Global demand for energy and innovation breakthroughs requires advancements in research and development by science teams in the sector. Although extensive research exists on the science of team science (SciTS), comparative analyses of science teams in the energy sector across middle-low-income and high-income countries remain scarce. This issue is particularly relevant in the context of shifting geopolitical dynamics, where countries in the Global South must diversify their collaborations, funding mechanisms, and power relations away from the United States toward South-South, European, and Asian partnerships. This study addresses this gap by examining the composition, performance, and knowledge structure of science teams in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and Europe from 1996 to 2019.

A bibliometric approach was employed, incorporating co-word network analysis and citation-based performance metrics to examine 6,248 science teams in the energy sector indexed in Scopus (i.e., research articles in the field of ‘energy’ with co-authorships from LAC and Europe). The study identified team size, regional composition, and their relationship with performance via mean normalized citation score (MNCS). Using keyword co-occurrence and betweenness centrality, the evolution of knowledge structures produced by LAC and European teams was modeled, highlighting thematic clusters and their structural significance over time.

Findings show that small to medium-sized teams (2 to 10 members) dominate collaboration structures, accounting for ~89% of teams, although larger organizations (>10 members) have been growing since 2012. A small but significant positive correlation was observed between team size and MNCS. A Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant performance differences across regions, with post-hoc analyses showing that European teams (>50% affiliations from any European country) outperformed LAC teams (>50% affiliations from any LAC country). Median MNCS values were 0.70 for Europe and 0.61 for LAC, highlighting significant disparities in research impact.

Thematic analysis revealed distinct research priorities. Clusters such as “Biomass Conversion and Renewable Energy Processes” and “Sustainable Carbon Management and Optimization” initially held greater relevance in Latin America before gaining prominence in Europe. Conversely, European teams engaged earlier with “Experimental Studies in Biofuel and Energy” and “Material Characterization and Microscopy Techniques.” Notably, “Solar Energy” and “Solar Cells” emerged as the only structurally significant keywords common to both regions in recent years.

These findings underline the predominance of science teams over organizations. The positive correlation between team size and performance suggests that larger teams benefit from pooled expertise and resources, although the magnitude of this effect remains limited. The superior performance of European teams may reflect scientific cumulative advantages in the region.

Thematic shifts in research priorities highlight the dynamic nature of agendas. European priorities appears more cohesive and long-term frameworks (i.e., European Union), while LAC seems more fragmented. The early focus of LAC on biomass and carbon management contrasts with Europe’s initial emphasis on experimental biofuels and materials science. The recent convergence on solar energy suggests a growing alignment of research priorities, potentially driven by sustainability imperatives. Strengthening South-South and trans-regional collaborations, expanding access to (in)tangible resources, and promoting interdisciplinary approaches will be essential to bridging existing gaps and fostering energy research breakthroughs.