and guidance for its design and implementation. Furthermore, the results can contribute to disseminating knowledge about open innovation and its role in the green transformation.

1. Introduction

Contemporary energy sector worldwide is influenced by two key socio-economic trends [1,2]. The first one is unfavorable climate change and the need to secure optimal living conditions for future generations, implemented within the concept of sustainable development [3,4]. The second relates to Industry 4.0 and 5.0, which involves the integration of digital technologies and industrial automation in cooperation with humans to improve the quality of life [5,6,7].

The interaction between these two trends is leading to a desirable and profound transition of the energy sector worldwide [8,9]. The transition is primarily reflected in the move away from traditional, non-renewable energy sources and their replacement with low-emission renewable sources [10,11]. The result of these changes is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ensure the continuity and long-term nature of energy supplies, which is difficult to contest or criticize.

Nevertheless, the green energy transition is a very difficult and complex challenge due to several circumstances [12,13]. The energy infrastructure in most economies has been adapted for many years to the production and distribution of energy from conventional energy sources. As a result, significant modernization of this infrastructure is extremely time-consuming and costly [6,14,15,16,17]. The green transition is also limited by the availability of renewable energy sources, which depends on climatic and geographical conditions [18,19]. Changes to energy systems very often give rise to public resistance and doubts, as they place a burden not only on the economy but also on all individual energy consumers, including businesses and households [20,21,22]. They also often generate additional costs and expenses for them, as well as the need for personal involvement in changing the energy system [23,24,25].

The green transition is particularly difficult in emerging and developing economies, which face many economic and social problems [26,27,28]. As a rule, they are manifested as lower levels of national and individual income and lower levels of environmental awareness than highly developed economies, which complicates the energy transition process due to insufficient financial resources and public resistance to any changes and burdens on already low incomes [29].

One of the few ways to solve transition problems and support green change and sustainable development is to constantly strive to improve innovation in the economy and the energy sector [30]. Innovation reduces the costs of introducing changes and shortens the time needed to implement them, which seems particularly important from the point of view of developing technologies for the use of non-renewable energy sources and climate protection [31,32,33].

Furthermore, the process of improving economic and individual innovation can be systematically strengthened by promoting open innovation in the energy sector, as openness increases the scope and speed of knowledge transfer [34,35,36]. It also multiplies the exchange of experience and involves many stakeholders in the creation of innovation. Furthermore, in the energy sector, it can also have a positive impact on the public perception of the green transition through the direct involvement of energy consumers in creating innovations for the energy sector [37].

Given the above arguments, the authors of this article decided to conduct a literature review on the use of open innovation for green transition in search of tools and ways to make green transition more effective, efficient, and acceptable to society. This review is accompanied by an attempt to answer the following research questions:

• R1. How can open innovation be used in the economy and by individual entities to achieve the goals of the green transition (increasing the use of renewable resources, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, modernizing conventional energy)?
• R2. How can specific stakeholder groups (including individual investors, institutional investors, corporations, and civic organizations) be motivated to participate in open innovation processes supporting green transition? And what financial instruments and mechanisms can support open innovation in the energy transition?
• R3. What are the real effects of using open innovation on a macroeconomic, social, and individual scale?

Obtaining and systematizing answers to the above questions is the main source of originality of the literature review conducted in this article. In particular, the contribution of the considerations presented here to the development of research on open innovation is manifested as follows:

• gathering existing knowledge and experience on the methodology of using open innovation in the green transition;
• holistic identification of ways to activate and motivate stakeholders to engage in the creation of open innovation in the energy sector;
• development of a comprehensive list of benefits of using open innovation in the green transition to promote this form of innovation.

To date, no comprehensive literature reviews have been conducted on the relationship between open innovation and energy transformation. These issues are also not addressed holistically in scholarly monographs and textbook publications. The identification and systematic review of research output in this area therefore encounter significant obstacles arising from the lack of systematization of research threads and the failure to recognize knowledge gaps. Consequently, the novelty of the literature review conducted by the authors lies primarily in the development of a synthetic compendium of knowledge concerning the role of open innovation in the pro-ecological transformation of the contemporary energy sector.

Furthermore, the authors categorize the analyzed content into three main research streams, encompassing, respectively: mechanisms for the effective application of open innovation in energy transformation, factors motivating the implementation of open innovation in the energy sector, and the outcomes of integrating the open innovation paradigm with the process of green energy transformation. This approach constitutes a novel, original, and empirically valuable set of recommendations for the scientific community and business practitioners, compiled in a single coherent and logically structured publication.

The novelty and scientific-practical value of the presented literature review results are also associated with the exposition of the interdisciplinary nature of contemporary research on open innovation in the energy sector. These analyses extend beyond strictly technical or organizational-legal issues, presenting a more holistic approach. They reveal the complexity of interactions between stakeholders and the socio-economic environment, addressing social, managerial, and economic issues. The consolidation of knowledge and experience in this area within a single publication serves as a reference point for multifaceted research and analyses in the future.

The rest of the article presents the research methodology adopted. Next, the results of the literature studies are described, with the logic of their presentation following the research questions above. The article concludes with a discussion identifying the main trends and research gaps in using open innovation in the green transition.

2. Materials and Methods

When systematizing the publications, the authors used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) method and qualitative text analysis (Figure 1). The methodology of literature studies, whose results are presented in this article, consisted of two stages. The first stage was quantitative and was carried out using VOSviewer version 1.6.20 software for constructing and visualizing bibliometric networks [38]. The second stage was qualitative and was based on the analysis of the content of previously selected publications.

In the quantitative stage, publications were selected from the Scopus database based on a query that included the title, abstract, and keywords and had the following form: TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Open Innovation” AND (“Energy” OR “Green Innovation” OR “Green Transition” OR “Energy Eco-Innovations”)). Therefore, for a publication to be included in the search set, it had to combine the priority topic of open innovation with issues related to green innovation and green energy transition. The search covered the last decade, i.e., the period from 2016 to 2025.

The keywords determining the effectiveness of the systematic literature review were selected based on two key criteria. The first criterion encompassed the thematic area of publications, focusing on two research streams: open innovation and energy. These terms were combined using the AND logical operator to eliminate publications addressing exclusively open innovation or exclusively energy issues. Furthermore, the authors aimed to narrow the research scope to analyses supporting energy transformation. For this purpose, a preliminary exploration of Scopus database search results was conducted, which revealed that additional terms such as green innovations, eco-innovations, and green transition appeared in publication titles, abstracts, and keywords. The identified terms were incorporated into the final search criteria, combining them using the OR logical operator.

The second criterion for defining keywords was based on the authors’ extensive publication and practical experience in the field of energy and energy transformation in Poland, as well as in open innovation. Familiarity with these issues and knowledge acquired through the analysis of numerous scientific publications enabled the authors to refine the conceptual apparatus used in the search process. It should be noted, however, that the authors are aware of potential methodological imperfections that may affect any research, which was identified as a research limitation in the section summarizing the conducted analyses.

The search conducted according to the presented methodology yielded 373 publications. The Scopus database included scientific articles, conference publications, as well as monographs and chapters in edited volumes.

Next, 31 titles were excluded from the sample because they were duplicates or referred to works edited by the authors, which were in fact collections of post-conference articles. As a result, 342 publications were selected for qualitative analysis, which was carried out by the authors based on an assessment of the content of the titles, abstracts, and keywords.

In the process of excluding successive articles from the research sample, the authors applied thematic and methodological criteria. Based on a qualitative review of the content, publications that addressed open innovation but had a very weak or indirect relationship with the energy sector were primarily excluded from further analysis. The final compilation also did not include publications that concerned energy transformation but only mentioned open innovation without it constituting an equivalent subject of analysis. Publications that were commentaries, reviews, or popular science content were also removed from the initial pool of publications.

Ultimately, 75 publications were selected for the literature review, mainly by removing the following references:

• those concerning sectors other than energy,
• those not directly related to the main line of reasoning, in which open innovation was only a side issue.

The selected publications were then subjected to a bibliometric evaluation considering:

• keyword links aimed at detailing research topics in the field of open green innovation in energy;
• number of citations, allowing the identification of topics that are most popular among scientists and researchers;
• country of origin of the publication, allowing the identification of geographical regions where research on open innovation is particularly intensive.

The final stage of the qualitative research was a review of publications in terms of the research questions formulated in the introduction, aimed at identifying the following:

• the circumstances of the use of open innovation in the green transition;
• tools and methods encouraging stakeholders to cooperate for the green transition;
• the effects of using open innovation in the green transition.

The rest of the article presenting the results of this literature study uses the structure corresponding to the stages of the research process described above.

3. Results

3.1. Bibliometric Analysis

As already mentioned, the bibliometric analysis assessed the links between keywords, identified the most cited publications, and determined the geographical regions where open innovation in energy is most popular.

Figure 2 visualizes the links between keywords used in the field of open innovation in energy.

Open innovation is most strongly correlated with terms such as sustainable development, sustainability, and green innovation. We can therefore conclude that this specific form of innovation supports efforts to improve the quality of life for current and future generations and is part of the process of stimulating environmental change.

In the context of energy, open innovation is associated with issues such as energy, energy management, energy economics, energy efficiency, renewable resources, energy conservation, and utilization. This classification indicates the usefulness of open innovation in organizing and coordinating the green transition, including efforts to increase the use of renewable energy sources in the economy. The relationships between the analyzed keywords also allow us to conclude that open innovation is created and implemented to improve energy efficiency. Therefore, the said keywords appear most often in the context of energy conservation and utilization.

The results presented in Figure 2 are also worth looking at from a subject perspective. Thus, green open innovation is associated with entities such as humans, stakeholders, living labs, managers, and ecosystems. This highlights the cooperative nature of open innovation and its social character, as well as its potential for use in managing the green transition.

Notably, the network of links between the analyzed keywords indicates the number of associations between green open innovation and research and development processes, inter-organizational cooperation, and intellectual property protection. The first two terms refer to the main distinguishing features of open innovation, based on unrestricted and unlimited production and transfer of knowledge among multiple stakeholders. The third refers to the most significant barrier to the development of open innovation, namely the rights to the resulting innovation and the benefits associated with it. The emergence of these aspects in the context of the green transition indicates their importance and prevalence in industry as well.

Researchers dealing with open innovation in energy are predominantly from China, the United States, and Italy (Figure 3). Many scientists involved in the analysis of this topic also come from Germany, the United Kingdom, Republic of Korea, and Spain. It is impossible not to notice that these are highly developed economies that are aware of the importance of technology in economic and social development and which, as a result, resort to the most modern and diversified methods of strengthening innovation.

The low level of interest in open innovation among developing and emerging countries (the only countries in this group are Poland, Hungary, Brazil, Mexico, India, Thailand, and Vietnam) indicates that this form of support for green transition is being overlooked and underutilized, as already mentioned in the introduction to this article. Unfortunately, this may result in a slowdown in energy transition and/or its ineffectiveness.

As part of in-depth research of the analysis, Figure 4 and Figure 5 shows the most frequently cited sources in the analyzed set of publications. The work with the highest number of citations is the article by Van de Vrande et al. (2009) [39], which plays a central role in research on open innovation in energy. A significant number of citations in this area were also recorded for the following authors: Mubarak et al. (2021) [40] and Roh et al. (2021) [41], which suggests a significant contribution of these researchers to the development of the issue described herein.

An analysis of the content of these publications allows us to identify specific issues described by the authors mentioned above. They include:

• open innovation in SMEs: trends, motives, and management challenges [39],
• the impact of Industry 4.0 technologies and open innovation on the effectiveness of green transition [40],
• the role of government support and assistance in the use of intellectual property rights in the development of green open innovation [41].

All the above topics concern the main issues related to the emergence of open innovation and are of a review and research nature, which promotes quotability and contributes to the dissemination of knowledge and experience in this area.

The most frequently cited publications are typically review-oriented, general, and theoretical in nature. They address, among other things, challenges, trends, and motivations in the field of open innovation. Popular themes also include the relationships between open innovation and entrepreneurship, intellectual property rights protection, and Industry 4.0.

3.2. The Use of Open Innovation in the Energy Transition from a Macro, Meso, and Microeconomic Research Perspective

In light of the publications we have collected and analyzed, the use of open innovation is considered from three research perspectives. The first concerns economies and is macroeconomic in nature. The second is a sectoral, energy-related perspective and encompasses enterprises belonging to this market segment. We refer to it as the mesoeconomic approach. The third is a view from the perspective of an individual enterprise. This is a microeconomic approach based on case studies.

The macroeconomic perspective identifies and examines the impact of open innovation in the energy sector on the functioning of national economies. In this regard, many research topics relate to the impact of open innovation on energy transition and the use of the circular economy. For example, Xuan (2025) [42] describes the beneficial impact of open innovation on gross domestic products and the willingness of European countries to take up the challenges of minimizing waste and production emissions. Kowalska-Styczeń et al. (2023) [43] identify resource-intensive sectors of the economy to indicate the desired directions for green transition in Ukraine. Thus, these publications link the level of economic development with a commitment to energy transition through innovation.

Another popular topic of macroeconomics is international comparative analysis of open innovation. This identifies leaders in this form of innovation and provides insight into national strategies for the use of open innovation in the energy sector. In this context, research by Lobov and Rybin (2021) [44] shows that gas and oil companies in North America and Western Europe have a higher level of internationalization of research and development networking than in Russia and China, which strongly favors open innovation. This innovation is also reinforced by investments in research and development and diversification of the innovation portfolio, illustrating the importance of resource complementarity and the role of financing in advanced energy transition.

Internationalization seems to be a particularly important stimulus for changes in solar energy. De Paulo and Porto (2017) [45] state that it is widespread, effective, and useful in countries such as the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Spain, and Germany—European leaders in the zero-emission economy. Also, national partnerships for solar energy development exist in Japan, the United States, France, Italy, and South Korea. The authors also note that local cooperation currently dominates in China, but in the future, the country may become a major international player in solar energy research.

The positive impact of open innovation on the energy transition is also illustrated by the analysis of Fontanela et al. (2020) [46] conducted in the wind energy sector in Brazil. It clearly shows that the use of this renewable energy source has provided energy to 4 million households and generated 70,000 new jobs. Open innovation in this sector is being developed through the creation of networks for research projects that strengthen the competitiveness of wind energy. It also serves to improve the protection of national intellectual property rights and the development of new technologies, which until now have been largely dependent on foreign cooperation. The above example confirms the ability of emerging economies to take effective action towards energy transition, reducing energy poverty, and making rational use of open innovation.

From a macroeconomic perspective, the role of the public sector in creating innovation for sustainability is also discussed. According to Kyriakopoulos (2023) [47], this sector can be an important intermediary between business and society, especially in crisis situations requiring the unification of all stakeholders. Such mobilization intensifies cooperation and creates a favorable climate for open innovation.

The other research perspective is mesoeconomic in nature and concerns the energy sector as one of the key industries in the economy. Unfortunately, as evidenced by a review of the literature and research by Dall-Orsoletta et al. (2022) [48], despite the prevalence of open innovation partnerships, companies in the electricity sector have only just begun to participate in such initiatives.

Furthermore, Nisar et al. (2016) [49] also note that existing analyses offer little insight into how companies establish open organizational structures, particularly in more traditional industries such as the energy sector. They therefore call for more work to identify the changes that facilitate the implementation of open innovation and a shift away from focusing solely on the role of open innovation in reducing transaction costs and increasing efficiency.

Carbajo and Cabeza (2018) [50] also point to a lack of consideration of the actual factors that facilitate the implementation of open innovation in practice in the energy sector.

In view of the above, attempts have been made to develop a model of open innovation tailored to the specific characteristics of the energy sector by, among others, Vaiyavuth (2012) [51] and Chiaroni et al. (2015) [52]. These researchers suggest an evolutionary approach to implementing such a model, which would involve a systematic transition from closed innovation to open innovation. Such a modification would increase the effectiveness of the green transition and could also reduce concerns about climate change by involving more stakeholders.

A model approach to open innovation also appears in the analyses of Golov et al. (2018) [53]. The authors propose a methodology for measuring the relationship between openness to innovation and economic indicators of company performance, which in a sense refocuses attention on the most popular approach to implementing open innovation, namely the efficiency- and methodology-based approach.

In addition to modeling and adapting open innovation to the requirements of the energy sector, an important challenge in the meso perspective is also to regulate issues related to the protection of intellectual property rights to open innovation, as pointed out by Roh et al. (2021) [41] and Banet (2021) [54]. In this process, an important stakeholder is the state, which is responsible for the legal and regulatory aspects of innovation at the economic level.

The third subject-based research perspective is a microeconomic view of individual entities, including enterprises, but also prosumers as stakeholders involved in both energy consumption and production. Research topics related to these entities include the following:

• for enterprises: case studies of individual programs for the implementation of open innovation [55,56] and stimulants for open innovation [57]; econometric analyses of the determinants of innovation for groups of energy companies [58]; identification of the role of social enterprises in creating open innovation in the field of renewable energy [59] (Willys et al., 2025); assessment of open innovation in the small- and medium-sized enterprise sector [60,61];
• for prosumers: identification of the role of prosumers in the development of open innovation in the solar energy sector [62].

Additionally, links between open innovation and energy transition may emerge in the development of smart cities. In this case, they fit into the strategy of sustainable creation of these entities [63].

The literature on the subject also devotes considerable attention and space to the determinants of open innovation in the energy sector. In general terms, Zobel et al. (2016) [64] note that an increase in the level of technological advancement increases the intensity of open innovation. According to Marostica et al. (2024) [65], in this context, the use of blockchain technology is particularly important, as it can improve the effectiveness of green open innovation by influencing climate action and rewarding sustainable social behavior. Furthermore, Ogiemwonyi et al. (2023) [66] point out, however, that open innovation will not be relevant to the energy transition if it is not green. These relationships are also described in more detail by Skordoulis et al. (2020) [67], who additionally refer to the dynamics of open innovation.

The above observations again favor highly developed countries, which generally have the most modern technologies and the latest knowledge as their tools. They also show greater interest in sustainable development and climate change mitigation.

The above catalog of determinants of open innovation in energy transition is enriched by Pattinson et al. (2023) [68]. Among the success factors for this form of inter-organizational cooperation, they additionally indicate technological diversity, the development of knowledge-sharing mechanisms, the adoption of open innovation strategies, and overcoming resistance to change. According to the authors, the combination of these determinants allows for the achievement of economic, environmental, and social goals, which is the essence of sustainable development.

In turn, Xing et al. (2024) [69] detail the stimulants of open innovation in the energy sector, referring to their type. Thus, in the case of operational innovations, the driving forces are: the depth of knowledge search, the number of research and development patents, and the number of innovative products. Higher education institutions play the most important role in creating these innovations. According to the researchers, the most important factors in the development of exploratory innovations are the depth of knowledge search, the quality of two-mode network relations, and cooperation with research institutions. For ambidextrous innovations, the key factors are the breadth of knowledge search, the strength of direct relations between stakeholders, and the involvement of research institutions.

A substantial proportion of the analyzed publications is characterized by an international and global scope, encompassing several to dozens of economies. Such comparative analyses are conducted based on publicly available data, which facilitates research implementation and the application of advanced econometric instruments. The literature also features sectoral analyses examining energy transformation within single or multiple national contexts. The regions most frequently represented in the research are Europe and the Americas.

National energy markets—as economic case studies—appear less frequently in the literature, although from the perspective of energy transformation progress, they would certainly be desirable and valuable. They concern emerging and developing economies in which green innovations are a current necessity. Examples include China, Ukraine, and India. In more economically advanced countries, the focus is on describing partnerships for open innovation in the energy sector, as well as the determinants and effects of their utilization. This geographical scope of publications is partly due to substantive justification related to the transformation itself and the need to implement it. In part, the lower interest in individual economic studies may result from journals’ reduced interest in research of a local nature.

3.3. Methods of Motivating Stakeholders to Engage in Open Innovation for Green Transition

Methods of motivating stakeholders to engage in open innovation in the energy sector are quite widely described and analyzed in the selected literature on the subject. An attempt has been made to systematize them using four key categories. These are therefore methods based on the following:

• internal resources and competencies related to the individual characteristics of particular stakeholders;
• distinguishing features of partnerships relating to the nature of relationships and cooperation networks;
• external legal and regulatory conditions shaped at the government and local government levels;
• external technical and organizational solutions supporting the creation of open innovation.

A detailed list of these methods, together with references to publications describing them, is provided in

Table 1. Methods of motivating stakeholders to engage in open innovation for green transition described in the analyzed literature on the subject.

Methods of Motivating Stakeholders Based on:
Internal Resources and Competencies	Distinguishing Features of Partnerships	External Legal and Regulatory Conditions	External Technical and Organizational Solutions
A mentoring program led by a leading company that stimulates partnerships between start-ups and corporations, research institutions, while respecting intellectual property rights [55].	The beneficial impact of cooperation between energy companies and universities (not private consultants) [70] and the creation of so-called communities of practice with them [71].	Regulation of intellectual property rights in line with the expectations of partners creating open innovations [72].	Creation of online platforms to support open green innovation [60,73,74].
An internal project focused on implementing a zero-emission economy within an energy company, promoting the concept of open innovation [75].	Cooperation with suppliers and access to scientific journals foster research and development (R&D) and process innovation, while cooperation with customers fosters product innovation [57].	Education focused on minimizing the energy footprint, green economy, and open innovation (e.g., using educational computer games or raising awareness of the biosphere and zero-emission energy technologies) [76,77,78].	Creating Living Labs, i.e., public-private-civil partnerships for user-driven open innovation in the renewable energy sector [79].
Creating a collaborative atmosphere, using relational management, and a positive perception of risk promote OI in the SME sector [60].	Entering into external partnerships in research and development for OI may slow down product innovation, while joining industry organizations has a positive impact on OI in the renewable energy sector [80].	Creating government incentive systems for the implementation of Industry 4.0 solutions in the energy sector and strengthening open innovation in this sector [40].	Supporting digitization and access to open data systems in the energy sector [81].
Open leadership based on extensive communication, cooperation, and power sharing [74].	The openness of cooperation networks, their consolidation, and the inclusion of research institutions are desirable features of open innovation for decarbonization in Africa [82].	Creation and use of international sources of financing for energy transition in developing countries (while maintaining protection for lenders, government control in the initial phase of development, and purchase guarantees for producers) [83].	Promoting the benefits of open innovation, especially in the small- and medium-sized enterprise sector [84].
A strategic approach to corporate social responsibility supported by open leadership fosters an organizational culture conducive to open innovation [56].	The use of so-called external transformative stakeholders—prosumers—to engage in the process of creating innovations for the energy sector [62].	The creation of a legal and regulatory framework for effective cooperation between the science sector, including universities and business [85].	Use of external sources of knowledge with diverse but beneficial effects on open innovation (market sources, institutional sources, specialist sources) [86,87]. The usefulness of these sources in creating open innovation has been observed in wind and solar energy [88].
Creating an open and inspiring learning environment and fostering enthusiasm for cross-sector exchange [89].	Building relationships based on future complementarities between partners, increasing confidence in achieving desired economic outcomes [90].		Building strategic partnerships with industry and research centers, creating knowledge and innovation centers, and developing open innovation platforms with virtual learning environments [91].
Diversification of partners’ resources and competencies—a factor more important than shared goals [89].	Use of partnership intermediaries to integrate and manage [89].		The use of social media to exchange knowledge and ideas while maintaining a lean organizational structure and integrating IO management into existing organizational structures [92].
Identifying the attitudes of innovation sponsors in the energy sector to facilitate cooperation: an organizational attitude focused on the relationship between the team and the sponsor; a task-oriented attitude focused on goals and results [93].	The use of innovative business models in partnerships for AI-based OI [94].		Effective energy demand management using the energy Internet [95].
	Increasing customer engagement, including prosumers, in the open innovation process [72,96,97].		Use of open innovation workshops and idea competitions to improve energy efficiency and grassroots proposals for change in the energy sector [98].
Using various models of supporting OI: focusing on intangible factors such as knowledge management and using material resources [99].
Using the dynamics of open innovation and gradually opening up previously closed innovations [100].
Using trust as an element supporting value co-creation in OI [101].
Prioritizing green efficiency by managers [97].

Source: own study based on the conducted literature research.

.

Table 1 shows that most attention is paid to the description of motivation methods based on internal resources and competencies. In this context, the following are recommended, among other things: strengthening knowledge management, systematically opening previously closed innovations, creating an atmosphere of mutual trust, exploiting differences in resource potentials, and implementing internal pro-innovation programs. Numerous publications also highlight the role of open leadership based on efficient and effective communication and power sharing. This approach fosters relationship building and the creation of an organizational culture that is friendly to open innovation.

In turn, the role of employee ties in the value chain (relations with suppliers and customers) is emphasized as a distinguishing feature of partnerships. Among the external stakeholders supporting open innovation, universities, research institutions, and industry organizations are often mentioned. External transitional stakeholders, i.e., prosumers actively involved in both energy production and consumption, also play an important role in creating open innovation for energy transition. An interesting, albeit less frequently described, research topic is the identification of the role of intermediaries and modern business models (AI) in pro-innovation cooperation.

Among external technical and organizational solutions that initiate open innovation, researchers most often point to online platforms that increase knowledge exchange and the associated digitization of data. Another important solution in this area is Living Labs, which inspire various stakeholders to engage in pro-innovation activities for energy transition. Such social initiatives can be further developed through competitions and pro-environmental and pro-innovation education. All solutions described in this area are linked by the intensification of knowledge and experience exchange through an increase in the number and capacity of information channels achieved thanks to the Internet and the community of stakeholders.

Relatively little attention is paid in the literature to the description of external legal and regulatory conditions conducive to open innovation in the energy sector. The issues that arise in this area concern the need to develop regulations on the protection of intellectual property rights, to focus education on environmental awareness, and to create a legal and organizational climate conducive to cooperation between science and business. An interesting and unexplored research topic is also the issue of financing open innovation, including the role of state incentives.

With regard to the second research question, it should be noted that the literature is dominated by a corporate perspective, in which enterprises are treated as key stakeholders engaged in the creation and implementation of open innovation. This approach focuses on the internal resources of organizations and their individual competencies. The literature also includes studies analyzing inter-organizational collaboration among large enterprises in open innovation and the external determinants of these relationships.

Among other categories of open innovation stakeholders identified in the literature, scientific institutions engaged in knowledge and technology transfer should be mentioned, as well as local communities involved in open research initiatives through the Living Labs concept and digital platforms. In publications of a macroeconomic nature, the state is also perceived as a significant stakeholder, responsible for shaping legal and institutional frameworks and financially supporting the processes of creating and implementing open innovation.

Environmental institutions are relatively rarely considered in the analyzed literature, despite constituting one of the key elements of the contemporary quintuple helix model. This indicates a clear research and application gap in this area. These institutions—due to their mission—should be naturally interested in and actively engaged in supporting innovation in the context of green transformation.

In the instrumental dimension, non-financial support tools dominate, including legal regulations and organizational solutions, as well as the development of collective initiatives for open innovation. Researchers also draw attention to indirect motivating factors, such as digitalization, the Industry 4.0 concept, and social media. It should be emphasized, however, that relatively little attention is devoted to financial instruments and systems, despite the fundamental importance of capital for the emergence and implementation of innovations.

3.4. The Effects of Using Open Innovation in the Green Transition

The effects of using open innovation for the green transition are an unquestionable motivator, as they document the real benefits of unlimited knowledge exchange. Many of these effects are mentioned in the literature, which is why, for the purposes of this generalization and systematization, they have been divided into two groups: tangible and intangible and are presented in

Table 2. Tangible and intangible effects of using open innovation in the green transition.

Tangible	Intangible
Due to their use in environmental management, they can have a positive impact on a company’s financial results [102].	Increase in the number of partnerships and improvement of the regulatory framework for research, development, and innovation [55].
Enable the acquisition of the necessary resources to implement Clean Energy practices [103].	A shift in strategic orientation towards a more open approach [58].
Strengthen the link between the application of digital technologies and green innovation through the use of business technology innovation platforms and industry–university-research collaboration platforms [104].	Increase the competitiveness and effectiveness of businesses in implementing AI technologies [94].
Enable the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and trigger energy savings in small- and medium-sized enterprises [105].	Support the technological development of enterprises [106], especially in exploratory links [57].
Increase the efficiency of regions through international cooperation between cities [107].	In combination with human capital, they can improve the intensity of green innovation creation [61,108].
Support the transition of urban energy systems from the bottom up [98].	Enable companies to engage in sustainable development more quickly and effectively [109,110].
Optimize the use of energy networks and energy consumption [111].	They are more useful in the development of climate change mitigation technologies than in climate change adaptation technologies [82].
Reduce the costs of wind energy projects in energy-poor countries [83].	Create social value and have a positive impact on entrepreneurial bricolage [59].
Using Living Labs, they can reduce energy poverty in emerging economies [112].	They can remove barriers to innovation such as lack of information, technological capabilities, and financial resources in circular economy-oriented enterprises [79].
They act as key catalysts, strengthening the impact of foreign direct investment on economic growth [42].

Source: own study based on the conducted literature research.

.

As shown in Table 2, the effects of using open innovation for green transition can be achieved at various levels. At the individual level, they refer to companies, cities, and regions. For companies, the tangible benefits of green open innovation can manifest themselves in improved financial results, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and the acquisition of resources necessary for the energy transition, including modern technologies. The intangible aspect of implementing open innovation in companies can, in turn, increase their openness to their environment, improve their competitiveness and effectiveness, especially in sustainable development.

In cities and regions, open innovation contributes to intensifying efforts to transform urban energy systems. International partnerships that promote the exchange of knowledge and experience of various kinds, with the participation of all urban stakeholders, are particularly beneficial in this case.

At the industry level, open innovation can lead to more efficient optimization of energy networks and contribute to the development of renewable energy sources, including emerging and developing economies.

The literature also touches on macroeconomic issues relating to the economy. There, open innovation in energy can generate new investments and stimulate economic growth. It is also an effective method of reducing energy poverty and the costs of implementing renewable energy sources. With their collective nature, they also create favorable conditions for removing financial and technological barriers to the development of innovation and contribute to the integration of various stakeholders and the creation of social value.

4. Discussion

The discussion within the conducted literature review was carried out with consideration of two research themes. The first relates to providing answers to the research questions posed. The second constitutes the identification of research gaps requiring future investigation. In this manner, the authors systematize research on open innovation in green energy transformation while simultaneously indicating directions for further research.

In the search for ways to use open innovation in the economy and individual entities to achieve the goals of the green transition (R1), three research perspectives were identified. These perspectives refer to different levels of describing open innovation in the energy sector. The macroeconomic level relates to the application of open innovation in the economy. The mesoeconomic level considers the implementation of open innovation in the sector. The microeconomic level concerns the utilization of open innovation in energy companies.

From a macroeconomic perspective, the focus is on the impact of green open innovation on the effectiveness of energy transition and economic development. International comparisons are also made, which show that open innovation is most important for energy transition in developed economies with a high degree of internationalization. Occasionally, researchers also describe examples of emerging countries that have benefited from the use of open innovation to develop non-renewable energy sources in terms of climate and economics, which encourages others to follow their path and popularizes this form of knowledge and technology diffusion.

The mesoeconomic perspective on the mechanisms of creating open innovation in the energy sector seems to be the least developed. Few studies in this area concern models for implementing and evaluating the effectiveness of open innovation and guidelines for improving intellectual property rights. However, there is a lack of detailed research on the organizational and practical aspects of using this form of innovation for energy transition.

From a microeconomic research perspective, the topic of open innovation in energy transition most often appears in the context of enterprises—usually large corporations implementing innovation support programs. It is less common in the small- and medium-sized enterprise sector. Occasionally, it appears in the context of smart cities.

The publications analyzed are often diagnostic in nature and refer to the determinants of open innovation in the energy sector. Thus, the technological drivers of OI most often mentioned in the literature include technological advancement, the possibility of using blockchain technology, technological diversification, the number of patents, inventions, or new products. Non-technological determinants include: the scope of knowledge, the ability to share knowledge and experience, the type of cooperating partners, inter-organizational trust, the quality and strength of links between stakeholders, and the breadth of cooperation networks. Notably, the analysis shows that innovations that are both open and green contribute the most to the energy transition.

Open innovations in energy transformation are utilized at various stages of their development. In the conceptual phase, mechanisms for knowledge creation and technology transfer are described. The context of these analyses is often embedded in issues related to the collaboration between enterprises, science, and society. International comparisons also emerge.

In the creation and implementation phase, the resource-based approach dominates. However, it is not limited to technological and material assets. Much attention is devoted to human resources, including the competencies of management staff, as well as relational resources that foster attitudes conducive to the exchange of knowledge and experience.

In the exploitation phase, open innovations supporting energy transformation are viewed from the perspective of intellectual property protection. Regulatory frameworks are also created to facilitate their utilization. An important stakeholder in this process is the state and local authorities responsible for innovation policy.

Among the methods for activating and motivating individual stakeholders to engage in the process of creating open innovation for green transition (R2), methods based on the following factors were identified:

• internal resources and competencies (knowledge management, internal programs, open leadership, trust, complementarity of resources);
• partnership differentiators (modern business models, involvement of partnership intermediaries, strengthening relationships with suppliers and customers, involvement of prosumers, cooperation with universities and research institutions);
• external legal and regulatory conditions (intellectual property rights protection, pro-innovation and pro-environmental education systems; creation of a legal framework for cooperation between science and business);
• external technical and organizational solutions (online platforms, social media, Living Labs, external sources of knowledge).

According to the above, among the motivators encouraging open innovations, organizational, relational, and legal solutions appear most frequently. Many of them are the result of advancing digitalization and are directly related to the idea of Industry 4.0. Unfortunately, few are of a financial nature, despite the fact that innovation development is most often accompanied by capital barriers. Nevertheless, the provided examples and case studies illustrate the effectiveness of non-material support and can serve as valuable inspiration for followers seeking effective methods of utilizing open innovations in energy transformation.

The most frequently mentioned individual effects of open innovation in the energy sector (R3) include improved efficiency, effectiveness, competitiveness in environmental management and the implementation of sustainable development, as well as the use of modern technologies. At the economic level, OI supports investment and economic growth. It can also have a positive impact on reducing energy poverty and developing renewable energy sources, including in emerging economies. This form of innovation also promotes social integration and the creation of social values.

Considering the above, in general terms, open innovations, like all others, drive growth at the level of the economy, industry, and enterprise. Additionally, in the energy sector, they can accelerate and facilitate green transformation, which is consistent with their original intention. Their side effect may also be an increase in social engagement in the energy transitions that are necessary today. Therefore, there can be no doubt that open innovation is useful, beneficial, and advantageous.

From the conducted literature review, it emerges that certain topics are addressed infrequently, despite their considerable cognitive appeal. This particularly concerns research characterized by a high degree of complexity and a high level of analytical granularity. Below, we present a compilation of identified research gaps. We treat them as an indicator of directions for future research and analyses on the role of open innovation in energy transformation.

Literature reviews show that open innovation in energy is being considered at various economic levels, although it is most often described in the context of energy companies. Among the publications, there are also those that refer to cities, regions, and economies, including developing and emerging ones [46,82].

It seems that the existing research gaps in terms of entities mainly concern small- and medium-sized enterprises, which is also directly pointed out by the authors of the analyzed articles [102,109]. These enterprises are a difficult research subject, but given their economic strength and dispersion, which favors the dispersion of knowledge and experience, they should be given much more attention [42,56,74]. There are also few publications on the development of green open innovation in energy in cities or regions, which are a natural environment for social integration [99].

This research gap certainly also applies to developing and emerging economies. A significant proportion of the publications analyzed come from highly developed countries and focus on their practices in favor of open innovation. Meanwhile, the few considerations in this area clearly indicate the usefulness of OI also in regions requiring more effective measures to achieve low-carbon development.

In terms of subject matter, the existing research gap primarily concerns the close link between open innovation, energy, and the effects on the green transition. Researchers often focus only on one element of this chain. The others are merely background considerations or side issues. This approach makes it difficult to assess the real impact of open innovation on the green transition and changes in the energy sector.

In methodological terms, there is a lack of detailed analyses showing the mechanisms for opening innovation and open organizational structures in the energy sector. Most of the publications analyzed are diagnostic and deterministic in nature. Meanwhile, examples and best practices in this area could significantly facilitate the implementation of OI in the energy sector and provide practical guidance for future followers. It would also be important to take a dynamic look at OI in the energy sector [113,114], which would allow us to understand the evolution of this form of innovation and its systematic development, both individually and economically.

It is also difficult to find a holistic, systemic approach in the methodology of research on OI in the energy sector that relates to policies supporting the use of open innovation in the energy transition, which makes research in this area highly dispersed, non-integrated, and fragmented.

5. Conclusions

The literature studies conducted in the article indicate that the contemporary approach to open innovations in energy transformation is broad and interdisciplinary. It does not focus solely on technological and legal-organizational aspects. It takes into account multiple stakeholders, which constitutes a direct reference to the quintuple helix idea. It also touches upon economic, managerial, and social issues. Open innovations in the energy sector are therefore described from a systemic perspective, although a holistic analysis of achievements in this area allows us to conclude that there are still quite a few gaps requiring systematic completion.

The analyses conducted in the article allow for organizing the threads concerning open innovations in energy transformation in the context of answers to the posed research questions. They refer, respectively, to: the ways of utilizing open innovations for energy transformation, motivators for undertaking open innovations in the energy sector, and the effects of open innovation.

Open energy innovations are utilized both at the level of the economy, as well as the sector and enterprise. Many different stakeholders participate in this process, which constitutes a reference to the quintuple helix concept. Motivation for open innovations is based mainly on organizational, human, and relational resources. Little attention is paid to financial incentives. However, it is worth emphasizing that these lie at the very essence of innovation. Research shows that the use of innovations in energy transformation brings tangible economic benefits in the form of faster development, increased competitiveness, or enhanced commitment to sustainable development.

The main limitation of this literature review may be the omission of some publications that link open innovation to energy transition due to imprecise publication search criteria or selection criteria at the qualitative analysis stage. Nevertheless, the authors have made every effort to ensure that the results obtained accurately reflect the state of current research in this area.

A research limitation is also the restriction of the search scope exclusively to the Scopus database. This may result in the omission of relevant publications indexed to other international databases. However, it should be emphasized that the database used by the authors is recognized as reputable, comprehensive, and contains publications of high scientific quality. This confirms the credibility of the conducted literature studies and makes them representative, despite certain limitations resulting from the adopted search strategy.

The main directions for further analysis result from the identified research gaps and include the following topics: the circumstances of OI implementation in small- and medium-sized enterprises, the identification of mechanisms for opening up innovation in the energy sector, good practices in the field of intellectual property rights in the energy sector, and focusing the analysis on the energy transition itself rather than exclusively on the energy sector.