Off-grid technologies increase income, time spent studying, and reduce kerosene consumption across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), though more research is needed around climate-related outcomes (e.g., air quality).
1.1 The Review in Brief
Our review included 47 rigorous impact evaluations of off-grid technology interventions in LMICs. The evidence was limited for many outcomes and was assessed as having a high risk of bias. Based on this evidence, we found that off-grid technology interventions reduce kerosene consumption and have a small increase in income and women’s empowerment. The interventions may also increase time spent studying; however, this result should be interpreted with caution, as there was evidence of publication bias, suggesting a potential overestimation of the true effect. We did not identify significant effects on other outcomes. Based on qualitative evidence, the financial model, local involvement and information and technical knowledge were identified as key factors that can contribute to programme effectiveness. The review findings constitute a global call for investment in rigorous evaluations in the sustainable energy sector.
1.2 What Is the Review About?
Halfway through the final decade of action towards the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), progress towards achieving universal energy for all (SDG7) is faltering, with many rural areas continuing to lack access to electricity. With limited financing options, it is vital that available resources are put towards interventions that work.
We defined off-grid technologies as those that provide electricity to households and communities without connection to a centralised grid. We included any intervention aimed at increasing the uptake and use of said technologies.
1.3 What Is the Aim of This Review?
Our review assessed the effects of off-grid technologies on outcomes related to energy access, climate and socio-economic indicators. We also aimed to identify barriers and facilitators that could affect the success of off-grid interventions.
1.4 What Are the Main Findings of This Review?
1.4.1 Included Studies
We included 47 rigorous impact evaluations, primarily focusing on Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). We included experimental and quasi-experimental designs (QEDs), though the majority were assessed as having a high risk of bias. The extent of evidence available across outcomes varied widely, hence for some of them, we were unable to draw conclusive findings.
1.4.2 Effects of Off-Grid Technologies on Energy Access Outcomes
We found that off-grid technology interventions had a significant effect on reducing kerosene consumption (the only traditional fuel for which there was comparable data available) as well as on increasing the use of off-grid technologies, though these findings are based on six and five studies, respectively. We found no statistically significant effect on other energy access outcomes.
1.4.3 Effects of Off-Grid Technologies on Climate Outcomes
We identified five studies, predominantly with high risk of bias, reporting the effect of off-grid technologies on air quality up to 24 months post-intervention, but did not find a statistically significant effect. Only one study analysed the effect of off-grid technologies on CO2 emissions, so no conclusions could be drawn.
1.4.4 Effects of Off-Grid Technologies on Socio-Economic Outcomes
Off-grid technologies had a small positive effect on income, a finding derived from 13 studies across nine countries. We also found an increase in time spent studying, based on 13 studies, though this result may be overstated due to a risk of publication bias. There was no significant effect on school attendance or test scores. Based on three studies, we found a significant increase in women’s decision-making. No significant effects were identified for other socio-economic outcomes.
1.4.5 Main Barriers and Facilitators to Off-Grid Technology Effectiveness
Drawing from qualitative evidence, we identified three key aspects to increasing engagement and effectiveness of programmes: information on how and why technologies should be used, allowing avenues for local involvement in the implementation and design of programmes, and setting appropriate financial models.
1.5 What Do the Findings of This Review Mean?
The results of this review suggest that information is a key mechanism to ensuring engagement and sustainability of interventions and should be considered a valuable component when designing programmes.
The state of the evidence on this topic, which did not allow us to explore the effects of off-grid interventions extensively, highlights that more and better research is needed. Future research could build up the evidence in contexts outside of SSA. Along with embedding high-quality evaluations within programme design and budgets, research should also aim to use standardised outcome measures to ensure that findings across contexts can be compared.
1.6 How Up-to-Date Is This Review?
The review searched for relevant studies up to September 2023.