This article reviews the concept of an energy technology innovation system (ETIS). The ETIS is a systemic perspective on innovation comprising all aspects of energy transformations (supply and demand); all stages of the technology development cycle; and all the major innovation processes, feedbacks, actors, institutions, and networks. We use it as an analytical framework to describe key features and drivers of energy innovation. A global snapshot of the ETIS is provided using investments as the main indicator. Rationales for government policy in energy innovation are discussed, and policy design guidelines for an effectively functioning ETIS are presented. The proposed guidelines are based on a survey of the literature and empirical case studies; they diverge substantially from polices implied by partial perspectives on innovation. Key research, information, and data needs are also identified.

Hundreds of millions of the world's poorest people directly depend on smallholder farming systems. These people now face a changing climate and associated societal responses. We use mapping and a literature review to juxtapose the climate fate of smallholder systems with that of other agricultural systems and population groups. Limited direct evidence contrasts climate impact risk in smallholder agricultural systems versus other farming systems, but proxy evidence suggests high smallholder vulnerability. Smallholders distinctively adapt to climate shocks and stressors. Their future adaptive capacity is uncertain and conditional upon the severity of climate change and socioeconomic changes from regional development. Smallholders present a greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation paradox. They emit a small amount of CO₂ per capita and are poor, making GHG regulation unwarranted. But they produce GHG-intensive food and emit disproportionate quantities of black carbon through traditional biomass energy. Effectively accounting for smallholders in mitigation and adaption policies is critical and will require innovative solutions to the transaction costs that enrolling smallholders often imposes. Together, our findings show smallholder farming systems to be a critical fulcrum between climate change and sustainable development.

Locally led adaptation (LLA) has recently gained importance against top-down planning practices that often exclude the lived realities and priorities of local communities and create injustices at the local level. The promise of LLA is that adaptation would be defined, prioritised, designed, monitored, and evaluated by local communities themselves, enabling a shift in power to local stakeholders, resulting in more effective adaptation interventions. Critical reflections on the intersections of power and justice in LLA are, however, lacking. This article offers a nuanced understanding of the power and justice considerations required to make LLA useful for local communities and institutions, and to resolve the tensions between LLA and other development priorities. It also contributes to a further refinement of LLA methodologies and practices to better realise its promises. Ultimately, we argue that the utility of the LLA framing in promoting climate justice and empowering local actors needs to be tested empirically.

Transformational adaptation is increasingly viewed as necessary to prevent the worst offsets in development gains due to severe climate impacts. However, clarity regarding how to produce transformational adaptation in practice is lacking, creating problems for project design and implementation. This paper examines (1) how transformational adaptation has been defined by major funders of adaptation; (2) how the concept has influenced funding priorities and the financing of projects. The study is based on a comparative analysis of the investment criteria, board meeting minutes, documents, and reports of the primary financial mechanisms under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: the Least Developed Country Fund, the Special Climate Change Fund, the Adaptation Fund and the Green Climate Fund. Our study demonstrates an increasing emphasis on transformational adaptation across funds over time, particularly in the Green Climate Fund. Transformative potential does guide funding decisions, but a clear understanding of whether transformational change is achievable, feasible, and desirable under all conditions has not yet emerged, an issue acknowledged by the funds and regularly discussed. Our analysis suggests that acknowledging tensions which arise with transformation in adaptation finance is critical because investment criteria and definitions of transformation impact the approaches to adaptation countries take.