Vivek Shastry
The importance of energy access, or the provision of clean, reliable sources of cooking fuels and electricity for rural development, cannot be over-stated; it can be a livelihood enabler, unlocking opportunities for better health, education, economic development, and so forth. Despite advances, we still live in a world where one in six people lack access to energy. An overwhelming 85 percent of that population live in rural areas, and 87 percent of them in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. This includes over 300 million people in India alone (Figure 1). Why has progress been so slow?
Researchers worldwide have focused on two important dimensions of energy access: measurement and delivery mechanism. The former deals with how to quantify the nature and level of access in a region, while the latter addresses the different institutional processes that facilitate the delivery of energy services. In the summer of 2014, I set out to find the relevant indicators used to understand energy access in India. Specifically, I wanted to learn how such indicators could help understand regional disparities in energy access, and further help prioritize the implementation of various schemes designed to address this. Before long, I learned not only was there no understanding of regional disparities and opportunities but there was no institutional process to recognize and make use of this information.
My focus then shifted to understanding the nature of energy policy-making in India—a distinctly state-driven top-down approach. In the past decade or so, a number of entrepreneurs have successfully pioneered energy delivery processes to facilitate access to the rural poor. The knowledge that they accrue from working on the ground, what I will henceforth refer to as local knowledge, plays an important role in complex processes like energy access delivery. Drawing from theoretical precedents, historical context, and empirical evidence, I argue that such useful local knowledge does not find a place in the current top-down decision-making environment. Instead, I propose a regional energy planning process to bring this knowledge to the forefront, and identify the key elements of that framework. But first, why have the top-down approaches seen limited success?
Limited Success of Top-Down Approaches
The history of electrification in India has been shaped by the social and political context. Political scientist Sunila Kale (2014) explores the reasons behind India’s limited success in the electrification project, despite it being central to the conceptualization of Indian modernity by early nationalists and planners. The initial conduit for electricity into rural India was for its productive impact in agro-industries and for irrigation; household access only followed. The expansion of the national electric grid, deciding which customers should be served, which sectors should be subsidized, and so forth were all decisions that rested with the state. Following this history it is apparent how energy access delivery has been a top-down process in India—an approach that has had only limited success
A number of policies have been enacted in the last decade to achieve goals of universal access. For example, the National Electricity Policy (2005), National Rural Electrification Policy (2006), Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojaja (2005), and Remote Village Electrification Program (2006) have all envisioned complete energy access but have missed several deadlines (Nathan, 2014). As of 2011, over 45% of rural households still did not have access to electricity in India (Planning Commission, 2013). Even among those that have connections, the supply is usually inadequate and unreliable.
The reasons often cited for these failures include the disconnect between public and private agencies in policy discourse, untested and sometimes unnecessary subsidy schemes, and a general lack of institutional frame-work for strategizing policy implementation (Balachandra, 2011). The only avenue for stakeholders to be involved in policy-making is a consultation process at the top, which has a tendency to only focus on the big picture, while missing the regional differences. As Indian economist Prabhat Patnaik observes, “the proliferation of ‘centrally sponsored schemes’ handed down to the states where they have to contribute a certain share, which is itself arbitrarily fixed by the center, has further taken away the freedom of state governments to make their own state plans” (2014). State governments tend to take a similar catch-all approach, often blinded to local knowledge and regional opportunities. The next question is: what is local knowledge, and why is it important?
Complexity and the Role of Local Knowledge
Several different actors and actions are involved in the delivery of energy access, as summarized by Bellanca, Bloomfield, and Rai (2013). They can be broadly categorized under energy market chain, enabling environments, and supporting services. Figure 2 (see page 102) shows an example of the different activities involved in the process. Additionally, a number of small energy providers, micro-financers and village level entrepreneurs play a vital role in the delivery of energy access in rural areas. These entrepreneurs possess a certain kind of local knowledge that is context-dependent and evolves over years of groundwork and learning by doing.
Consider, for example, actors’ understanding of how the potential spending on energy needs would fit into a rural household’s monthly budget, as compared to spending on other needs like food, water, and education. Many households are not able to afford the upfront cost of energy services that is required under some of the current policies. Understanding the local expenditure patterns can result in structuring payment mechanisms that reduce the financial burden on rural households. For almost every reason cited for the slow progress of electrification, one can find examples of such local knowledge that is useful, but not recognized.
Theoretically, these actors, their location, context, and local knowledge are characteristic of complex systems (Antonelli, 2009). Two key characteristics of the system that are of most interest in this context are the notions of local knowledge and feedbacks. The translation of local knowledge into replicable, codified knowledge (i.e. policies) occurs through systematic local interactions (Polyani, 1969), resulting in feedback loops that reinforce the system’s performance (Odum and Odum, 2001). When there is no institutional capacity to facilitate these interactions, local knowledge would rarely get incorporated into policies.
This leads to my central argument that the challenge of delivering complete energy access in India does not lie in a silver bullet policy or grand institutional framework. Rather, it lies in a regional energy planning process that values the local knowledge and synthesizes the regional data and local institutional practices to advocate for locally relevant policies. Now, what would that planning entail?
Toward Regional Energy Planning
A quick theoretical and historical example demonstrates why a top-down approach to energy access delivery does not and cannot incorporate useful local knowledge. On the other hand, several policy research institutions have begun looking at ways to involve local stakeholders, though there is no clear consensus on how these agencies can take the leadership in regional energy planning. At least two important questions arise from this discussion. First, what would be the key components and functions of a regional energy planning framework? Second, what regional data and indicators can aid strategic policy formulation and implementation?
A stakeholder focus group organized in Bangalore, India, recognized these challenges and offered several suggestions. Participants included state regulators, government officials, policy researchers, entrepreneurs, and training institutions. Based on this theoretical, historical, and empirical discussion, three key components emerged to be important in a regional energy planning framework (Table 1). It is important to note that policy research agencies already work on bits and pieces of this planning process. Conceptualizing these activities under an energy planning framework can help agencies to codify this approach. This in turn would make it possible to repeat the process in other regions and states, and thereby co-construct context-based policies that give importance to local knowledge
Table 1: Key components and functions of a regional energy planning framework. Source: Author
| Data Management | Establish and coordinate a state-level energy-related database that would act as a node for various stakeholders to pool in and update data. Even prior to this, it is to establish what data is important, who possesses this data, and what gaps need to be filled. |
| Stakeholder Coordination | Create a forum for all relevant stakeholders to have regular deliberations on current issues. Reach out to groups that are not present at the table. Facilitating this dialogue can resolve miscommunication between stakeholders, help the state understand how it needs to structure its policies, and bring locally relevant knowledge to the forefront. |
| Policy Research and Advocacy | Synthesize the data to determine which business models are most suitable for which regions within the state and issue policy guidance to scale up existing models effectively. Actively advocate on behalf of the regions still lacking access to reliable energy access in order to maintain the government’s focus on this issue. |
In conclusion, priorities, capabilities, and resources to achieve energy access goals will vary between states and regions within nations. An over-arching directive imposed from the top will no longer be enough to attain complete energy access and sustain the growing demand. A participatory approach that involves local stakeholders and incorporates local knowledge is necessary to co-construct policies relevant to local contexts. The hope, then, is to move from a top-down, subsidy-based, supply-driven approach towards a more bottom-up, capacity-based, demand-driven approach to realize the goals of universal access to energy.
Acknowledgment
I wish to thank SELCO Foundation, Bangalore, for being a partner in this study, and the William H. Emis III Traveling Scholarship at University of Texas at Austin for facilitating my research travel to India.
References
Antonelli, C. (2009). The economics of innovation: From the classical legacies to the economics of complexity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 18(7), 611–646.
Balachandra, P. (2011). Modern energy access to all in rural India: An integrated implementation strategy. Energy Policy, 39(12), 7803.
Bellanca, R., Bloomfield, E., & Rai, K. (2013). Delivering Energy for Development. Practical Action Publishing.
Nathan, H. S. K. (2014). Solar energy for rural electricity in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 49(50), 60–67.
Odum, H. T., & Odum, E. C. (2001). A Prosperous Way Down: Principles and Policies. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.
Patnaik, P. (2015). From the planning commission to the NITI Aayog. Economic and Political Weekly, 50(4), 10–12.
Planning Commission, Government of India. (2013). Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012- 2017). New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Polanyi, M. (1969). Knowing and Being: Essays. London: Routledge & K. Paul.
