IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v218y2025ics1364032125004514.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A systematic review and typology of power outage literature: Critical infrastructure, climate change and social impacts

Author

Listed:
  • Ptak, Thomas
  • Brooks, Julie
  • Stock, Ryan

Abstract

This systematic review offers a typology to more comprehensively understand contemporary power outage scholarship. A significant body of literature concerning critical infrastructure broadly adopt either a technocentric approach or engage engineering principles to model and assess standards of structural integrity, regulatory actions, and cascading risks emanating from outage events. Technocentric scholarship largely indicates how social considerations necessitate deeper investigations and require more detailed modes of analysis. Alternatively, scholarship focused on social vulnerability and human-centered impacts are often qualitative in nature or adopt mixed methodologies to mitigate gaps in analysis. Studies investigating outages driven by climate change either serve as a bridge between categories or are positioned either side of a thematic binary. This paper identifies and analyzes three main strands of power outage literature: critical infrastructure, climate change and social impacts. Further, the review identifies sub-categories which reveal limitations and lacunae in scholarship to date, while discussing potential avenues for actionable and interdisciplinary future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Ptak, Thomas & Brooks, Julie & Stock, Ryan, 2025. "A systematic review and typology of power outage literature: Critical infrastructure, climate change and social impacts," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:218:y:2025:i:c:s1364032125004514
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2025.115778
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032125004514
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2025.115778?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:218:y:2025:i:c:s1364032125004514. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.