{"word_count": 1310, "character_count": 9888}
by Sylvy JaglinThe following is the introduction of this paper. The full reference is:    Jaglin, S., 2019. Off-grid Electricity in sub-Saharan Africa: from rural experiments to urban hybridisations.   Hybridelec Background research paper1 January 2019 . Available at:  https://hal-upec-upem.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02078148v1 Willthe electricity revolution in Africa come from the deployment of decentralisedsolutions? With their capacity to decarbonise the energy mix and to use off-gridsolutions now available everywhere on the continent, are local renewableresources capable of meeting demand from some 600 million Africans that thedominant industrial systems have failed to meet, and if so under whatconditions? That is the challenge targeted by policies developed in response tothe delayed awareness of energy gaps and their role in the (mis)-development ofthe continent,[1] whichare now priorities for Agenda 2063 and for the African Development Bank (AfDB2017).[2]Beyondthe promises of this new model of electrification, this chapter will examine theforms and whereabouts of the proposed sociotechnical transition by exploringthe relations between large power grids and decentralised solutions, definedhere as “autonomous” modes of access to electricity.[3]Out ofa variety of combinations of renewable and/or fossil energy sources, three mainfamilies of decentralised solutions can be identified in sub-Saharan Africa:mini-grids supplied by power stations,[4]usually hybrid, which supply electricity to end-users (households and smallbusinesses); energy kiosks that provide community services; individual systems(solar torches, lanterns and kits) that fulfil basic needs such as lighting andphone charging (Berthélemy and Béguerie 2016). Usually distributed commercially– and sometimes opportunistically – by outside actors, these solutions constitutea model of autonomy which, far from expressing opposition to the grid, gives“default” legitimacy to a vision of self-sufficiency. In this sense, theinterpretative registers here are very different from those that prevail in theanalysis of alternative energy scenarios in Europe (Christen and Hamman 2015). Sincethe configurations that can be observed in Africa are recent, however, thedynamics and characteristics of autonomisation are likely to form newcombinations. We therefore favour a processual definition of autonomy todescribe relations to the grid that can also vary depending whether theemphasis is placed on the material infrastructures, the socio-economicmechanism or the political rationales of decentralised solutions (Bridge et al.2013). The aim is hence to understand when and where electrical autonomy isadopted; what collective dynamics (temporary or long-term) drive it; and whichprojects incorporate it, either as an end in itself or as a stage in along-term process that includes modes of coordination between centralised anddecentralised access to electricity. Thechapter first seeks to clarify the link between electricity shortage and therecent proliferation of international rhetoric, initiatives and frameworkspromoting the large-scale deployment of decentralised solutions using renewableresources (Africa Progress Panel 2017). It shows that the spread ofdecentralised solutions follows two main pathways. One of them,institutionalised and well publicised in the media, takes the form of off-gridprojects that are themselves part of international programmes (Bloomberg NEF and Lighting Global 2016).These projects, which we propose to treat as electricity experiments (Hamman2016), are primarily directed to rural locations outside the areas served by thegrid. The other pathway, commercial and often informal, operates through importchains (particularly Chinese solar equipment),[5]through local sellers of new and used equipment, and through purchasing practicesthat depend on the economic opportunities and information available tocustomers. It develops wherever demand exists, and above all in cities, wherethe end segments of the “discreet” value chains of globalisation prosper (Choplinand Pliez 2018). In other words, off-grid electrification systems, earmarked forrural energy autonomy, are partially “diverted” to serve a variety of urbanautonomy practices.[6] Thereare two main reasons for this. The first is that the divide between city andcountry has only limited operational relevance in the light of Africa’sincreasingly diffuse urbanisation. The second is that the distinction betweenon-grid and off-grid provides no satisfactory response to the sorry quality ofthe conventional urban electricity supply. Although conceived as a solution forrural pre-electrification,[7]off-grid projects are also a response to significant latent demand in urbanareas, a fact that influences their electricity future. Thisredirection of both location and use is an unexpected and insufficientlyrecognised outcome of experiments in electricity autonomy, as it uses arereinvented by urban populations. It is an invitation to explore the interfacesthat then emerge between on-grid and off-grid solutions in cities and toexamine the locus and nature of the frictions that arise from the technicalcombinations implemented in urban conditions. What respective roles do the gridand autonomous systems play in the emergence of entirely novel spatial andfunctional arrangements? Do these offer a foretaste of more lasting forms ofelectrical hybridisation? These questions open up a largely unexploredterritory of research. Both institutions and experts stress the impossibilityof making reliable projections in the absence of data and history. This meansthat everyone is currently operating in&#160;conditions of great uncertainty,between hopes of a takeoff in the market for off-grid solutions and fear of itscollapse for lack of a sustainable economic model (Payen et al. 2016; PwC2017a). In fact, despite the profusion of commitments, rhetoric and initiativesin favour of decentralised electrification solutions, the real scale ofimplementation remains limited and, above all, very poorly documented. Inaddition, the analysis of the literature on decentralised rural electrificationsolutions comes up against two obstacles: imperfectly defined, the term “rural”is used to describe very disparate spaces, including areas of diffuse urbanisation(villages, suburbs, roadside population corridors); the sources, many of whichare found in the grey literature (project descriptions and documents, differentorganisational websites), anticipate – not to say exaggerate – the impact ofoperations that have not yet been implemented or are only in their infancy. Itis therefore difficult to establish the real status of these projects, thedegree of adoption, the forms of use, the level of satisfaction in their targetpopulations… The “facts” on which any analysis can be based are fairly few innumber and drawn from a small and frequently quoted set of examples. Moreover,these provide only tenuous indications regarding our hypotheses on hybridinterfaces, which are cited among the “problems” encountered by rural projects:unfair competition from urban sellers, markets flooded with imported products,distribution of unbranded and used equipment… all dynamics in which the urbandrivers are usually ignored. The aim here is therefore to establish “what isknown” about urban electrical hybridisation, based on the available sources andthe landscape that emerges from them.[8]The focus is on sub-Saharan Africa, excluding South Africa, whose electrical indicatorsand development are exceptional on the continent in every respect (Jaglin andDubresson 2016). Section2 presents the background to off-grid projects – justified by the “crisis” ofcentralised systems in a continent-wide context of electricity shortage – andtheir expected contribution to the electrification of the continent. The nextsection shows that the future of the grid/off-grid pairing is not sealed: whilerural business models have yet to be invented, decentralised solutions – spreadingthrough long and short range commercial pathways – are already part of theday-to-day experience of city populations. The conclusion re-examines thedistinctiveness of the African physiognomy of electricity autonomy and theprospects for hybridisation in urban areas connected to the grid.[1] “Africa’s energy infrastructure gap is akey constraint on the continent’s economic growth potential.”: Declaration of the President of the AfDBGroup, Donald Kaberuka, to the World Energy Congress (12-16 September 2010,Montréal). URL:https://www.afdb.org/fr/news-and-events/afdb-at-world-energy-congress-energy-is-key-to-africas-development-7075/[2] Agenda 2063 is a plan for thestructural transformation of Africa adopted in May 2013 at the African Union’sGolden Jubilee.[3] When electrification isaccomplished using an off-grid system, it is primarily local power productionthat defines autonomy. It should be noted, however, that this technicaldefinition of decentralisation ignores the organisation of the electricitysector, since a single centralised operator can run technically independentlocal systems.[4] Depending on the number of usersand the power available on the network, they are sometimes described as nano-grids,micro-grids or mini-grids. In this text, we will use the generic term mini-grid.[5] The vast majority of low-costequipment comes from China (Bloomberg NEFand Lighting Global 2016).[6] In the sense proposed by Olivier deSardan in his analysis of development projects (Olivier de Sardan 1995).[7] Understood as a stage preliminaryto electrification: “Unlike electrification, end-users are not connected to agrid or are not energy self-producers” (Tavernier and Rakotoniaina 2016&#160;:68).[8] The research is part of the Hybridelecproject (ANR 2017 Défi 2). Scientific director: E. Verdeil (Sciences Po Paris),coordinator S. Jaglin (Latts, UPEM).