Difference between revisions of "Understand User Needs"

From energypedia
***** (***** | *****)
m
Tag: 2017 source edit
***** (***** | *****)
Line 26: Line 26:
 
The local population served can also have additional roles in the electrification scheme, i.e. beyond being the users of the services and the customers of the supply company. The local population can be actively involved in several phases of the project development - including the construction, the operation and the management of the systems<ref>Höffken, J.I. (2016) ‘Demystification and localization in the adoption of micro-hydro technology: Insights from India’, ''Energy Research & Social Science'', 22, pp. 172–182. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.09.002</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Madriz-Vargas, R., Bruce, A. and Watt, M. (2018) ‘The future of Community Renewable Energy for electricity access in rural Central America’, ''Energy Research & Social Science'', 35, pp. 118–131. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.015</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Katre, A., Tozzi, A. and Bhattacharyya, S. (2019) ‘Sustainability of community-owned mini-grids: evidence from India’, ''Energy, Sustainability and Society'', 9(1), p. 2. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-018-0185-9</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Bloem, S., Swilling, M. and Koranteng, K. (2021) ‘Taking energy democracy to the streets: Socio-technical learning, institutional dynamism, and integration in South African community energy projects’, ''Energy Research & Social Science'', 72, p. 101906. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101906</nowiki>.</ref>.
 
The local population served can also have additional roles in the electrification scheme, i.e. beyond being the users of the services and the customers of the supply company. The local population can be actively involved in several phases of the project development - including the construction, the operation and the management of the systems<ref>Höffken, J.I. (2016) ‘Demystification and localization in the adoption of micro-hydro technology: Insights from India’, ''Energy Research & Social Science'', 22, pp. 172–182. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.09.002</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Madriz-Vargas, R., Bruce, A. and Watt, M. (2018) ‘The future of Community Renewable Energy for electricity access in rural Central America’, ''Energy Research & Social Science'', 35, pp. 118–131. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.015</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Katre, A., Tozzi, A. and Bhattacharyya, S. (2019) ‘Sustainability of community-owned mini-grids: evidence from India’, ''Energy, Sustainability and Society'', 9(1), p. 2. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-018-0185-9</nowiki>.</ref><ref>Bloem, S., Swilling, M. and Koranteng, K. (2021) ‘Taking energy democracy to the streets: Socio-technical learning, institutional dynamism, and integration in South African community energy projects’, ''Energy Research & Social Science'', 72, p. 101906. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101906</nowiki>.</ref>.
  
−
==== Addressing structures of inequality ====
+
==== <s>Addressing structures of inequality</s> Consider aspects of gender equality ====
−
It becomes increasingly important to view the needs and constraints of different groups through an energy justice framework. Studies find a strong risk of implementing rural electrification interventions that do not represent a sustainable solution to the structural drivers of energy poverty and do not have the capacity to address social inequalities (Samarakoon, 2020, Monyei et al 2018). This also includes interventions that are addressing productive uses. For example, Sahrakorpi and Bandi (2021) find that programmes promoting use of rice husk processing appliances among women in rural North India led to formal employment opportunities, but their presence did not secure long-lasting women’s empowerment.  
+
<s>It becomes increasingly important to view the needs and constraints of different groups through an energy justice framework. Studies find a strong risk of implementing rural electrification interventions that do not represent a sustainable solution to the structural drivers of energy poverty and do not have the capacity to address social inequalities (Samarakoon, 2020, Monyei et al 2018). This also includes interventions that are addressing productive uses. For example, Sahrakorpi and Bandi (2021) find that programmes promoting use of rice husk processing appliances among women in rural North India led to formal employment opportunities, but their presence did not secure long-lasting women’s empowerment.</s>
 +
 
 +
To improve diversity and inclusion, developers should provide training for all genders<ref>Solar Power Europe (2021) Operation and Maintenance Best Practice Guidelines / Africa edition. Available at: <nowiki>https://api.solarpowereurope.org/uploads/Africa_edition_O_and_M_Best_Practice_Guidelines_fdea430b58.pdf</nowiki></ref>. A selection of training academies already offers courses targeting women specifically. There is a greater potential of gender-sensitive approaches to reduce household poverty and increase the overall wellbeing of the community<ref>Soler, A., Jäger, J. and Lecoque, D. (2020) Women Entrepreneurs as Key Drivers in the Decentralised Renewable Energy Sector. Available at: <nowiki>https://www.ruralelec.org/sites/default/files/Gender%20%26%20Energy%20Publication.pdf</nowiki>.</ref>. Women benefit from an increase in electricity supply by spending less time on household production, providing them more time for e.g. economic activities. This in turn leads to an increase in employment and factor incomes which benefits the whole community<ref>Cicowiez, M. et al. (2022) ‘Gender-differentiated impacts of a Rural Electrification Policy in Nigeria’, Energy Policy, 162, p. 112774. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112774</nowiki></ref>.
 +
 
 +
To ensure a comprehensive and diverse perspective, women and other disadvantaged members should be included in decision processes. Developers should also consider women-led groups for better representation<ref>SIGMA (2022) ‘Community participation in mini-grids development: Key points to focus on’. Available at: <nowiki>https://www.sigma-gcrf.net/blog/community-participation-in-mini-grids-development-key-points-to-focus-on</nowiki>.</ref>. Public meetings and other outreach efforts should take place at times when women can attend and should be adapted to women needs<ref>USAID (no date) How can developers engage communities? Available at: <nowiki>https://www.usaid.gov/energy/mini-grids/community/engagement</nowiki>.</ref>.
  
 
==== Community-based models ====
 
==== Community-based models ====
 +
Under community-based models, local communities own, manage, operate and maintain mini-grids. These communities usually receive external help with financing, design and installation. Often, the developer or another outside organization provides technical capacity building, and a public entity or donor provides grants or other financial assistance. Once the mini-grid is installed, the community assumes responsibility for tariff collection and operations and maintenance. Community electricity cooperatives and other local organizations often play this role<ref>USAID. What ownership models are used for mini-grids? <nowiki>https://www.usaid.gov/energy/mini-grids/ownership/models</nowiki></ref>. There is evidence of failed community-based models due to a gap in local capacity and a rushed ownership transfer<ref>Katre, A. and Tozzi, A. (2019) ‘Using hugs, carrots and sticks: How agents exercise power in the transition to community-owned energy systems in remote India’, Energy Research & Social Science, 54, pp. 129–139. Available at: <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.04.008</nowiki></ref>.
  
 
==Existing Tools==
 
==Existing Tools==

Revision as of 15:10, 18 September 2023



Introduction

Designing electricity delivery models for people living in poverty begins with an understanding of the opportunities and constraints arising from the end users’ specific socio-economic and cultural context. These opportunities and constraints may be related to energy but also to other, non-energy factors. This dimension has a broad scope and touches on many of the subsequent dimensions of the toolbox. This section will firstly provide some guiding principles by reviewing some of the broader concepts and secondly hint towards existing tools and resources.

Definitions

[Enter definitions text]

Challenges

[Enter challenges text]

Guiding Principles

There is an increasing amount of evidence that underlines the importance of taking into account the socio-cultural, economic and political dimensions of the specific local contexts in which off-grid energy interventions take place[1][2]. The importance of these contextual dimensions can be roughly categorized into three issues: a) understanding needs, b) securing engagement and c) addressing structures of inequality.

Understanding needs

When developing an electrification intervention, understanding aspirations and values of the people that get access to the electricity service is as important as solving the economic challenges (e.g. the accessibility and the financial ability to buy the required appliances). There is a diversity of benefits that electricity users can perceive as valuable, such as business opportunity, the elimination of labour intensive tasks, preservation of health, security, the ability to acquire knowledge, and comfort, among others. Understanding and properly addressing these context specific values of a population is an important factor to ensure communities’ endorsement to electrification interventions [3][4]. The potential effects of access to electricity on practices linked to business activities of the served population are of particular interest in the design and implementation of electrification interventions. These types of effects are often gathered under the term “productive use of electricity” (PUE).

Securing communication and engagement

The process of implementing a new local energy system implies introducing a series of changes in the physical and immaterial aspects of the lives of the local population. It is essential to engage local actors in all the phases of project development – i.e. in the process of introducing changes in their lives – in order to secure sustainable operation of the systems as well as to deliver effective development impacts[5][6].

One crucial issue is the building and maintaining of trustful communication. This is key in order to build proper understanding of the needs of the users and to ensure that all the actors involved or affected by the electrification initiative understand the project objectives, potential benefits as well as its limitations, i.e. for proper management of expectations[3]. This implies for instance securing mutual understanding about important design parameters such as tariffs, the costs and rules for connection, the power or the amount of energy available to single users, the schedule of the energy provision, the operation and management arrangements[3][6].

Local factors influencing such design parameters can be difficult to determine ex-ante and might become apparent first after the implementation or even the operation of the systems has started. It is also difficult to foresee how the practices of the users will evolve once the use of electricity is integrated in their lives. Thus, maintaining communication channels and – more generally – engagement with the users can be crucial also for managing the future evolution of the systems[7][6][2].

The local population served can also have additional roles in the electrification scheme, i.e. beyond being the users of the services and the customers of the supply company. The local population can be actively involved in several phases of the project development - including the construction, the operation and the management of the systems[8][9][10][11].

Addressing structures of inequality Consider aspects of gender equality

It becomes increasingly important to view the needs and constraints of different groups through an energy justice framework. Studies find a strong risk of implementing rural electrification interventions that do not represent a sustainable solution to the structural drivers of energy poverty and do not have the capacity to address social inequalities (Samarakoon, 2020, Monyei et al 2018). This also includes interventions that are addressing productive uses. For example, Sahrakorpi and Bandi (2021) find that programmes promoting use of rice husk processing appliances among women in rural North India led to formal employment opportunities, but their presence did not secure long-lasting women’s empowerment.

To improve diversity and inclusion, developers should provide training for all genders[12]. A selection of training academies already offers courses targeting women specifically. There is a greater potential of gender-sensitive approaches to reduce household poverty and increase the overall wellbeing of the community[13]. Women benefit from an increase in electricity supply by spending less time on household production, providing them more time for e.g. economic activities. This in turn leads to an increase in employment and factor incomes which benefits the whole community[14].

To ensure a comprehensive and diverse perspective, women and other disadvantaged members should be included in decision processes. Developers should also consider women-led groups for better representation[15]. Public meetings and other outreach efforts should take place at times when women can attend and should be adapted to women needs[16].

Community-based models

Under community-based models, local communities own, manage, operate and maintain mini-grids. These communities usually receive external help with financing, design and installation. Often, the developer or another outside organization provides technical capacity building, and a public entity or donor provides grants or other financial assistance. Once the mini-grid is installed, the community assumes responsibility for tariff collection and operations and maintenance. Community electricity cooperatives and other local organizations often play this role[17]. There is evidence of failed community-based models due to a gap in local capacity and a rushed ownership transfer[18].

Existing Tools

Name Nigeria specific Open source Description
PeopleSuN Survey Data Yes Yes The survey data within the PeopleSuN project comprise responses from 3,599 households and 1,122 enterprises. The survey included a set of questions specifically designed to ascertain the ownership of electrical appliances, as well as the timing of their usage during both the day and night. The dataset is publicly available on PeopleSuN Harvard dataverse for the open access of academic community, local stakeholders and international initiatives.
Rural Senses User-Perceived Value approach No Yes The Rural Senses User-Perceived Value approach helps to understand individual preferences and values linked to the use of energy. It helps to understand what is important to local community members and to effectively link this to project design. By ensuring that projects target what local community members truly value, the success rate of interventions can be increased.  The development of this approach is based on previous research work that has been published [4][19].
Powering Renewable Energy Opportunities (PREO) Knowledge Hub No Yes The hub collects information related to productive use of energy. The published resources aim to close critical knowledge gaps in sub-Saharan Africa’s PUE market, helping to uptake PUE, stimulate economies and create jobs. The knowledge hub is clustered in various subject areas like case studies, mini-grids, agri-processing, cold-storage and many more.
Local Solutions Lab by Clean Technology Hub Yes Yes The Nigerian organisation Clean Technology Hub (CTH) applied an innovative approach to identifying community needs and triggering change. The “Local Solutions Lab” (LSL) concept aims to develop community-driven and bottom-up local solutions for sustainable development through a collaborative deep dive into challenges of local stakeholders and opportunities[20]. This experience is featured in a case study that sums up the application of the LSL in Kaduna (North West Nigeria) and Anambra (South West Nigeria) as well as some of the impacts it has had since, in particular in the development of energy-related solutions.
USAID Mini-Grids Support Toolkit No Yes The toolkit includes one module that focuses on community involvement in mini grids. It describes approaches for engaging the local community (including women and other marginalized groups), how to assess a community’s energy needs, how to assess community support, types of conflicts that might arise and how to measure social benefits and impacts of a mini grid project.

Case Study

This case study describes the approach of a Local Solutions Lab developed by the Clean Technology Hub. They used a design-thinking approach to identify community needs and solutions. You can view and download the case study here.

Peoplesun Casestudy 2 CTH.pdf

Bibliography

  1. ↑ Ockwell, D. et al. (2018) ‘The uptake and diffusion of solar power in Africa: Socio-cultural and political insights on a rapidly emerging socio-technical transition’, Energy Research & Social Science, 44, pp. 122–129. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.04.033.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Ulsrud, K., Winther, T., Palit, D., & Rohracher, H. (2015). Village-level solar power in Africa: Accelerating access to electricity services through a socio-technical design in Kenya. Energy Research & Social Science, 5, 34–44. https://doi.org/ka
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Eder, J. M., Mutsaerts, C. F., & Sriwannawit, P. (2015). Mini-grids and renewable energy in rural Africa: How diffusion theory explains adoption of electricity in Uganda. Energy Research & Social Science, 5, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.12.014
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Hirmer, S., & Guthrie, P. (2017). The benefits of energy appliances in the off-grid energy sector based on seven off-grid initiatives in rural Uganda. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 79, 924–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.152
  5. ↑ Liu, Y., & Bah, Z. (2021). Enabling development impact of solar mini-grids through the community engagement: Evidence from rural Sierra Leone. Energy Policy, 154, 112294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112294
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Tomei, J., Cronin, J., Arias, H. D. A., Machado, S. C., Palacios, M. F. M., Ortiz, Y. M. T., Cuesta, Y. E. B., Lemus, R. P., López, W. M., & Anandarajah, G. (2020). Forgotten spaces: How reliability, affordability and engagement shape the outcomes of last-mile electrification in Chocó, Colombia. Energy Research & Social Science, 59, 101302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101302
  7. ↑ Batidzirai, B. et al. (2021) ‘Towards people-private-public partnerships: An integrated community engagement model for capturing energy access needs’, Energy Research & Social Science, 74, p. 101975. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101975.
  8. ↑ Höffken, J.I. (2016) ‘Demystification and localization in the adoption of micro-hydro technology: Insights from India’, Energy Research & Social Science, 22, pp. 172–182. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.09.002.
  9. ↑ Madriz-Vargas, R., Bruce, A. and Watt, M. (2018) ‘The future of Community Renewable Energy for electricity access in rural Central America’, Energy Research & Social Science, 35, pp. 118–131. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.015.
  10. ↑ Katre, A., Tozzi, A. and Bhattacharyya, S. (2019) ‘Sustainability of community-owned mini-grids: evidence from India’, Energy, Sustainability and Society, 9(1), p. 2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-018-0185-9.
  11. ↑ Bloem, S., Swilling, M. and Koranteng, K. (2021) ‘Taking energy democracy to the streets: Socio-technical learning, institutional dynamism, and integration in South African community energy projects’, Energy Research & Social Science, 72, p. 101906. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101906.
  12. ↑ Solar Power Europe (2021) Operation and Maintenance Best Practice Guidelines / Africa edition. Available at: https://api.solarpowereurope.org/uploads/Africa_edition_O_and_M_Best_Practice_Guidelines_fdea430b58.pdf
  13. ↑ Soler, A., Jäger, J. and Lecoque, D. (2020) Women Entrepreneurs as Key Drivers in the Decentralised Renewable Energy Sector. Available at: https://www.ruralelec.org/sites/default/files/Gender%20%26%20Energy%20Publication.pdf.
  14. ↑ Cicowiez, M. et al. (2022) ‘Gender-differentiated impacts of a Rural Electrification Policy in Nigeria’, Energy Policy, 162, p. 112774. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112774
  15. ↑ SIGMA (2022) ‘Community participation in mini-grids development: Key points to focus on’. Available at: https://www.sigma-gcrf.net/blog/community-participation-in-mini-grids-development-key-points-to-focus-on.
  16. ↑ USAID (no date) How can developers engage communities? Available at: https://www.usaid.gov/energy/mini-grids/community/engagement.
  17. ↑ USAID. What ownership models are used for mini-grids? https://www.usaid.gov/energy/mini-grids/ownership/models
  18. ↑ Katre, A. and Tozzi, A. (2019) ‘Using hugs, carrots and sticks: How agents exercise power in the transition to community-owned energy systems in remote India’, Energy Research & Social Science, 54, pp. 129–139. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.04.008
  19. ↑ Hirmer, S., & Guthrie, P. (2016). Identifying the needs of communities in rural Uganda: A method for determining the ‘User-Perceived Value’ of rural electrification initiatives. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 66, 476–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.037
  20. ↑ CTH. (2019). Enabling Small Scale Solutions Growth—Local Solutions Lab. https://bit.ly/LocalSolns
Retrieved from "https://staging.energypedia.info/index.php?title=Understand_User_Needs&oldid=421972"