Main knowledge bank page | Recent additions | Recent changes | What links here | Categories | Category cloud
How-to guides | Organisation profiles | Project profiles
 

edit this page

Are energy projects not wanted any more?

Boiling Point
Front cover of Boiling Point issue 44
Issue 44 (2000) Linking household energy with other development objectives
ArticleAre energy projects not wanted any more?
AuthorClive Caffall


Les projets énergétiques sont-ils toujours désirables?

Les bailleurs fonds ont désormais tendance à favoriser les projets impliquant les populations plutôt que les projets à forte intensité en capital. Cette approche devrait favoriser le développement des énergies domestiques. Cependant les besoins énergétiques ne sont pas toujours explicites car ils sont intégrés dans d'autres besoins comme l'eau, la nourriture etc. Il peut être par conséquent difficile d'identifier les bailleurs de fonds appropriés ou les politiques à mettre en oeuvre. Les projets énergie domestique devraient être formulés de manière à ce qu'ils soient reconnus par les bailleurs de fonds potentiels, par exemple l'accès plus égalitaire entre les genres, l'amélioration des conditions sanitaires, une meilleure productivité devraient être mis en relief.

These are personal views based upon several years' experience of working within both multi-lateral and bi-lateral development agencies.

Funding organisations are aligning their work with the International Development Targets (IDTs) agreed at various United Nations (UN) summits. The prime IDT is halving the proportion of people living in absolute poverty by 2015. Related to this are several other quantifiable targets, eg for reducing infant mortality, working towards gender equality, and ensuring environmental sustainability.

The effect of this has been a trend towards more people-based projects. These can be at the policy level, seeking to influence the way authorities work, or working directly with the communities. Hence within many donor organisations the social sciences are now having a greater influence upon policy and therefore which type of projects will be supported.

To those working in household energy, this might seem to be a change for the better in terms of getting funding for their projects. However there is tendency, within agencies now, to consider more integrated approaches to tackling poverty rather than programmes devoted to a particular sector. One of the constraints for household energy people to contribute to this integrated approach appears to be 'connecting' with the correct policy and/or funding lines without being sent from department to department.

To overcome this, we have to realise that household energy is rarely seen as relevant to the objectives of these other departments and disciplines. There is an unfortunate perception that an energy project still means power stations and large-scale electricity provision. Or, at the other extreme, that household energy equates with just 'stoves', which are seen as involving hands-on management-intensive fieldwork that is best left to local NGOs.

The problem we have is that energy is not something that is needed for its own sake, unlike water, shelter or food. Participatory appraisals with communities do not explicitly identify energy as a need. Instead it is often embedded in the needs that are expressed, such as help for children suffering from asthma and breathing problems, adult education, or cash for basic fulfilment.

So the promoters of household energy will increasingly have to adapt their work to be incorporated within other initiatives, ie 'put into the mainstream'. Some may find it difficult to be only contributing to a small part of a larger activity instead having their own 'energy' project. But this is starting to become the only way to get support for energy work.

It is important to highlight those benefits of household energy interventions that are consistent with the IDTs. These benefits will often be things that we know well, such as reduced indoor air pollution, but they may have to be 'marketed' in terms that the potential funders are now seeking. It must be borne in mind that energy (or power) will have been (and may still be) the responsibility of another department. So the funders you are addressing now may never have had any dealings with energy specialists. Hence it may be good idea for you to collaborate with specialists from other disciplines such as social development, economics and governance to get the necessary perspectives.

Some examples follow of how household energy work can be shown to contribute to the IDTs. The addition of a relevant example (say from the country where the project will be) would help to illustrate the case being made.

[top] [end]Better health for poor people

The following health issues are associated with the absence of modern fuels:

  • Health effects of collecting and preparing traditional fuels (see Table 1);
  • Domestic air pollution and other hazards from cooking over open fires (see Table 1);
  • Lack of power for health centres (lighting, vaccination refrigeration and sterilisation);

Health benefits that can arise from improving household energy provision:

  • Smoke reduction via better ventilation, quicker cooking practices (less time in the kitchen), use of more efficient stoves, a transition to cleaner fuels (eg kerosene, LPG, bio-gas);
  • Decentralised grids or standalone systems to provide electricity for health centres;
  • Power for community water pumping from cleaner ground water supplies.

Table 1. Health hazards associated with biomass fuels
Activity Possible health effects
Gathering fuel Severe fatigue, risk of landmine injury, bites from snakes and insects, opportunity cost of time (eg reduced child care)
Preparing dung cakes Risk of infection
Charcoal production Smoke poisoning, burns, cataracts
Cooking - smoke emission Acute respiratory infections (ARI), chronic obstructive lung diseases (COLD), conjunctivitis, exposure to toxic fumes
Cooking - heat emission Greater incidence of burns and scalds, cataracts
Cooking - posture Arthritis, back pain
Source: Prof. P Miller (BP40, 1998) adapted from WHO

[top] [end]The removal of gender discrimination

Women suffer most from the lack of access to modern energy. This forces them to spend most of their day on survival activities. In particular:
  • Fetching water, which can be the most burdensome and time consuming activity;
  • Pounding grain by hand, often a daily activity and the most exhausting;
  • Collecting firewood or other combustible biomass (which accounts for 20% of rural women's work time on average);
  • Cooking over inefficient fires;
  • Head-loading of crops and other manual farming work.

Hence women's use of energy should be considered as a major issue within any gender analysis of development needs. The provision of appropriate energy supplies can enable a number of gender related benefits:
  • Opportunity for women to improve their status by being freed from drudgery;
  • Energy for small enterprises allows women to expand their traditional craft activities and diversify into new business areas;
  • Provision of street lighting improves safety at night and facilitates social gathering;
  • Power for a public phone can bring real benefits to women and the community.

[top] [end]The reduction of poverty

The limited access to reliable and affordable energy services constrains poverty reduction by:
  • Perpetuating the lack of opportunities for sustainable income generation;
  • Restricting productive activities in the evenings, due to poor quality lighting.

So incorporating energy supply into development programmes can:
  • Encourage faster development of small enterprises, creating job opportunities and reducing migration to urban areas;
  • Provide affordable electricity to homes, generated by decentralised mini-grids and standalone systems, for lighting and productive uses.

However, if the provision of a new energy supply does not stimulate an increase in local productivity and incomes, it is not likely to be sustainable. Micro credit schemes can only be based on an adequate future income to repay the loans (although an energy service company (ESCO) may only require a down payment for connection, not a loan). Therefore providing energy should be seen as an enabling element, not the reason for a development intervention. The best projects are those where the introduction of a small amount of energy can lead to a large increase in incomes.

It will greatly help the case you are trying to make if you are familiar with the programmes that the funding organisation is planning. Most donors publish their strategies for particular countries and themes. Some of these are available through official web sites. It will save both your time and theirs to approach only on those donors who are working in the country in which you are interested. Further you should identify which programmes (if any) might include an energy element, based upon the sort of reasoning given in the examples above.

Such programmes could be:
  • Community managed natural resource schemes (improve the biomass resources available by instigating farmer tree growing and local woodland management);
  • Influencing the policy environment (eg by addressing inconsistencies between forestry and energy policies; ensuring that traditional fuels are fully included in national and local energy planning);
  • Facilitating market liberalisation (remove distorting fuel subsidies and taxes);
  • Helping governments to create an enabling environment that will encourage the private sector to invest in public service delivery (eg ESCOs);
  • Enterprise development (enabled by reliable energy supply)
  • Institutional development (eg establishing community ownership of local decentralised systems, training in maintenance skills, etc).

The basic needs of poor people have not changed. Household energy interventions can help to meet these and improve their quality of life. The challenge is to show how this can fit within the broader agenda that development agencies are adopting.

[top] [end]Contents: Boiling Point 44: Linking household energy with other development objectives

.
.
Integrating household energy into wider development objectives - Interlinkages of household energy with the environment - Are energy projects not wanted any more - Health and household energy - the need for better links between research and development - Cooking smoke can increase the risk of tuberculosis - Monitoring ECO-house performance as if people mattered - Carbon trading - a new route to funding improved stove programmes - The integrated approach to link household energy with other development objectives - The ecological cost of increasing dependence on biomass fuels as household energy in rural Nigeria - Women in post-harvest operations - reducing the drudgery - Light - from wind - a journey of will and imagination - The Tehesh efficient biomass stove, Tigrai, Ethiopia - The Turbo wood-gas stove

edit this page

Page created: 16 July 2007; Last edited: 21 August 2007; Version: 0
Knowledge Bank text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.

Pagename: AreEnergyProjectsNotWantedAnyMore @HEDON: GVFA