IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cam/camdae/1804.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Harnessing the Ring of Fire: Political economy of clean energy development finance on geothermal development in Indonesia and the Philippines

Author

Listed:
  • Chelminski, K.

Abstract

Located along the Ring of Fire in the Asia Pacific, both Indonesia and the Philippines have tremendous natural resource endowments in geothermal energy. Yet, the two countries have dramatic differences in the share of installed capacity they have developed with international development assistance for geothermal development over the last decades. This paper investigates the major interests, institutions and barriers to geothermal development in Indonesia and the Philippines and then examines how closely clean energy development finance has addressed these barriers. Using qualitative analysis and data from field research in both countries, this paper investigates the effectiveness of the clean energy development finance for renewable energy development. The main findings of this research show that clean energy development finance targeted major barriers to geothermal energy development, but the finance was limited in its impacts on removing the barriers or addressing major domestic political interests, particularly in the case of Indonesia. This research also illuminated limitations of the project-based development approach to solving macro-level problems in clean energy development.

Suggested Citation

  • Chelminski, K., 2018. "Harnessing the Ring of Fire: Political economy of clean energy development finance on geothermal development in Indonesia and the Philippines," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1804, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  • Handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:1804
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/research-files/repec/cam/pdf/cwpe1804.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Leonardo Bursztyn & David Hemous, 2012. "The Environment and Directed Technical Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 131-166, February.
    2. Miranda A. Schreurs, 2016. "The Paris Climate Agreement and the Three Largest Emitters: China, the United States, and the European Union," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 219-223.
    3. Bhattacharyya, Subhes C., 2013. "Financing energy access and off-grid electrification: A review of status, options and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 462-472.
    4. David Houle & Erick Lachapelle & Mark Purdon, 2015. "Comparative Politics of Sub-Federal Cap-and-Trade: Implementing the Western Climate Initiative," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(3), pages 49-73, August.
    5. Michaelowa, Axel & Jotzo, Frank, 2005. "Transaction costs, institutional rigidities and the size of the clean development mechanism," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 511-523, March.
    6. Matthew S. Winters & Matthew Cawvey, 2015. "Governance Obstacles to Geothermal Energy Development in Indonesia," Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, Institute of Asian Studies, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 34(1), pages 27-56.
    7. Haas, Peter M., 1989. "Do regimes matter? Epistemic communities and Mediterranean pollution control," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(03), pages 377-403, June.
    8. David Popp, 2011. "International Technology Transfer, Climate Change, and the Clean Development Mechanism," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 131-152, Winter.
    9. Andrew Jordan & Harro van Asselt & Frans Berkhout & Dave Huitema & Tim Rayner, 2012. "Understanding the Paradoxes of Multilevel Governing: Climate Change Policy in the European Union," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 12(2), pages 43-66, May.
    10. Nick Johnstone & Ivan Haščič & David Popp, 2010. "Renewable Energy Policies and Technological Innovation: Evidence Based on Patent Counts," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 133-155, January.
    11. Gørild Heggelund & Steinar Andresen & Sun Ying, 2005. "Performance of the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) in China: Achievements and Challenges as Seen by the Chinese," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 323-348, September.
    12. Yuan, Xueliang & Zuo, Jian & Ma, Chunyuan, 2011. "Social acceptance of solar energy technologies in China--End users' perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1031-1036, March.
    13. Stoneman, Paul & Diederen, Paul, 1994. "Technology Diffusion and Public Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 918-930, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    clean energy development; development finance; energy policy; geothermal energy;

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • N55 - Economic History - - Agriculture, Natural Resources, Environment and Extractive Industries - - - Asia including Middle East

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cam:camdae:1804. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jake Dyer). General contact details of provider: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.