4: Improving the effectiveness of alternative energy systems in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia
Submitting Institution
University of EdinburghUnit of Assessment
Anthropology and Development StudiesSummary Impact Type
EnvironmentalResearch Subject Area(s)
Chemical Sciences: Physical Chemistry (incl. Structural)
Engineering: Materials Engineering
Medical and Health Sciences: Public Health and Health Services
Summary of the impact
Since 2007, Edinburgh researchers have played an important role in
increasing the use of local, context-specific knowledge in the assessment
of technological sustainability and efficiency in the bioenergy and solar
sectors in East Africa and South Asia. This has taken the following forms:
- Supporting policy development through establishing multi-stakeholder
bio-energy forums in Kenya, Tanzania and Sri Lanka.
- Improving clean energy access to approximately 180,000 people in
Kenya, India, Sri Lanka and Tanzania.
- Informing practitioners through high-level advice to campaign groups
and international organisations.
- Taking leading roles in public debates about the political economy of
energy innovation in the developing world.
Underpinning research
Limited access to sustainable energy has been identified as one of the
major constraints to development and poverty alleviation in the global
South over the coming years. Moreover, unsustainable sources of energy are
rapidly exacerbating existing tensions between growth, climate change and
poverty. Research in Edinburgh has produced context-specific ethnographic
evidence about the limits and potential of sustainable energy technologies
in East Africa and South Asia, focusing in particular on two of the most
promising, yet problematic, energy sectors: bioenergy and solar energy.
Bioenergy. Project Innovation Systems for Clean Energy Security (PISCES)
is a four-country, five-partner research collaboration, funded with £4.61m
from the UK's Department for International Development (DFID) (2007-2013).
James Smith — at Edinburgh since 2003 and co-investigator on PISCES — and
Shishuru Pradhan — research fellow in PISCES partner, MSSRF (MS
Swaminathan Research Foundation), before gaining employment in the
University of Edinburgh in 2012 — have focused on two streams within
PISCES:
- Understanding Research Partnerships: para-ethnographic research on how
institutions interact in resource-poor settings to generate relevant new
knowledge and technologies;
- Research Into Use: how best to operationalise activities to capture
new knowledge and turn it into development outcomes
One of the main insights of this research has concerned the assessment of
alternative energy systems. In particular, this work has highlighted the
importance of using appropriate methodologies (such as participatory
market mapping), developing detailed case studies of effective small-scale
bioenergy projects, and supporting multi-stakeholder policy forums in East
Africa. The combination of methods, evidence and networking are necessary
in order to understand the complex contexts in which new technologies
succeed or fail, the bases on which success or failure depend, and how
best to incorporate evidence into appropriate institutional and national
policy-making (Lyall et al, 2009; Pradhan and Ruysenar 2013; Smith 2010).
Solar energy. Cross's work has brought similar ethnographic
insights to bear on the effectiveness of affordable energy technologies,
this time with a focus on solar energy. Research at Edinburgh has been
supported by Cross's 3-year Early Career Fellowship from the Leverhulme
Trust (2011-14), for which Smith acts as mentor, and small grants from the
ESRC-EPSRC Interdisciplinary Network on Energy, Equity and Vulnerability
(2012). This research focuses on solar photovoltaic technology designed
for and sold to people living without electricity across Asia and Africa.
There have been two main insights produced through this research. First,
it has highlighted the importance of the relationships between
entrepreneurs, technologies, and poor consumers in creating new markets
for low-cost solar powered lighting systems (Cross 2013). Second, it has
highlighted the need for increased public scrutiny of labour and
environmental issues in the global supply chains for low cost renewable
energy technologies (Cross, 2013).
References to the research
Cross, J. 2013. `The 100th Object: Solar Lighting Technology
and Humanitarian Goods', Journal of Material Culture 18:4, DOI:
10.1177/1359183513498959 .
Lyall, C., Smith, J. and Pappaioannou, T. (eds) (2009) Limits to
Governance: The Challenge of Policy-making in the Life Sciences.
Ashgate, London, available from HEI.
Molony, T. and Smith, J. 2010. `Biofuels, food security and Africa, African
Affairs', 109(436), 489-498, DOI: 10.1093/afraf/adq019.
Pradhan, S. & Ruysenaar, S. 2013. `Burning Desires: Untangling and
Interpreting 'Pro-Poor' Biofuels Policies in India and South Africa', Environment
and Planning A 45, DOI: 10.1068/a45482.
Smith, J. 2010. Biofuels and the Globalization of Risk. Zed
Books, London, available via REF2.
Details of the impact
If the global community is to meet the UN Secretary General's goal of
providing `Sustainable Energy for All by 2030', then alternative sources
of energy — whether from natural biomass, purpose-grown biofuels, or
photovoltaic solar technologies — will be part of the solution. Smith,
Cross and Pradhan are using the findings from individual and collaborative
research projects to meet the challenge of future energy access in East
Africa and South Asia. The researchers have provided policymakers in those
countries with new information and approaches that they can apply to
unlock the potential of bioenergy and solar power to improve energy access
and livelihoods in poor communities. Impact has therefore come through shaping
and influencing policy made by government, quasi-government bodies, NGOs
and private organisations, stimulating public debate, and in
facilitating the direct provision of energy sources.
Supporting Policy. Research findings have helped shape domestic
and international policy making on bioenergy. The clearest evidence has
been the central role of the PISCES project, at the invitation of the
Kenyan and Tanzanian governments, in the establishment of
multi-stakeholder policy working groups (for corroboration see 5.1).
Building on research insights into the importance of multiple stakeholder
input for the effectiveness of alternative energy policy (Smith 2010),
PISCES led the creation of a bioenergy Policy Working Groups (PWG) in
Kenya and Tanzania (2009-2012). In Kenya, for example, the PWG was chaired
by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Energy, with members from
government, NGOs, bilateral donors and business. A similar process is
underway in Sri Lanka, albeit at an earlier stage. PWGs seek to develop a
consultative and participatory policy methodology to discuss and guide
bioenergy policy. Members of the Kenya PWG established by PISCES were
instrumental in the writing of the country's National Biofuel Policy,
approved by the Ministry of Energy. Under the new Kenya constitution
promulgated in 2011, the draft Kenya National Biofuel Policy was
integrated into the draft Kenya Energy Policy 2013, which is currently
awaiting approval by the new Parliament (5.1). PISCES involvement led to a
policy formulation process that involved a diversity of stakeholders, in
particular, civil society.
Improved clean energy access. The above policy interventions have
had an impact on the use of alternative clean energy sources. Although
precise measurement in Global South conditions is very difficult, PISCES
estimates that it has improved clean energy access and livelihoods via
bioenergy for approximately 180,000 people in Kenya, India, Sri Lanka and
Tanzania. It did so, for example, by bringing together stakeholders to
facilitate the translation of basic science into marketable technologies
in East Africa. As a direct result of these forums, training and market
mapping, PISCES has facilitated the distribution and use of 30,000
efficient gassifier stoves. The figure of 180,000 people is based on the
assumption that each stove serves a household of six people (see 5.3 for
details).
In March 2013, in partnership with the Microloan Foundation, Cross and
Smith were awarded £377,304 by the Scottish Government. The grant was a
practical recognition of the importance of Cross's insights into the
effective take up of solar energy amongst poor populations. A significant
slice of the project focuses on supporting `solar entrepreneurs' — women
who sell photovoltaic panels to provide lighting, phone and battery
charging to improve the lives and livelihoods of 15,000 female clients in
Malawi (5.4).
Informing Practitioners. Research has directly informed
professional debates and practices through expert contributions to
practitioner-led networks on biofuels and solar photovoltaics. In 2011, as
a result of the recognition of the importance of his work on science,
technology and development, Smith was appointed as a technology and
development specialist to the board of Practical Action, the leading INGO
working on the role of technology for development and sustainable energy
provision. Smith's role is to contribute to their notion of `technological
justice' as an advocacy tool, taking advantage of Smith's expertise in
influencing debates around equitable access to technology and thus
expanding their developmental reach. Meanwhile, in March 2013 Cross was
appointed as a Technical Advisor to the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition
(SVTC), a leading INGO engaged in research and advocacy in the global
solar industry. His key contribution has been to support SVTC's Solar
Scorecard, an initiative that holds manufacturers and suppliers publically
accountable by monitoring sustainability and social justice issues in
their supply chains.
Research capacity-building programmes and training workshops have created
additional practitioner impact. According to the Director of Research at
the African Centre of Technology Studies Institute in Nairobi — the
leading African think tank on science and development — this work has
`contributed significantly to the capacity building and training
initiatives` of the centre (see 5.5). Smith has contributed to the
training of 1349 bioenergy development stakeholders in the UK, East Africa
and Sri Lanka (5.11). As part of this process, small-scale bioenergy
projects supervised by Smith for the UN's Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), for example, have led to an influential report which
has provoked practitioner debates about the tensions between small-scale
and large-scale bioenergy provision at the FAO (see 5.6).
Engaging Publics. Research has broadened public understandings of
science and technology in international development. It has done so
through challenging existing development practice, raising new questions
about the political economy of technological innovation and global social
entrepreneurship, and by holding business practices up to scrutiny. In the
UK, Smith drafted a chapter on `Ethical Principles and Biofuels Policy'
for the Nuffield Council's 2010 report, Biofuels: Ethical Issues,
which was the first public report to set out principles on which biofuel
policy should be based (see 5.7). The reports recommendations have been
strongly reflected in the `Bioenergy principles' set out in the UK
Government's Bioenergy Strategy, published in April 2012 (5.8). Further
public engagement includes: invited commentaries on the emergence of
biofuels in print, broadcast and online media (Smith), as well as at UK
public festivals of science (Smith); the organization of a public debate
on the ethics of market-based approaches to development at the University
of Oxford in May 2011, bringing together panelists and participants from
DFID, ODI, OXFAM, CARE, Unilever, and The Guardian (Cross); and the launch
of a web-based portal aimed at bringing academic research to
practitioners, http://www.responsiblebop.com
which has registred an average 500 unique user hits per day since June
2011 (Cross) (5.9).
Smith and Cross's research has also had direct impact on public advocacy
around biofuels and solar photovoltaics. Smith worked with Practical
Action and ActionAid to help establish public awareness of the political
economy of biofuels before it was generally recognized that they might be
socially, politically and environmentally problematic, and has fed into
pressure on the EU to reduce biofuel blending targets (5.2). In 2011-12
Cross worked with the SVTC and the Dutch Centre for Research on
Multinationals to establish Good Solar, an international network aimed at
bringing together social, labour, and environmental activists to
strengthen regulatory mechanisms in the global photovoltaic supply chain,
which represents one of the first — if not the first — attempt to
facilitate civil society networking, information exchange, capacity
building and joint strategy-making at the level of solar supply chains
(5.10).
Sources to corroborate the impact
PDFs of all web links are available at
www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/display/REF2014REF3B/UoA+24
5.1 Letter from DfID, corroborating Smith's role in forming
multi-stakeholder policy working groups, Kenya National Biofuel Policy and
improving clean energy access. Provider is a reporter on the process of
impact.
5.2 `EU Parliament vote on biofuels'. Nuffield Council on Bioethics Press
Release, 11 July 2013. Corroborating impact of Nuffield Report on EU
policy, http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/news/eu-parliament-vote-biofuels
5.3 Spreadsheet of PISCES quantitative impacts based on PISCES partners'
African Centre of Technology Studies, Kenya, Practical Action, MS
Swaminathan Research Foundation, India, and the University of Dar es
Salaam, Tanzania. Corroborating calculations on clean PISCES impact on
clean energy take up. Available from
www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/pages/editpage.action?pageId=175640392
5.4 Microloan Foundation announcement on project. Corroborating Smith and
Cross's involvement in project, http://www.microloanfoundation.org.uk/what-we-do/news/13-03-18/MicroLoan_wins_grant_from_Scottish_Government_s_Malawi_Development_Programme.aspx
5.5 Letter from the Director of Research at the African Centre of
Technology Studies Institute in Nairobi, corroborating Smith's
contribution to capacity building around energy and technology innovation.
Provider is a participant in impact process.
5.6 Report published by FAO: Practical Action. Small-Scale Bioenergy
Initiatives: Brief description and preliminary lessons on livelihood
impacts2028from case studies in Asia, Latin America and
Africa, ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/aj991e/aj991e.pdf
5.7 Letter from Chair of Nuffield Biofuels Report, corroborating Smith's
contribution to report.
5.8 `UK Government sets out `bioenergy principles''. Nuffield Council on
Bioethics, Press Release, 3 May 2012. Corroborating Nuffield Bioefuels
Report's impact on UK Government's Bioenergy Strategy, http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/news/uk-government-sets-out-%E2%80%98bioenergy-principles%E2%80%99
5.9 Website Analytics, available from
www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/pages/editpage.action?pageId=175640392.
5.10 SOMO Annual Report 2012, http://somo.nl/publications-en/Publication_3949
5.11 PISCES report on Stakeholder participation. Corroborating PISCES
involvement in training practitioners, available at www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/pages/editpage.action?pageId=175640392.