Projects exist in many developing countries to improve the supply of energy to rural communities. There will often be benefits to people other than an improved supply of energy. These impacts are not always recognised or understood, however. A greater awareness of these could help planners to develop energy projects that are more suitable to the needs of local people.

A report from Intermediate Technology Consultants (ITC) reviews micro hydropower projects (MHPs) in Nepal and Kenya. MHPs are small-scale projects that use water-powered turbines to generate electricity. The research provides a checklist of questions that can determine the impact of energy schemes on poverty, the environment, empowerment and livelihoods

The research examined energy projects in Mbuiru on the slopes of Mount Kenya and Pinthali in Nepal. There are plans to install a water-powered turbine in Mbuiru, which will create new businesses in the area by providing electricity for a commercial centre. At the time of the research the turbine was not yet operational. In Pinthali, a turbine system is already in place.

The two communities have much in common: dependence on subsistence agriculture, isolation from markets and ill health due to poor quality drinking water. A lack of water for irrigation limits agricultural production in both communities. As in many parts of the developing world, villagers depend on fuel wood for cooking and kerosene for lighting. Alternative energy sources could reduce the demand for these.

ITC reports that:

• Planning of the Mbuiru MHP has improved social networks: increased communication with the government and other external agencies has raised confidence within the community, particularly amongst women.
• The Mbuiru committee has managed to avoid laws that prevent them from selling electricity to households by getting permission to charge batteries for villagers to take home to provide lighting.
• In Pinthali, it has been difficult to find uses for the power generated by the MHP. People have received skills training but market opportunities have not been identified.
• The main impact in Pinthali has not been a supply of electricity but an increase in irrigation water, a by-product of the canal infrastructure that supplies the turbine. This has generated income from selling garlic.
• The provision of light in Pinthali by the MHP has increased the time available to look after livestock and produce buffalo milk for sale. It has also enabled shops to stay open longer and stock a wider range of goods.
• Increased lighting has allowed children and adults to study in the evenings, and more people attend communal events.

These examples show how energy projects can benefit rural communities in many ways. To ensure the maximum benefit from future projects, MHP planners must realise that:

• New energy developments will not improve livelihoods if they are led by technology – they must consider the existing markets in a region.
• Assumptions that electricity will reduce the use of fuelwood and conserve natural resources are naive. New forms of energy cannot always replace traditional sources.
• The secondary impacts of energy supply projects are often more important to local people than the original aims.
• Considering the potential impacts for business or technology alone are not enough when planning new energy projects. Social, environmental and economic factors must also be considered.
• When markets remain inaccessible, MHPs may be better used to improve the supply of drinking water rather than creating new industries.

MHPs do not always bring economic development or end poverty in a region, even when new businesses are included in the project planning. They can still benefit communities, although often not in the ways that had been planned. To make the best use of MHPs, policy makers must consider the existing needs of a community and include these in the planning stage, rather than introduce new forms of development which are inappropriate and will ultimately be unsuccessful.

Source(s):
‘The impact of energy infrastructure projects on poverty a sustainable livelihoods analysis’ Intermediate Technology Consultants, by Rona Wilkinson, 2002 Full document.

Funded by: Department for International Development

id21 Research Highlight: 26 January 2005

Further Information:
Rona Wilkinson
Intermediate Technology Consultants
Schumacher Centre for Technology and Development
Bourton on Dunsmore
Rugby
CV23 9QZ
UK
www.itcltd.com

Tel: +44 (0) 1926 634400
Fax: +44 (0) 1926 634401
Contact the contributor: ronaw@itdg.org.uk

Intermediate Technology Consultants

Other related links:
'Identifying energy needs for development – applying a participatory approach to energy planning'

'Can partnerships deliver electricity to boost the livelihoods of the rural poor?'

World Bank Energy

Energy for Sustainable Development Ltd, UK

DFID's Knowledge and Research Energy website