Sustainable energy for whom? Governing pro-poor pathways to low carbon energy for development Dr David Ockwell, Dr Rob Byrne, Prof Kevin Urama February 2014 [email protected]
Sustainable energy for whom? Governing pro-poor pathways to low carbon energy for development
May 11, 2015
David Ockwell and Robert Byrne (University of Sussex/ STEPS Centre) gave this presentation at King's College London on 25 February 2014 as part of the Environment, Politics and Development Research Group seminar series.
Despite the potential development benefits of low carbon energy technologies, existing international policy has failed to deliver against the needs of low income countries or poor and marginalised people therein. This seminar presents (and seeks feedback on) preliminary findings from a CDKN-funded project on off-grid solar electrical services in Kenya (see http://steps-centre.org/project/low_carbon_development/ ). Utilising the STEPS Centre’s Pathways Approach, it is argued that the failure of existing policy stems from its tendency to frame low carbon development as a problem of financing low carbon hardware transfer to developing countries. Alternative conceptual framings, building on insights from innovation studies and socio-technical transitions, applied to in-depth historical analysis of the successful adoption of off-grid solar in Kenya, suggest neither hardware financing policies nor the free market are likely to result in widespread uptake of low carbon energy technologies amongst poor countries and poor people therein. Instead, interventions should seek to act as “innovation system builders” with an explicit focus on building inclusive innovation systems via a range of specific capacity building approaches.
Dr David Ockwell is a Senior Lecturer in the Dept of Geography at the University of Sussex and co-convenes the STEPS Centre’s energy and climate domain. He’s also affiliated to the Sussex Energy Group and the Tyndall Centre. David’s research focuses on low carbon development with particular recent emphasis on the implications of international policy in terms of poverty and social justice.
Dr Rob Byrne is a Research Fellow in SPRU (Science and Technology Policy Research) at the University of Sussex. He co-convenes the STEPS Centre’s energy and climate domain with David and is also affiliated to the Sussex Energy Group and the Tyndall Centre. Rob’s research focuses on low carbon development with a particular empirical focus on off-grid solar electrical services in East Africa where he has worked both as a practitioner installing solar home systems as well as conducting academic research on this issue
Despite the potential development benefits of low carbon energy technologies, existing international policy has failed to deliver against the needs of low income countries or poor and marginalised people therein. This seminar presents (and seeks feedback on) preliminary findings from a CDKN-funded project on off-grid solar electrical services in Kenya (see http://steps-centre.org/project/low_carbon_development/ ). Utilising the STEPS Centre’s Pathways Approach, it is argued that the failure of existing policy stems from its tendency to frame low carbon development as a problem of financing low carbon hardware transfer to developing countries. Alternative conceptual framings, building on insights from innovation studies and socio-technical transitions, applied to in-depth historical analysis of the successful adoption of off-grid solar in Kenya, suggest neither hardware financing policies nor the free market are likely to result in widespread uptake of low carbon energy technologies amongst poor countries and poor people therein. Instead, interventions should seek to act as “innovation system builders” with an explicit focus on building inclusive innovation systems via a range of specific capacity building approaches.
Dr David Ockwell is a Senior Lecturer in the Dept of Geography at the University of Sussex and co-convenes the STEPS Centre’s energy and climate domain. He’s also affiliated to the Sussex Energy Group and the Tyndall Centre. David’s research focuses on low carbon development with particular recent emphasis on the implications of international policy in terms of poverty and social justice.
Dr Rob Byrne is a Research Fellow in SPRU (Science and Technology Policy Research) at the University of Sussex. He co-convenes the STEPS Centre’s energy and climate domain with David and is also affiliated to the Sussex Energy Group and the Tyndall Centre. Rob’s research focuses on low carbon development with a particular empirical focus on off-grid solar electrical services in East Africa where he has worked both as a practitioner installing solar home systems as well as conducting academic research on this issue
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Sustainable energy for whom?
Governing pro-poor pathways to low carbon energy for development
Dr David Ockwell, Dr Rob Byrne, Prof Kevin Urama
February 2014 [email protected]
www.steps-centre.org/project/low_carbon_development
3
Overview
1. Pathways to low carbon development (Stirling 2012) 2. Dominant framing: Hardware financing 3. Alternative 1: Building innovation capacities 4. Alternative 2: Socio-technical nature of change & development 5. Our Kenya study 6. Implications for policy and research
Multiple Pathways to “Low Carbon Development” - What? For who? How?
Multiple Pathways to “Low Carbon Development” - What? For who? How? - Multiple configurations of energy services, access, behaviour, technologies….
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
Social expectations, cultural norms
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
Historical contingency: Path dependence
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
Politics: Interests, power – who frames the problem?
Intended and unintended processes and power ‘close down’ pathways
Economics: Lock-in to inferior technologies – even in competitive markets
Dominant framing: Hardware financing
Hardware financing policies
e.g. CDM
Internalise positive externalities
(carbon mitigation) to cover additional cost of low carbon
technologies
Africa 3%
China 60%
India 11%
Mexico 3%
Brazil 6%
ROW 17%
CDM USD pc (2014)
CO2 tpc
(2010)
USD pt CO2
China 154 6.15 25
Mexico 104 3.86 27
Brazil 100 2.13 47
India 31 1.62 19
Africa 10 1.09 9
Key ROW: Rest of the World
Sources: Authors, based on analysis of the CDM pipeline; World Development Indicators; http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/world_population.htm
Accumulated investment through the CDM in countries and regions as at end of January 2014 (http://www.cdmpipeline.org)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Brazil Mexico China India Africa
CDM project investment per tonne CO2 emissions
Source: Authors, based on analysis of the CDM pipeline
54 19
14 6
2 2
17 13
10 5
4 4
3 3
2 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
South Africa Egypt
Morocco Tunisia Algeria
Libya Kenya
Uganda Nigeria
Côte d'Ivoire Rwanda Senegal
Madagascar Tanzania
Cameroon Congo DR
Ethiopia Mauritius
Zambia Ghana
Mozambique Sudan
Lesotho Namibia
Zimbabwe Namibia
Cape Verde Liberia
Mali Niger
Sierra Leone
CDM registered projects per country for Africa
Source: Authors, based on analysis of the CDM pipeline
1 1 3 8 10 15 16 22 22 28 33 42 43 61 84 84 93 96 104
305 354 356
632 632
2012 2355
Agriculture Tidal
CO2 usage Mixed renewables
Afforestation Energy distribution
EE service Cement
HFCs Transport
Geothermal Reforestation
Fugitive EE supply side
Coal bed/mine methane EE households
EE industry Fossil fuel switch
N2O EE own generation
Solar Landfill gas
Biomass energy Methane avoidance
Hydro Wind
Source: Authors, based on analysis of the CDM pipeline
• 90% registered CDM projects use seven types of technology
• Only two new renewable energy technologies (although wind is mature relative to other new renewables)
• Solar about 5% of portfolio
Number of registered CDM projects as at end of January 2014, by project type (7412 total registered projects) (http://www.cdmpipeline.org)
Building innovation capacities
Technology suppliers
Technology importers
Technology transferred
Supplier firms’
engineering, managerial and other
technological capabilities
Capital goods, services & designs
Skills & know-how for operation &
maintenance
Knowledge & expertise behind
technology
Accumulation of innovation capacities
New production capacity
Flow A
Flow B
Flow C
Building innovation systems
Indigenous support for technological capabilities
National Innovation System
Skills & know-how for operation &
maintenance
Accumulation of innovation capacity
Knowledge & expertise behind technology
Technology transfer
New production capacity Capital goods, services
& designs
Africa 3%
China 60%
India 11%
Mexico 3%
Brazil 6%
ROW 17%
CDM USD
pc (2014)
CO2 tpc
(2010)
Ratio: USD / tCO2
China 154 6.15 25
Mexico 104 3.86 27
Brazil 100 2.13 47
India 31 1.62 19
Africa 10 1.09 9
Key ROW: Rest of the World
Sources: Authors, based on analysis of the CDM pipeline; World Development Indicators; http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/world_population.htm
Accumulated investment through the CDM in countries and regions as at end of January 2014 (http://www.cdmpipeline.org)
Socio-technical nature of change &
development
Socio-technical nature of change &
development
Socio-technical nature of change &
development
Research questions
Case study: • PV based electrical services in Kenya • Per capita = most successful global market for off-grid PV
Source: Ondraczek, J. (2013) “The sun rises in the east (of Africa): A comparison of the development and status of solar energy markets in Kenya and Tanzania”, Energy Policy 56: 409
Research questions
Case study: • PV based electrical services in Kenya • Per capita = most successful global market for off-grid PV
Research questions: What factors can explain the success of the off-grid PV market in
Kenya? • What role has hardware financing played? • What technological capacity building activities can be identified? • Can “innovation system builders” be identified? • How can this inform policy (especially Climate Innovation Centres)?
Methodology
• In-depth historical analysis • Innovation Histories Method (Douthwaite & Ashby 2005) • Stakeholder workshop & in-depth interviews • Detailed timeline of PV market development • Interrogation against research questions
Snap shot of time line
Date Description Others involved Significance Documents Elaborations
1978 (Henry Watitwa)
Brother used dry cell with wires to light a spot light bulb in our room
Friends and other brothers
For fun – indicates interest in, and awareness of, electricity (power was only in selected houses in town, institutions and Government buildings)
Personal memory motivation
There was no solar.
August 1982 (Enos Orongo)
Failed Coup Contextual event Stimulated Government directive to increase TV network country wide
Possible press reports?
Summary of Kenyan PV market evolution
• Over 300,000 SHSs in Kenya now • Birth of market in mid-1980s • From 1990s, Energy Alternatives Africa managed many projects
– Donor-funded, multi-stakeholder market and technology RD&D
– Articulated market demand and supply chain
– Some technology development success
– Lighting Africa built on this, other players now in the market • Chinese interest in PV manufacture failed but Dutch-Kenyan joint venture
now in Naivasha • Climate Innovation Centre underway
PVMTI vs LA: An illustration from solar in Kenya
Lighting Africa:
Building indigenous technological capacities & innovation systems
Different framings
CDM:
Funding for one-off, international hardware investments
Lighting Africa:
Poor countries, poor people
Different framings: Different distribution of benefits
CDM:
Private investors,
China, India, Brazil
Different framings: Different distribution of benefits
Conclusion: Pro-poor pathways to low carbon development?
www.steps-centre.org/project/low_carbon_development
Policy recommendations j
www.steps-centre.org/project/low_carbon_development
1. Market forces will not deliver on their own. 2. Policy must foster capacities by:
• Building networks that link diverse stakeholders
• Conducting market & technological research & monitoring, making results publicly available
• Raising awareness among consumers & investors to reduce perceived risks & build shared visions
• Fund experimental initiatives (e.g. new stakeholder configurations to test new technologies and approaches)
3. National institutions like Climate Innovation Centres could achieve this, but must be designed to do so. They should link across countries to learn lessons and share best practice.
Related Documents
