Knowledge management mapping and gap analysis in renewable energy: Towards a sustainable framework in developing countries

Fadel, M. El; Rachid, G.; El-Samra, R.; Boutros, G. Bou; Hashisho, J.

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.071

Cited by 42 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…REEEP managers have stated that this tends to enhance effective implementation, done through a decentralized network closer to "people on the ground," instead of relying on a "one-size-fits-all" strategy of implementing projects (Florini and Sovacool, 2009). One interdisciplinary study noted that REEEP's strengths included serving as a clearinghouse for knowledge about energy issues in developing countries, possessing an active online platform and presence through their database and knowledge portal, and comprehensively identifying barriers to policy reform (Fadel et al, 2013). A more recent "Deep Impact Assessment" within the organization of 62 former and ongoing projects with impact across 32 countries noted that 79% of projects were deemed successes, while 8% were cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances and 13% were considered unsuccessful (REEEP, 2015).…”

Section: Efficacy (Moderately Weak)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks

Sovacool

Graaf

2018

Energy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polycentric governance networks are on the rise in global energy and climate governance, but we know surprisingly little about their effectiveness. This paper analyzes the performance of four such transnational energy and climate governance networks. In the realm of sustainable energy, our cases are the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership (REEEP) and the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves (GACC). In the climate sphere, we examine the effectiveness of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI). Using principles from governance and public administration about the effectiveness of institutions, we examine the extent to which four networks have contributed to improving governance outcomes in the spheres of climate and sustainable energy. Our evaluation focuses on the clarity of purpose, funding, institutional formality, efficacy, and level of resilience of these networks. Some differences between the networks notwithstanding, we find that the transnational governance networks generally fail to meet the criteria about what constitutes an effective institution. The paper concludes with a reflection on what could be done to enhance the performance of these governance networks. governance 3. Polycentric governance assessment framework Polycentrism, a form of governance that blends scales and/or types of actors (Visseren-Hamakers, 2015; Galaz et al. 2012) is related to the more recent literature on 'network governance' and 'governance networks'. McGinnis and Ostrom (2012) note that the concept of polycentricity, first laid out by Michael Polanyi (1951) and later adopted by Vincent Ostrom et al. (1961), can be seen as an early statement of the critical importance of network forms of governance in democratic societies. Yet, the more recent literature on network governance and governance networks rarely makes any mention to this pioneering work (Klijn and Koppenjan, 2012), despite the similarity of the concepts. Nonetheless, the'governance networks' that are formed by actors from the state, the market and civil society to address climate change can be said to provide 'polycentric governance' in the sense that they include the self-organizing relationship between many centers of decision-making that are formally independent of each other (Ostrom et al., 1961: p. 831;Ostrom, 2010).In this section we propose four criteria, drawn mostly from the literature on public administration, policy sciences, and governance, to assess the performance of polycentric energy and climate networks, building on an earlier study by Poocharoen and Sovacool (2012). We employ the term 'performance', which allows for a more contextualized evaluation compared with the concept of 'effectiveness'. Whereas effectiveness usually refers to 'outcome' (i.e., goal attainment), performance refers more to 'process' (i.e., the manner by which outputs and outcomes are achieved). Here, we argue it includes the ability of the network to (1) set clear goals; (2) mobilize resources; (3) adopt formal structures; (4) make int...

show abstract

Section: Efficacy (Moderately Weak)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks

Sovacool

Graaf

2018

Energy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…El Fadel et al (2013) provided knowledge management mapping in renewable energy to design a framework for defining activities in different time spans. They argued that renewable energy development in developing countries relies on financial and technological aid provided by developed countries as well as international and regional organizations.…”

Section: Technology Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Renewable Energy Sources and its Significance for the Environment

Heshmati

Abolhosseini

Altmann

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Governments, development banks, bilateral and multilateral agencies, private enterprises and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) all engage in international development assistance for renewable energy, often with a special emphasis on off-grid rural electrification and small-scale applications for populations lacking access to modern energy services (Chaurey et al, 2012;Sovacool and Drupady, 2012). However, as many RET initiatives fail to achieve sustainable outcomes, a growing body of literature has identified barriers and drivers to the adoption of RETs (Bhattacharyya, 2012;El Fadel et al, 2013;Mallett, 2013;Palit and Chaurey, 2011;Sovacool and Drupady, 2012). Academic reviews and practitioner evaluations suggest that the sustainability and impact of RET interventions to a large extent depend on:…”

Section: Development Assistance For Off-grid Rets: Lessons Learntmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…of North-South partnerships is contingent upon their ability to deal with inherent power imbalances between partners (Ashman, 2001;Ellersiek, 2011). Questions have been raised about how partnerships for sustainable energy (P4SEs) can approach this problem, and how they should be managed to enable productive collaboration between international and local organisations (El Fadel et al, 2013;Fernández-Baldor et al, 2012;Morsink et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

North–South partnerships for sustainable energy: Knowledge–power relations in development assistance for renewable energy

Kruckenberg

2015

Energy for Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on a case study of a North-South partnership between non-governmental organisations (NGOs), this paper examines knowledge-power relationships in partnerships for sustainable energy. It presents a framework for visualising and analysing the multiple knowledge challenges faced by development organisations assisting Southern communities in the adoption of off-grid renewable energy technologies (RETs).Partnerships between local and international organisations are seen as a means for meeting these challenges by bringing together complimentary skills and knowledge, but they can be affected by power imbalances between partners inhibiting their performance.Through a micro analysis of knowledge-power relations between two renewable energy NGOs, this paper shows how the ways in which knowledge is framed and valued in partnerships for sustainable energy determine opportunities for inter-organisational learning and collaboration. Partnership models emphasising an efficient division of labour between partners and 'North-South knowledge transfer' may be less likely to deliver effective outcomes than previously thought. Given that the sustainable adoption of off-grid RETs requires processes of social innovation, partnerships that engage in an open negotiation of knowledge may stand a better chance of achieving 'sustainable energy for all ' (UN, 2015). Based on a discussion of this finding, the paper concludes by proposing a participatory tool for the negotiation of knowledge and knowledge-power relations in partnerships for sustainable energy. (1457) 3

show abstract

Knowledge management mapping and gap analysis in renewable energy: Towards a sustainable framework in developing countries

Cited by 42 publications

References 17 publications

Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks

Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks

The Development of Renewable Energy Sources and its Significance for the Environment

North–South partnerships for sustainable energy: Knowledge–power relations in development assistance for renewable energy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About