IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v154y2021ics030142152100207x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the enabling environment for the sustainable development of rural-based bioenergy systems in Zambia

Author

Listed:
  • Kaoma, Mwansa
  • Gheewala, Shabbir H.

Abstract

The low adoption rates of modern bioenergy systems in the rural areas of Zambia indicate shortcomings within the existing institutional arrangements for a conducive enabling environment for their deployment. To address them, this study employed the SWOT–AHP (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats-Analytic Hierarchy Process)-TOWS (Threats, Opportunities, Weaknesses, Strengths) technique to assess the effectiveness of such arrangements by building on the insight of the identified stakeholders. This led to the generation of ideas for further policy development for rural-based bioenergy systems. The SWOT-AHP analysis shows that the negative aspects (weaknesses and threats) associated with the enabling environment for the promotion of rural-based bioenergy systems dominate their positive counterparts (strengths and opportunities). Among others, the following policy considerations are vital to the enhancement of the enabling environment in this context: (1) building relevant policy actors' analytical capacity in biomass supply chains for cooking and heating fuels, (2) seeking developed-country support for the effective transfer of bioelectricity technologies, and (3) developing a framework used in planning for the sustainability of rural-based bioenergy systems. To increase the likelihood of their adoption, these strategies must be aligned with the country's higher-level national development goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaoma, Mwansa & Gheewala, Shabbir H., 2021. "Evaluation of the enabling environment for the sustainable development of rural-based bioenergy systems in Zambia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:154:y:2021:i:c:s030142152100207x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112337
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142152100207X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112337?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johansson, Viktor & Lehtveer, Mariliis & Göransson, Lisa, 2019. "Biomass in the electricity system: A complement to variable renewables or a source of negative emissions?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 532-541.
    2. Choumert-Nkolo, Johanna & Combes Motel, Pascale & Le Roux, Leonard, 2019. "Stacking up the ladder: A panel data analysis of Tanzanian household energy choices," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 222-235.
    3. Sun, Dingqiang & Ge, Yang & Zhou, Yingheng, 2019. "Punishing and rewarding: How do policy measures affect crop straw use by farmers? An empirical analysis of Jiangsu Province of China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    4. Shankar, Anita V. & Quinn, Ashlinn K. & Dickinson, Katherine L. & Williams, Kendra N. & Masera, Omar & Charron, Dana & Jack, Darby & Hyman, Jasmine & Pillarisetti, Ajay & Bailis, Rob & Kumar, Praveen , 2020. "Everybody stacks: Lessons from household energy case studies to inform design principles for clean energy transitions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    5. G. Hodgson, 2007. "What Are Institutions?," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 8.
    6. Kurttila, Mikko & Pesonen, Mauno & Kangas, Jyrki & Kajanus, Miika, 2000. "Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis -- a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 41-52, May.
    7. Carvalho, Ricardo L. & Lindgren, Robert & García-López, Natxo & Nyambane, Anne & Nyberg, Gert & Diaz-Chavez, Rocio & Boman, Christoffer, 2019. "Household air pollution mitigation with integrated biomass/cookstove strategies in Western Kenya," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 168-186.
    8. Shane, Agabu & Gheewala, Shabbir H. & Fungtammasan, Bundit & Silalertruksa, Thapat & Bonnet, Sébastien & Phiri, Seveliano, 2016. "Bioenergy resource assessment for Zambia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 93-104.
    9. Mangoyana, Robert B. & Smith, Timothy F., 2011. "Decentralised bioenergy systems: A review of opportunities and threats," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1286-1295, March.
    10. Shane, Agabu & Gheewala, Shabbir H. & Phiri, Seveliano, 2017. "Rural domestic biogas supply model for Zambia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 683-697.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Songhee Han & Jeonghee Park & Heeseob Lee & Wona Lee & JiHee Son, 2023. "Identifying and Prioritizing Barriers to Climate Technology International Cooperation from the Perspective of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-18, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alananga, Samwel Sanga & Igangula, Nurdin Husama, 2022. "Constrained cooking energy choices: Understanding up-the-ladder stacking behaviour in Dar es Salaam Tanzania," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    2. Kapsalyamova, Zhanna & Mishra, Ranjeeta & Kerimray, Aiymgul & Karymshakov, Kamalbek & Azhgaliyeva, Dina, 2021. "Why Is Energy Access Not Enough for Choosing Clean Cooking Fuels? Sustainable Development Goals and Beyond," ADBI Working Papers 1234, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    3. Gebru, Bahre & Elofsson, Katarina, 2023. "The role of forest status in households’ fuel choice in Uganda," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    4. Jianliang Wang & Yuru Yang & Yongmei Bentley & Xu Geng & Xiaojie Liu, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Bioenergy from a Global Perspective: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    5. Nastasi, Federico & Spagano, Salvatore, 2023. "Institutionalist Clues in Celso Furtado’s Economic Thought," MPRA Paper 120242, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Maximiliano Marzetti & Rok Spruk, 2023. "Long-Term Economic Effects of Populist Legal Reforms: Evidence from Argentina," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 65(1), pages 60-95, March.
    7. Robert Roßner & Dimitrios Zikos, 2018. "The Role of Homogeneity and Heterogeneity Among Resource Users on Water Governance: Lessons Learnt from an Economic Field Experiment on Irrigation in Uzbekistan," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(03), pages 1-30, July.
    8. Klege, Rebecca A. & Amuakwa-Mensah, Franklin & Visser, Martine, 2022. "Tenancy and energy choices in Rwanda. A replication and extension study," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    9. Maria Taljegard & Lisa Göransson & Mikael Odenberger & Filip Johnsson, 2021. "To Represent Electric Vehicles in Electricity Systems Modelling—Aggregated Vehicle Representation vs. Individual Driving Profiles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-25, January.
    10. Mika Kallioinen, 2017. "Inter‐communal institutions in medieval trade," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1131-1152, November.
    11. Luis Alfonso Dau & Aya S. Chacar & Marjorie A. Lyles & Jiatao Li, 2022. "Informal institutions and international business: Toward an integrative research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 985-1010, August.
    12. Valentin Seidler, 2017. "Institutional Copying in the 20th Century: The Role of 14,000 British Colonial Officers," Journal of Contextual Economics (JCE) – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 137(1-2), pages 93-119.
    13. Masahiko Aoki, 2013. "Institutions as cognitive media between strategic interactions and individual beliefs," Chapters, in: Comparative Institutional Analysis, chapter 17, pages 298-312, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Marletto, Gerardo, 2011. "Structure, agency and change in the car regime. A review of the literature," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 47, pages 71-88.
    15. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    16. Simon Hartmann & Thomas Lindner & Jakob Müllner & Jonas Puck, 2022. "Beyond the nation-state: Anchoring supranational institutions in international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 1282-1306, August.
    17. Olivia Muza & Ramit Debnath, 2020. "Socially inclusive renewable energy transition in sub-Saharan Africa: A social shaping of technology analysis of appliance uptake in Rwanda," Working Papers EPRG2017, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    18. Gözaçan Nazlıcan & Lafci Çisem, 2020. "Evaluation of Key Performance Indicators of Logistics Firms," Logistics, Supply Chain, Sustainability and Global Challenges, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 24-32, February.
    19. George Liagouras, 2016. "From Heterodox Political Economy to Generalized Darwinism," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 48(3), pages 467-484, September.
    20. Zoltán Bartha & Andrea S. Gubik, 2014. "Characteristics Of The Large Corporation-Based, Bureaucratic Model Among Oecd Countries – An Foi Model Analysis," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 1, pages 1-20, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:154:y:2021:i:c:s030142152100207x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.