|
|
Line 113: |
Line 113: |
| == Relevante Case Studies: == | | == Relevante Case Studies: == |
| | | |
| + | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;" |
| + | |- |
| + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(0, 152, 203);" | <br/> |
| + | | |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)|Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)|Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: South Africa, Integrated National Electrification|South Africa, Integrated National Electrification]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: South Africa, Integrated National Electrification|South Africa, Integrated National Electrification]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Tunisia, Low Cost Distribution Technology|Tunisia, Low Cost Distribution Technology]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Tunisia, Low Cost Distribution Technology|Tunisia, Low Cost Distribution Technology]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion|Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion|Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion]]<br/> |
| + | |} |
| | | |
| <br/> | | <br/> |
Line 223: |
Line 228: |
| == Relevante Case Studies: == | | == Relevante Case Studies: == |
| | | |
| + | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;" |
| + | |- |
| + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(0, 204, 248);" | <br/> |
| + | | |
| None of the examples examined have had a purely private sector delivery models (ie no public involvement in either ownership or funding). | | None of the examples examined have had a purely private sector delivery models (ie no public involvement in either ownership or funding). |
− | | + | |} |
| <br/> | | <br/> |
| | | |
Line 348: |
Line 357: |
| == Relevante Case Studies: == | | == Relevante Case Studies: == |
| | | |
− | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Bangladesh,_IDCOL_Solar_Home_Systems|Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems]]<br/> | + | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;" |
| + | |- |
| + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(100, 203, 248);" | <br/> |
| + | | |
| + | *[[NAE Case Study: Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems|Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)|Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)|Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation|Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation|Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation]]<br/> |
− | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Costa_Rica,_Distribution_Cooperatives|Costa Rica, Distribution Cooperatives]]<br/> | + | *[[NAE Case Study: Costa Rica, Distribution Cooperatives|Costa Rica, Distribution Cooperatives]]<br/> |
− | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Ethiopia,_Solar_Market_Development|Ethiopia, Solar Market Development]]<br/> | + | *[[NAE Case Study: Ethiopia, Solar Market Development|Ethiopia, Solar Market Development]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030|Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030|Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Mali, Rural Electrification Programme|Mali, Rural Electrification Programme]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Mali, Rural Electrification Programme|Mali, Rural Electrification Programme]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme|Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme|Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme]]<br/> |
− | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Peru,_Concession_Model_for_Standalone_Systems|Peru, Concession Model for Standalone Systems]]<br/> | + | *[[NAE Case Study: Peru, Concession Model for Standalone Systems|Peru, Concession Model for Standalone Systems]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives|Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives|Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning|Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning|Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning]]<br/> |
− | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_South_Africa,_Integrated_National_Electrification|South Africa, Integrated National Electrification]]<br/> | + | *[[NAE Case Study: South Africa, Integrated National Electrification|South Africa, Integrated National Electrification]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework|Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework|Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework]]<br/> |
− | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Vietnam,_Rapid_Grid_Expansion|Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion]]<br/> | + | *[[NAE Case Study: Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion|Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion]]<br/> |
| + | |} |
| | | |
| <br/> | | <br/> |
|
Technologies
|
Few, if any, national grid systems have been established through a private delivery model (though in many countries privatisation has been used to transfer them into private ownership and bring in private investment). Grid-connected mini-grids and distribution systems have frequently been developed by private (non-state-owned) organisations. Where the grid system is also privately-owned, this constitutes a private model. (However, if the grid system is publically owned, and the mini-grid or distribution system uses electricity from the grid system, or the development draws on public grants, subsidies, loans, tax exemptions or guarantees, it constitutes a public-private partnership). The most frequently used models for delivery of standalone systems are private, though involvement of state-organisations along the market chain, or use of funding from grants or subsidies provided by the state, donors or international agencies, may result in private-public partnerships.
|
|
Legual Basis
|
A private delivery model calls for an explicit legal framework for any form of electrification which involves significant long-term capital investment (grid, mini-grids and potentially standalone systems which are charged for on a pay-as-you-go basis) in order to attract private finance and allow for price regulation to protect users. A concession, which offers protection from competition, will provide the greatest attraction for private financiers. Where no long-term capital investment is involved, as with standalone systems sold directly to users, it’s generally considered that no legal control (beyond that for any business) is necessary.
|
|
Price/Tariff Regulation
|
Where electricity is delivered by the private sector, using purely private finance, in a competitive market with no legal or effective monopoly (eg where several solar lanterns providers are operating) price regulation may be regarded as unnecessary. However, where any form of concession has been granted (or exists in practice), price regulation would be expected to protect users. On the other side, where significant capital investment is involved private financiers are likely to require a transparent framework for price/tariff regulation, to reduce the risk of price controls being introduced in the future at below cost-recovery levels and preventing full recovery of and return on investment.
|
|
Finance
|
As discussed above a private delivery model must be purely privately financed (since inclusion of any public finance would cause the delivery model to be categorized as a public-private partnership). Ultimately private delivery models will rely on connection and ongoing charges, and standalone system purchases from users. For multi-user systems (grids and mini-grids) there is also likely to be some element of cross-subsidy between users.
|
|
Non-Financial Interventions
|
National energy planning is key to establishing the optimum mix of technologies to meet electrification needs across the country, regardless of the delivery model employed. Institutional restructuring and capacity building or technical assistance may be needed where the key actors lack the capacity to undertake regulatory reform in order to establish the legal and regulatory framework for private electrification, or to set and implement technical and quality standards (needed where the private sector is delivering access through mini-grids or distribution systems to ensure safety and compatibility between systems, and to support user confidence). Awareness raising amongst users and other potential market actors and service providers, as well as training (capacity building) to develop the skilled workforce needed by new energy access businesses are likely to be particularly relevant under a private delivery model, and demand promotion may be needed to increase revenues and make electricity access economically sustainable. Private delivery models are often a means of introducing new technologies, with private sector players bringing in technologies which they believe will have advantages over existing options which will allow them to grow their businesses. (Such new technology introduction, however, brings risks, and the private sector will expect to reap additional returns to balance these risks).
|
|
Technologies
|
Public-private models for grid systems might include:
- Publically owned generation and transmission combined with privately owned distribution;
- Independent Power Producers (IPPs) connected to a publically owned transmission/distribution system;
- A privately owned grid system using grants from public sources to connect new users.
For grid connected mini-grids and distribution systems:
- Mini-grids owned by a private developer connected to the (publically-owned) main grid, and thereby drawing on publically owned generation to meet demand;
- A private company, or public-private joint venture, taking on operation of a section of the publically-owned grid distribution system;
- Public grants or subsidies supporting development of a privately-owned mini-grid or distribution system.
For isolated mini-grids:
- Mini-grids developed on a Build-Own-Operate-Transfer basis (initially owned and operated by a private developer, but transferred to public ownership at the end of a concession period);
- Mini-grids built and operated by a public-private joint venture;
- Public grants or subsidies supporting development of a privately-owned mini-grid.
Use of public finance (grants, subsidies and loans) to enhance affordability and support market growth often results in a public-private model for standalone systems, even when there is a purely private-sector chain of manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers. There could also be benefits in some circumstances from government energy agencies becoming directly involved in the standalone system market, by forming a joint entity to supply systems or by taking on one of the roles along the value chain (eg providing a distribution service for all system providers), as a means of supporting market development.
|
|
Legual Basis
|
Because a public-private model involves private ownership and investment, an explicit legal framework will be required for any form of electrification which involves significant long-term capital investment in order to attract private finance and allow for price regulation to protect users. A concession, which offers protection from competition, will provide the greatest attraction for private financiers. Where no long-term capital investment is involved, as with standalone systems sold directly to users, no legal control (beyond that for any business) may be necessary – however if there is partial public sector ownership, a transparent legal framework may be required to convince private market participants that they are not facing unfair competition, and also to ensure that any public finance is not being misused.
|
|
Price/Tariff Regulation
|
Where significant capital investment is involved, a transparent framework for price/tariff regulation is likely to be required to attract the private element into any public-private partnership. Tariff regulation will also protect users and provide a means of ensuring that public finance is not being misused or exploited by the private sector. It may also demonstrate to private market participants that they are not facing unfair competition from partially publically-owned market participants.
|
|
Finance
|
All public-private partnerships will involve a combination of private and public finance. Private finance will come through ownership and investment in, and loans to electricity providers. Public finance may come through these routes, but may also be through various forms of grant, subsidy, tax exemption or guarantee. Ultimately public-private models, like other forms of electricity provision, will rely on connection and ongoing charges, and standalone system purchases from users. For multi-user systems (grids and mini-grids) there is also likely to be some element of cross-subsidy between users.
|
|
Non-Financial Interventions
|
National energy planning is key to establishing the optimum mix of technologies to meet electrification needs across the country, regardless of the delivery model employed. Institutional restructuring may be needed to establish public-private partnerships and capacity building or technical assistance may be required if the key actors lack the capacity to undertake regulatory reform or design arrangements for public financial support. Awareness raising amongst users and other potential market actors and service providers, as well as training (capacity building) to develop the skilled workforce needed by new energy access businesses can be beneficial alongside financial forms of public support. Public-private partnership may also provide the means to bring in new technology, with the private sector providing the technology know-how while the public sector bears the risk inherent in new technology which private investors may be reluctant to take on.
|
The Review was prepared by Mary Willcox and Dean Cooper of Practical Action Consulting working with Hadley Taylor, Silvia Cabriolu-Poddu and Christina Stuart of the EU Energy Initiative Partnership Dialogue Facility (EUEIPDF) and Michael Koeberlein and Caspar Priesemann of the Energising Development Programme (EnDev). It is based on a literature review, stakeholder consultations. The categorization framework in the review tool is based on the EUEI/PDF / Practical Action publication "Building Energy Access Markets - A Value Chain Analysis of Key Energy Market Systems".
A wider range of stakeholders were consulted during its preparation and we would particularly like to thank the following for their valuable contributions and insights:
- Jeff Felten, AfDB - Marcus Wiemann and other members, ARE - Guilherme Collares Pereira, EdP - David Otieno Ochieng, EUEI-PDF - Silvia Luisa Escudero Santos Ascarza, EUEI-PDF - Nico Peterschmidt, Inensus - John Tkacik, REEEP - Khorommbi Bongwe, South Africa: Department of Energy - Rashid Ali Abdallah, African Union Commission - Nicola Bugatti, ECREEE - Getahun Moges Kifle, Ethiopian Energy Authority - Mario Merchan Andres, EUEI-PDF - Tatjana Walter-Breidenstein, EUEI-PDF - Rebecca Symington, Mlinda Foundation - Marcel Raats, RVO.NL - Nico Tyabji, Sunfunder -