Explore the vast range of titles available.

Growing political pressure to find solutions to climate change is leading to increasing calls for multiple disciplines, in particular those that are not traditionally part of climate change research, to contribute new knowledge systems that can offer deeper and broader insights to address the problem. Recognition of the complexity of climate change compels researchers to draw on interdisciplinary knowledge that marries natural sciences with social sciences and humanities. Yet most interdisciplinary approaches fail to adequately merge the framings of the disparate disciplines, resulting in reductionist messages that are largely devoid of context, and hence provide incomplete and misleading analysis for decision-making. For different knowledge systems to work better together toward climate solutions, we need to reframe the way questions are asked and research pursued, in order to inform action without slipping into reductionism. We suggest that interdisciplinarity needs to be rethought. This will require accepting a plurality of narratives, embracing multiple disciplinary perspectives, and shifting expectations of public messaging, and above all looking to integrate the appropriate disciplines that can help understand human systems in order to better mediate action.

Mitigation solutions are often evaluated in terms of costs and greenhouse gas reduction potentials, missing out on the consideration of direct effects on human well-being. Here, we systematically assess the mitigation potential of demand-side options categorized into avoid, shift and improve, and their human well-being links. We show that these options, bridging socio-behavioural, infrastructural and technological domains, can reduce counterfactual sectoral emissions by 40–80% in end-use sectors. Based on expert judgement and an extensive literature database, we evaluate 306 combinations of well-being outcomes and demand-side options, finding largely beneficial effects in improvement in well-being (79% positive, 18% neutral and 3% negative), even though we find low confidence on the social dimensions of well-being. Implementing such nuanced solutions is based axiomatically on an understanding of malleable rather than fixed preferences, and procedurally on changing infrastructures and choice architectures. Results demonstrate the high mitigation potential of demand-side mitigation options that are synergistic with well-being.Evaluation of mitigation actions often focuses on cost and overlooks the direct effects on well-being. This work shows demand-side measures have large mitigation potential and beneficial effects on well-being outcomes.

Lack of access to modern forms of energy hampers efforts to reduce poverty. The provision of electricity to off-grid communities is therefore a long-standing developmental goal. Yet, many off-grid electrification projects neglect mid- and long-term operation and maintenance costs. When this is the case, electricity services are unlikely to be affordable to the communities that are the project’s primary target. Here we show that, compared with diesel-powered electricity generation systems, solar photovoltaic systems are more affordable to no less than 36% of the unelectrified populations in East Asia, South Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa. We do so by developing geo-referenced estimates of affordability at a high level of resolution (1 km 2 ). The analysis illustrates the differences in affordability that may be found at the subnational level, which underscores that electrification investments should be informed by subnational data.

It is abundantly clear that adequate, reliable and clean energy services are vital for the achievement of many of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In essence, energy access has come to represent one of the intractable challenges in development, and therefore emblematic of the call for poverty eradication, and economic and social transformation. This focus issue on 'Energy Access for Sustainable Development' is initiated to draw broadly from the ideas and emerging experiences with energy activities and solutions that sought to enhance sustainable development through expansion of energy access. The focus issue includes several contributions from authors on some of the knowledge gaps this field, including: (i) the role of off-grid and mini-grid energy systems to meet multiple SDGs; (ii) the impacts of the evolving suite of off-grid and distributed energy services on inequalities across gender, and on minority and disadvantaged communities; (iii) the opportunities that the evolving technology base (both of energy services and information systems) plays in expanding the role of off-grid and mini-grid energy systems; (iv) energy options for cooking; (v) new insights into energy planning as well as the political economy, institutional and decision challenges across the energy system. Drawing from papers in this focus issue and other literature, this paper provides a sketch of the key issues in energy access.

While most scholars argue that reducing fuel subsidies should be a policy priority, they also note that once subsidies are in place, many countries, including Indonesia, find it hard to reduce them. This paper examines the complexity of Indonesia’s fuel subsidy reforms from 1998 to 2019, investigating key actors and narratives that shave have their trajectory. It undertakes discourse analysis of purposively sampled news articles from two credible media outlets, reflecting the central role of media as an arena for policy debates in the Global South. It finds that Indonesia has been consistently locked in the ups and downs of fuel subsidy reforms, which are rife with economic and political tensions. This paper affirms that fuel subsidy reform in Indonesia, and elsewhere, is ultimately a complex political, not just technical, endeavour. Reform narratives of economic rationality and technical feasibility must be understood and navigated alongside social and religious beliefs, and political contestation. To this end, reform efforts will likely only succeed and be sustained if they are both embedded within broader social contracts that respect public and political sensitivities and also confront the long-term fiscal and environmental costs of inaction. Through focussing on discourse, this study offers a valuable political economy perspective on fuel subsidy reforms and insight for both scholars and policymakers on highly consequential faming discourses and conflicts.

Background Off-grid and decentralized energy systems have emerged as an alternative to facilitate energy access and resilience in a flexible, adaptable way, particularly for communities that do not have reliable access to centralized energy networks both in rural and urban areas. Much research to date on community energy systems has focused on their deployment in Europe and North America. This paper advances these debates by looking at how community energy systems can support energy transitions in Africa. Specifically, it asks: what role can community energy systems play in the energy transition in East and Southern Africa? Results This article investigates the potential for community energy to foster sustainable and just energy transitions in two countries in East and Southern Africa, namely Ethiopia and Mozambique. To do so, it explores transformations in Ethiopia and Mozambique’s energy systems through the lens of energy landscapes. This concept enables us to situate energy transitions within recent developments in energy governance and to understand current and future possibilities for change through the involvement of communities that currently lack access to reliable and clean energy. Our results show that when countries face the prospects of lucrative energy investments in natural gas or large hydropower, renewables are often deprioritized. Their suitability to address energy challenges and access gaps is de-emphasized, even though there is little evidence that investment in large-scale generation can handle the energy needs of the most disadvantaged groups. Initiatives and policies supporting community-focused renewable energy have remained limited in both countries. They tend to be designed from the top-down and focused on rural areas when they exist. Conclusions Energy transitions in Ethiopia and Mozambique, and many other countries with significant gaps in access to centralized energy systems, require putting inclusivity at the forefront to ensure that energy policies and infrastructure support the well-being of society as a whole. As long as investments in off-grid energy continue to depend on international organizations’ goodwill or development aid programs outside the ambit of national energy plans, energy access gaps will remain unaddressed, and there will not be a genuine and just transition to sustainable energy.

This paper presents an innovative approach to addressing critical global challenges in long-term energy planning for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The paper proposes and tests an international enabling environment, a delivery ecosystem, and a community of practice. These components are integrated into workflows that yield four self-sustaining capacity-development outcomes. Planning long-term energy strategies in LMICs is particularly challenging due to limited national agency and poor international coordination. While outsourcing energy planning to foreign experts may appear to be a viable solution, it can lead to a reduction in government agency (the ability of a government to make its own informed analysis and decisions). Additionally, studies commissioned by external experts may have conflicting terms of reference, and a lack of familiarity with local conditions can result in misrepresentations of on-the-ground realities. It is argued here that enhancing national agency and analytical capacity can improve coordination and lead to more robust planning across line ministries and technical assistance (TA) providers. Moreover, the prevailing consulting model hampers the release and accessibility of underlying analytics, making it difficult to retrieve, reuse, and reconstruct consultant outputs. The absence of interoperability among outputs from various consultants hinders the ability to combine and audit the insights they provide. To overcome these challenges, five strategic principles for energy planning in LMICs have been introduced and developed in collaboration with 21 international and research organizations, including the AfDB, IEA, IRENA, IAEA, UNDP, UNECA, the World Bank, and WRI. These principles prioritize national ownership, coherence and inclusivity, capacity, robustness, transparency and accessibility. In this enabling environment, a unique delivery ecosystem consisting of knowledge products and activities is established. The paper focuses on two key knowledge products as examples of this ecosystem: the open-source energy modeling system (OSeMOSYS) and the power system flexibility tool (IRENA FlexTool). These ecosystem elements are designed to meet user-friendliness, retrievability, reusability, reconstructability, repeatability, interoperability, and audibility (U4RIA) goals. To ensure the sustainability of this ecosystem, OpTIMUS is introduced—a community of practice dedicated to maintaining, supporting, expanding, and nurturing the elements within the ecosystem. Among other ecosystem elements, training and research initiatives are introduced, namely the Energy Modelling Platform for Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Asia-Pacific as well as the ICTP Joint Summer School on Modelling Tools for Sustainable Development. Once deployed via workflows, the preliminary outcomes of these capacity-development learning pathways show promise. Further investigation is necessary to evaluate their long-term impacts, scalability, replication, and deployment costs.

Fuel subsidies are policy instruments that have historically been used to assist the poor in affording energy for essential household activities. The subventions have, however, been the subject of considerable criticism that they in practice exacerbate inequalities and enrich fuel producers and well-to-do households that do not require support from fuel subsidies. When efforts to resolve tensions across different stakeholder needs lead to unintended, undesirable, and differential impacts across groups and across different time horizons, a policy dilemma emerges. Actors looking to understand or inform fuel-subsidy reform face an analytical challenge in knowing how to effectively frame important interlinkages and identify strategies for intervention. This policy brief responds to this analytical challenge in understanding interlinkages that frame these policy dilemmas by using John Kingdon's multiple-policy stream framework to analyze how the Indonesian government navigated its energy subsidy reform policy dilemma during 1998-2016. It shares lessons on how the country has managed this situation and discusses implications for further domestic reforms. The Indonesian experience may provide useful insights and lessons for other developing countries looking to navigate the multiple interlinkages across fuel-subsidy dilemmas.

Energy supply for clean cooking is a priority for Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG, i.e., propane or butane or a mixture of both) is an economically efficient, cooking energy solution used by over 2.5 billion people worldwide and scaled up in numerous low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Investigation of the technical, policy, economic and physical requirements of producing LPG from renewable feedstocks (bioLPG) finds feasibility at scale in Africa. Biogas and syngas from the circular economic repurposing of municipal solid waste and agricultural waste can be used in two groundbreaking new chemical processes (Cool LPG or Integrated Hydropyrolysis and Hydroconversion (IH2)) to selectively produce bioLPG. Evidence about the nature and scale potential of bioLPG presented in this study justifies further investment in the development of bioLPG as a fuel that can make a major contribution toward enabling an SSA green economy and universal energy access. Techno-economic assessments of five potential projects from Ghana, Kenya and Rwanda illustrate what might be possible. BioLPG technology is in the early days of development, so normal technology piloting and de-risking need to be undertaken. However, fully developed bioLPG production could greatly reduce the public and private sector investment required to significantly increase SSA clean cooking capacity.