![Sample our Global Development journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5929/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Global-Development.jpg"})
Abstract
Renewable energy technologies have increasingly been promoted to address energy poverty and environmental sustainability challenges in Africa. Yet, their diffusion and uptake remain marginal. The focus of renewable energy technology diffusion research in Africa has largely been on identifying technological, economical and social factors, which determine adoption decision of end-users. In this paper, I argue that there is a need to systematically understand the enabling institutional context of renewable energy technologies as well. I argue that the Technological Innovation System (TIS) is a useful approach in this regard. In terms of policy, I argue that strengthening the functional build-up of TISs is crucial to increase the diffusion of renewable energy technologies in Africa. This requires gaining insights into the functioning of TISs. To this end, I provide a simplified framework for evaluating the functional performance of renewable energy TISs in Africa.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 See http://www.se4all.org/tracking-progress/ for more on the SE4ALL initiative and its tracking framework.
2 According to Kaplinsky (Citation2011, 200), the general reasons attributable to the failure of Appropriate Technology are
… first, there was a shortage of entrepreneurship in low-income countries. Second, the capabilities required to develop new ideas for innovation were thinly spread globally, overwhelmingly concentrated in high-income countries. [And], third, the absence of effective demand in low income countries in general, and by poor consumers in particular.
3 Note that despite high attention to R&D, the ‘Sussex Manifesto’ is widely regarded as predecessor in highlighting modern theory of innovation to policymakers in developing countries.
4 A system is a set of interrelated elements working toward a common objective. The elements of an innovation system are actors, networks and institutions, whose actions and interactions contribute to the system’s ultimate objective, i.e. the generation, dissemination and utilization of a new technology (Carlsson and Stankiewicz Citation1991).
5 It is worth noting that in the ‘functions of innovation systems’ approach, the TIS theoretical framework is often employed as an analytical construct for the purpose of research. That is, innovation systems are viewed as entities that may not exist as objective realities, but are heuristic constructs that serve as a focusing device for research. This has allowed creating insights into the dynamics and building up of TISs at their early stage of emergence through their functions (see Bergek et al. Citation2008 for more elaboration on this notion).
6 Technology in the context of this framework represents a particular product or group of highly related products, providing energy services. Examples of such technologies can be solar PV panels, bio-digesters and improved cooking technologies.
7 Determining the ‘sufficiency’ of a function served remains normative and relative to each function. I have attempted to address this by using mixed strategies of mapping of actual events and perceived intensity of fulfilments by experts. Indeed lack of precise determination of the optimal level of functionality at different stages of TIS’s evolution that results in greater innovative performance is one of the challenges that is yet to be dealt by empirical studies (Bergek 2008; Jacobsson and Bergek Citation2011; van Alphen Citation2011).
8 There may be exceptions. For example, if the technology is imported, knowledge development activities might be limited to adapting to local circumstances.
9 Note that what is intended is to capture the strength of the fulfilment of each function. While the interactions of the functions are important, some evidence suggests that such dynamics is unlikely to significantly materialise at early stage of TIS development in least-developed countries (Tigabu, Berkhout, and van Beukering Citation2015c).
10 The activities and processes are fulfilled by the system. However, practically, they are related to the structural components of the TIS, i.e. actors (public or private, governmental or non-governmental organizations and individuals). They are also related to the interactions among actors and institutions (policies, rules, regulations, culture, beliefs, norms, routines and so on) for the development and/or diffusion and adoption of the technology in focus in the specified country (Jacobsson and Johnson Citation2000; Edquist Citation2001).
11 See also Hekkert et al. (Citation2011) for more elaborate propositions on stages and functional fulfilment requirements that may be more relevant for western industrial contexts than small-scale renewable energy sectors in developing countries.
12 Mapping the structural components (i.e. actors, linkages and institutions and technological factors) are not included in this evaluation. This is because different TISs with completely different structural components may function similarly and vice versa. However, if one is still interested in gaining insights into the types and arrangements of structural elements of TISs, structural analysis can also be included (see Hekkert et al. Citation2011 for an evaluation framework in which structural analysis is incorporated).
13 It may be useful to share the description with some of the key informants and gain feedback on the overview of TIS dynamics generated. This can be instrumental not only to ensure that the TIS is fully and appropriately depicted but also to establish communicative validity and reliability of the mapping process undertaken (Negro Citation2007).