SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM - RISE 2020 REGULATORY INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY RISE
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
RISE 2020 RISE REGULATORY INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM
ABOUT ESMAP The Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) is a partnership between the World Bank and 18 partners to help low- and middle- income countries reduce poverty and boost growth through sustainable energy solutions. ESMAP’s analytical and advisory services are fully integrated within the World Bank’s country financing and policy dialogue in the energy sector. Through the World Bank Group (WBG), ESMAP works to accelerate the energy transition required to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7) to ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all. It helps to shape WBG strategies and programs to achieve the WBG Climate Change Action Plan targets. Learn more at: https://esmap.org © 2020 December | International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org Some rights reserved. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because the World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes if full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: +1-202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Furthermore, the ESMAP Program Manager would appreciate receiving a copy of the publication that uses this publication for its source sent in care of the address above, or to esmap@worldbank.org. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ igo. Under the Creative Commons Attribution license, you are free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes, under the following conditions: Attribution—Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP). 2020. Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE) Sustaining the Momentum. Washington, DC: World Bank. Translations—Add the following disclaimer along with the attribution: This translation was not created by The World Bank and should not be considered an official World Bank translation. The World Bank shall not be liable for any content or error in this translation. Adaptations—Add the following disclaimer along with the attribution: This is an adaptation of an original work by The World Bank. Views and opinions expressed in the adaptation are the sole responsibility of the author(s) of the adaptation and are not endorsed by The World Bank. Third-Party Content—The World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the content contained within the work and does not warrant that the use of any third-party owned individual component or part contained in the work will not infringe on the rights of those third parties. If you wish to reuse a component of the work, it is your responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that reuse and to obtain permission from the copyright owner. Examples of components can include, but are not limited to, tables, figures, or images. PRODUCTION CREDITS Editor | Steven Kennedy Designer | Duina Reyes, The World Bank Photo Credits | Cover: © World Bank; Introduction: © SNV; Developments since RISE 2018: © Getty; Regional Briefs: © World Bank All images remain the sole property of their source and may not be used for any purpose without writtenpermission from the source.
RISE RISE 2020 REGULATORY INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM
RISE 2020 – SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS....................................................................................................3
WHAT IS RISE? ..............................................................................................................4
INTRODUCTION............................................................. 6
KEY FINDINGS...........................................................................................................7
POLICIES TO SUPPORT SUSTAINABLE ENERGY IN THE TIME OF COVID-19 ...........8
THE RISE METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................9
DEVELOPMENTS SINCE RISE 2018................................. 10
ELECTRICITY ACCESS: MAJOR PROGRESS OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS..............17
CLEAN COOKING: STEADY PROGRESS SINCE 2010................................................21
RENEWABLE ENERGY: SLOWED PROGRESS OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS ............26
ENERGY EFFICIENCY: A STRONG UPWARD TREND ACROSS ALL REGIONS...........30
REGIONAL BRIEFS.......................................................... 36
REFERENCES.................................................................................................................51
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................................52
1
RISE 2020 – SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
R egulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE),
2020 - Sustaining the Momentum - was produced
by the Global Energy and Extractives Practice of the World
country financing and policy dialogue in the energy sector.
Through the World Bank Group (WBG), ESMAP works to
accelerate the energy transition required to achieve Sus-
Bank Group. It benefited from the support and guidance tainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7) to ensure access to
of Demetrios Papathanasiou, Energy Global Director; Ro- affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all.
hit Khanna, Practice Manager, Energy Sector Management It helps to shape WBG strategies and programs to achieve
Assistance Program (ESMAP); and Vivien Foster, Infrastruc- the WBG Climate Change Action Plan targets.
ture Chief Economist.
The team is grateful for the constructive feedback provid-
Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE) is part ed by peer reviewers Vivien Foster, Ani Balabanyan, and
of the Energy Data and Analytics Hub Program and was Husam Beides. Many World Bank colleagues, and exter-
managed by a core team led by Elisa Portale and compris- nal partners offered formal and informal guidance during
ing Daron Bedrosyan, Sharmila Bellur, Juliette Besnard, preparation of the report. The team is also grateful to the
and Tigran Parvanyan. The following staff and consultants staff of World Bank’s Energy and Extractives Global Prac-
performed the work on the four RISE pillars: tice, which contributed to the validation of information and
data, country by country.
§§ Electricity Access: Juliette Besnard and Paul Pulickal
Mathew, with support from Raluca Golumbeanu and RISE is underpinned by individual data collection efforts
Dana Rysankova in each of the 138 countries covered. The full list of those
§§ Clean Cooking: Sharmila Bellur and Daron Bedrosyan, who provided information in each country is on the RISE
with support from Yabei Zhang website (http://rise.worldbank.org). The team would like
to particularly recognize the project managers of the firms
§§ Renewable Energy: Tigran Parvanyan and Hong Yang, that led data collection activities across multiple countries:
with support from Zuzana Dobrotkova and Pierre Alexander LaBua and Sylvana Bohrt (Greenmax Capital Ad-
Audinet visors); Michel Layec and Rebecca Lamas (Stantec); Akram
§§ Energy Efficiency: Muna Abucar Osman and Daron Al Mohamadi, Sara Ibrahim, and Maged Mahmoud (Re-
Bedrosyan, with support from Ivan Jaques and Jas gional Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficien-
Singh cy); and Sanjay Dube and Sumedha Awasthy (International
Institute of Energy Conservation).
The team also received valuable support from Yadviga
Semikolenova on the policy implications of the COVID-19 An editorial and design team comprising Steven Kenne-
pandemic, and from Stephen Halloway at various stages dy, Duina Reyes, and Talar Manoukian raised the quality
of the project development. and visual presentation of the final report. The online plat-
form was developed by K.S. Sreejith, R. Narayanan, Rony
The financial support of ESMAP is gratefully acknowl- George, and Ram Prasad of Advanced Software Systems.
edged. ESMAP is a partnership between the World The communications process was led by Anita Rozowska,
Bank and 18 partners to help low- and middle-income Nugroho Nurdikiawan Sunjoyo and Phillip Edouard Cor-
countries reduce poverty and boost growth through sus- nell, with input and guidance on publication from Marjorie
tainable energy solutions. ESMAP’s analytical and advi- Araya and Heather Austin.
sory services are fully integrated within the World Bank’s
3WHAT IS RISE?
RISE—Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy—is a has some room for improvement; and red for the lowest
set of indicators intended for use in comparing the poli- scores (0–33), indicating that policy adoption remains at
cy and regulatory frameworks that countries have put in an early stage.
place to support the achievement of Sustainable Develop-
ment Goal 7 on universal access to clean and modern en- By measuring the level and ambition of policy adoption in
ergy. This third edition of the report captures policies and countries, the indicators can help policy makers bench-
regulations that enhance sustainable energy in the form mark their own national energy framework against those
of 31 indicators distributed among four pillars: access to of regional and global peers. By providing empirical evi-
electricity, clean cooking, renewable energy, and energy dence of the support provided by policy frameworks, the
efficiency. RISE database helps countries attract investment in their
sustainable energy sector.
The indicators, scored on a 0–100 scale, can be used to
compare 138 economies that now account for 98 percent RISE is also a valuable resource for private investors and
of the world’s population. A country’s overall score is an developers, who use it to carry out due diligence related
average of its scores for the access to electricity1, renew- to new projects, products, and services. RISE scores are
able energy, and energy efficiency pillars (the clean cook- intended to illustrate how close or far a country is from of-
ing pillar is only scored for 55 access-deficit countries2). fering an attractive policy environment. They should not be
The data in RISE 2020 cover the years 2010 to 2019 and construed as investment advice.
are current as of December 31, 2019.
The RISE data platform also includes a comprehensive li-
Scores are grouped into three categories based on a “traf- brary of policies and regulations on sustainable energy in
fic light” system: green for the highest third of scores 138 countries. It highlights global, regional, and national
(67–100), indicating a relatively mature policy environment best practices spanning the gamut of sustainable energy
though still with room for improvement; yellow for the mid- policy making and offers regional profiles and country pol-
dle range (33–67), indicating that the country has begun to icy profiles. Detailed information on methodology is avail-
make serious efforts to develop a policy framework but still able on the website (http://rise.esmap.org/).
1 54 countries were surveyed for electricity access in 2019. Access deficit countries were selected if they had access rates under 90% or if there were
over 5 million people lacking access to electricity in the country. Countries with no electricity access deficit were scored 100.
2 The clean cooking pillar is scored for 55 access-deficit countries (as identified in IEA, IRENA, UNSD, World Bank, and WHO, 2020) and is averaged into
the overall score for those countries only.
RISE 2020 – SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM 4The RISE framework
Each of RISE’s four pillars rests on a set of indicators as shown in the figure below.
FIGURE A. RISE’S PILLARS AND INDICATORS
Pillar Indicators
• Electrification plan • Framework for standalone • Scope of the electrification • Consumer affordability
systems plan
ELECTRICITY ACCESS • Grid electrification • Utility creditworthiness
framework • Utility transparency and • Framework for mini grids
monitoring
• Planning • Scope of planning • Standards and labeling • Incentives for clean
CLEAN COOKING cooking solutions
• Legal framework for • Network connection • Planning for renewable • Counterparty risk
renewable energy and use energy expansion
RENEWABLE ENERGY • Incentives and regulatory • Carbon pricing and • Attributes of financial and
support for renewable monitoring regulatory incentives
energy
• National energy efficiency • Transport sector • Energy labeling system • Financing mechanisms for
plannin • Energy efficiency • Carbon pricing and energy efficiency
ENERGY EFFICIENCY • Incentives and mandates: entities monitoring • Building energy codes
Public sector • Incentives and mandates: • Incentives and mandates:
• Minimum energy Utilities Industrial and commercial
performance standards end users
Source: World Bank RISE 2018
5INTRODUCTION Photo Credits: © World Bank
KEY FINDINGS
§§ Policy matters. Policies and regulations are critical for countries seeking to attract new investment and
grow toward a sustainable energy sector in line with Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7). RISE 2020
presents an inventory of sustainable energy policies and regulations in 138 countries
§§ Globally, steady progress was made on sustainable energy policy in 2017–2019, but the pace was
slower than in the past. Progress on policy related to renewable energy and energy efficiency slowed
by half compared with 2015–17, whereas scores for electricity access and clean cooking maintained their
advance and even accelerated during 2017–19.
§§ Although the sustained global momentum toward electrification has brought significant policy improve-
ments since 2010, most countries with deficits in access to electricity still have room for improvement
in building robust policies. Frameworks to support mini grid and standalone systems have seen faster
development since 2010 compared to on-grid electrification. Income levels have affected electrification
policy efforts, with 67 percent of middle- and upper-income countries having adopted comprehensive
access frameworks by 2019, compared with just 13 percent of low-income countries.
§§ Although only 15 percent of the countries with deficits in access to clean cooking solutions have
achieved advanced policy frameworks, those countries, including Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, and
Kenya, represent more than half of the unserved population globally. While the period between 2010
and 2017 was notable for progress in upper- and lower-middle-income countries in Asia (Bangladesh, Cam-
bodia, China, India, Indonesia, Mongolia, and Nepal) and Latin America (Guatemala), the period between
2017 and 2019 saw large improvements in low income Sub-Saharan Africa countries, notably Benin, Kenya,
Nigeria, and Tanzania, which moved from the red zone to the yellow zone.
§§ Renewable energy policies in the heating and cooling sector and the transport sector lag consider-
ably behind those in the electricity sector, and the gap has widened. This is due to the historical priority
of using renewable energy sources to produce electricity rather than to deploy them in other sectors.
Despite overall progress in renewable energy policies, measures related to carbon pricing and monitoring,
which are key to the use of renewables in heating and cooling and in transport, have gone relatively un-
developed since 2010, with 50 percent of the surveyed countries still not having policies in place in 2019.
§§ Historically, energy efficiency policies in heating and cooling, or HVAC, have been more developed
than those in electricity and transport, with the latter scoring lowest globally. Approximately 75 per-
cent of the surveyed countries have adopted minimum HVAC energy performance standards and labelling
measures, with roughly 60 percent making them mandatory.
§§ The countries that made the most rapid improvements were concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa. Of
the top ten performers in RISE 2020, nine were in Sub-Saharan Africa, including South Africa, Benin, and
Sudan. Kenya, Kenya, Tanzania, and Chad had the largest improvements, increasing their RISE scores by
more than nine points per year on average from 2017 to 2019. The increase was driven mainly by progress
on electricity access and renewable energy, with Kenya also improving markedly on energy efficiency.
7POLICIES TO SUPPORT SUSTAINABLE ENERGY IN THE TIME OF COVID-19 RISE 2020 monitors and assesses policy and regulatory support for sustainable energy to promote energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy while expanding access to electricity and clean cooking fuels. Marshalling policy data from well before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic through December 2019, RISE 2020 reviews what governments have done to create an enabling environment for sustainable energy. The economic crisis brought on by the pandemic is affecting sustainable energy in ways that are only beginning to emerge. In response to COVID-19, several countries introduced country-wide lockdowns as well as energy-sector specific policies that are straining the energy industry and threatening access to energy just when it is needed most. With an addition- al 150 million people projected to be pushed into extreme poverty by 2021, the expected impact of COVID-19 on poverty de- creases the chances of meeting the access targets of Sustainable Development Goal 7 on universal access to modern forms of energy (World Bank 2020a). In many countries where utilities were already under financial duress, the COVID-19 crisis has exacerbated existing pressures and jeopardized utilities’ ability to provide essential services.3 In addition, low oil prices have reduced incentives to invest in clean energy, and more difficult financing conditions have constrained the development of capital-intensive clean energy solutions. In the short term, policies embedded in stimulus packages could support energy service providers and minimize mar- ket disruptions in the energy sector. Governments will need to help utilities recover from cash shortfalls and restructure their debt. As recovery progresses, broader energy tariff reforms can be undertaken, accompanied by measures to protect lower-income customers. Governments could then take the opportunity to implement structural reforms by phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and investing in digital, resilient, and clean energy infrastructure designed for financial recovery, long-term cost savings, and expanded access to electricity (IEA 2020a). Promoting sustainable energy through stimulus policies could also tamp down the likely spike in emissions of greenhouse gases as the global economy recovers, a phenomenon observed in the crisis of 2008–09 (McKinsey & Company 2020). Beyond challenges, the pandemic confronts energy policy makers with opportunities to build back better. Policy mak- ers have the opportunity to set new priorities and explore different trajectories to support a low-carbon recovery and acceler- ate the pace toward attaining SDG 7 (IEA 2020b). Short-term measures embedded in recovery plans are opportunities to set longer-term strategies and align policies on energy with SDG 7 targets over the next decade. The crisis underlines the need to continue strengthening the regulatory framework, including incentives for sustainable energy development to ensure a resilient recovery from COVID-19. It also highlights the need to adopt policies and regulations that mitigate the risk of global shocks while gradually withdrawing support for energy inefficient sectors (World Bank 2020). Countries must not lose sight of the need to invest in clean energy, which would create jobs across sectors, boost eco- nomic growth, and improve energy sustainability and resilience. Around $1 trillion per year over the next three years will be needed to ensure the full recovery of the energy sector (IEA 2020b). Government support, such as financial incentives for private investments in clean energy and digitalization, will be critical. The returns to such support would likely be immense. A large-scale shift toward electrification fueled by renewables between now and 2050, accompanied by a ramping up of energy efficiency, could more than triple global employment in renewable energy—from 12 million jobs in 2017 to 42 million by 2050. Solar photovoltaic (PV) technology, coupled with energy efficient buildings, appliances, and industrial processes, creates the most jobs per dollar of investment—up to 15 jobs per million (Ferroukhi, Casals, and Parajuli 2020). Options for governments to promote such investment include tax deductions, guaranteed lending, rebates, cash-for-replacement schemes, incentives for energy management systems, and programs for training and hiring energy managers (IEA 2020b). The pandemic also constitutes a mandate for clean cooking solutions—the benefits of which would extend beyond the immediate post-pandemic recovery. As COVID-19 is a respiratory disease, scientists expect that urban air pollution, coupled with inhalation of smoke from household cooking fires, may significantly sharpen the risk of dying from COVID-19 complications. It is therefore more important than ever to make clean cooking a policy and investment priority, especially in low-income countries. 3 Observed reductions in bill collections due to lockdowns are even more severe than observed reductions in demand. Sector-specific policies introduced by some countries (bill reductions, cancellations, or deferrals for all customer classes) have the greatest negative impact on utility finances in the short-term. RISE 2020 – SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM 8
THE RISE METHODOLOGY
RISE’s geographic coverage has expanded from 133 countries in 2018 to 138 in 20204. RISE 2020 now encompasses
98 percent of the global population. Its basic scoring methodology has not changed from previous editions.
Clean cooking has been transformed from a pilot into a main pillar. Deficits in access to clean cooking, the most over-
looked part of the sustainable energy agenda, affect 2.8 billion people worldwide. The RISE clean cooking pillar covers 55
countries that account for more than 93 percent of the countries with low access scores (IEA, IRENA, UNSD, World Bank,
and WHO 2020).5 Four indicators measure the pillar’s policy frameworks: planning, inclusiveness, standards and labelling,
and incentives to increase uptake.
To capture recent changes in the energy sector, RISE 2020 refines the indicators and subindicators for all pillars,
producing recalculations of the entire time series for all countries. The survey methodology for the electricity access
pillar now captures more nuances in national policy design for electrification frameworks (grid and off-grid). The ques-
tionnaire was updated to yield a better picture of how national electrification plans are drafted—taking into account the
access target as well as the existence of clear licensing procedures for mini grid operators and consumers. Similar ques-
tions shared between indicators (“framework for mini grids” and “framework for standalone systems”) were merged so
that scores would better reflect sector realities. With respect to clean cooking, RISE 2020 incorporates questions within
the three other pillars to capture policies that address the externalities of cooking practices on health and gender. With re-
spect to energy efficiency, the questionnaire was refined from eleven indicators to two (eliminating “information provided
to consumers about electricity usage” and “energy efficiency incentives from electricity rate structures”). With respect to
renewable energy, some subindicators were modified (mainly to merge redundant questions). Because of these changes,
scores from previous RISE reports cannot be directly compared with those in the latest edition.
Measuring the quality and enforcement of policies remains challenging. RISE provides a record of the legislation, pol-
icies, and strategies prevailing in a country over a specified timeline. As policies and regulations may exist without being
enforced, a country’s RISE score reflects laws that have been enacted, without making a judgment on whether they are
being implemented. RISE cannot fully capture the quality of policies and regulations, which is highly context-specific and
may produce subjective assessments. Some policies may not be completely relevant for all countries given country-spe-
cific strategies and political choices. One example is electrification strategies, where some countries have elected to rely
only on publicly owned service providers or on grid expansion.
Cross-pillar comparisons must be nuanced. The indicators included under the four pillars yield a holistic view of the
state of regulation and policy making within each pillar. Comparing results across pillars reveals differences in the relative
maturity of, say, energy access versus clean cooking or renewable energy versus energy efficiency.
The RISE score is not the only precursor or indicator of SDG 7 progress or investment. RISE is intended to provide a
record of laws, regulations, and policies that countries enact to support sustainable energy. The policy environment alone
is insufficient, however, to attract investment or ensure progress toward SDG 7. It must be backed by strong institutions,
open markets, access to finance, an open flow of information, and a strong private sector. Nevertheless, RISE can help
explain trends in sustainable energy investment and SDG 7 outcomes.
Except where otherwise noted, the figures in this report are based on RISE project data.
4 The 5 countries added are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, and North Macedonia.
5 The 55 countries in the RISE clean cooking pillar are made up of 54 countries in the RISE electricity access pillar, plus China. For access-deficit
countries, the overall country scores are the average of the scores for electricity access, clean cooking, renewable energy and energy efficiency.
9DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE RISE 2018
Photo Credits: © GettyDEVELOPMENTS SINCE RISE 2018
Since RISE 2018, the number of countries with advanced policy frameworks for sustainable energy has grown at
a good pace. In 2017, 57 countries had built advanced policy frameworks for sustainable energy into their regulatory
systems. By 2019, 65 countries had done so, including many emerging and developing countries such as South Africa,
Ecuador, Jamaica, and Kenya.
FIGURE 1. EVOLUTION OF RISE SCORES WORLDWIDE, 2017 VS. 2019
2017 2019
≤ 33 ≤ 33
33 < x < 67 33 < x < 67
≥ 67 ≥ 67
Source: World Bank, RISE 2020.
But the pace of improvement from 2017 to 2019 was slower than that from 2015 to 2017. Compared with RISE 2018,
the global average score has improved almost two points per year, whereas in the previous period annual average growth
was around three points per year (figure 2). Nonetheless, from 2017 to 2019 the number of countries with advanced
(green) policy frameworks rose from 41 to 49 percent, while the share of countries with undeveloped (red) policy frame-
works fell from 21 to 17 percent. In 2019, 24 countries were still in the early stages of building a sound policy environment.
FIGURE 2. GLOBAL PROGRESS ON REGULATION RELATED TO SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, WITH PACE OF GROWTH, 2015–17 AND
2017–19
Average Average Average
+3.2 in RISE +1.9 in RISE
51 score / year 57 score / year 61
100%
90%
80% 35% 41%
49%
70%
Share of countries
60%
50% 35%
40% 38%
30% 35%
20%
30%
10% 21% 17%
0%
2015 2017 2019
≤33 33Average Average Average
+3.2 in RISE +1.9 in RISE
51
Policy frameworks for clean energy policies 57 efficiency
(both energy
score / year score /and 61 energy) improved more slowly
year renewable
100%
than those for 90%
the other pillars over the period 2017–19. The annual rate of improvement in the global average score
for energy efficiency
80% improved 35% by only 1.6 points per year41%
between 2017 and 2019, compared with an annual rise of 3.6
points between70% 2015 and 2017. Yearly improvement in renewable energy policies slowed 49% from the pace recorded during
the 2015–17 period,
60% dropping to 2.5 points annually over 2017–19. Standards for heating and cooling were among the
Share of countries
fastest growing50%policies in both35%the renewable and efficiency pillars. Meanwhile, building codes that embraced policies
on carbon pricing,
40% energy efficiency, and monitoring of renewable
38% energy use slowed in 2017–19. Clean cooking also
30% 35%
slackened, moving from annual growth of 3.2 points per year in the 2015–17 period to 2.8 points in 2017–19. The energy
20%
access pillar showed the greatest
30% increases in policy quality, with an annual rate of improvement of 5 points per year in
10% 21% 17%
the 2017–19 period compared with 4 points per year for 2015–17.
0%
2015 2017 2019
Across all dimensions of sustainable energy, average global scores suggest considerable scope to improve policy
≤33 33FIGURE 4. DISTRIBUTION OF RISE SCORES BY WORLD REGION, 2019
Sub-Saharan Africa East Asia & Pacific Latin America & Caribbean
8% 5%
3 countries 21% 1 country
36%
5 countries 3 countries 42%
8 countries
43%
15 countries 49% 43% 53%
17 countries 6 countries 10 countries
≤33 33The countries improving most rapidly over 2017–19 are concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa. Most countries in the
region saw their RISE scores increase between 2017 and 2019, though at differing rates (figure 5). Of the world’s top ten
fastest improving countries, nine were in Sub-Saharan Africa. As the fastest improving countries globally, Kenya, Tanzania,
and Chad increased their RISE scores by more than nine points per year on average from 2017 to 2019. The increase was
driven mainly by two pillars (energy access and renewable energy), with Kenya’s score driven mainly by its rising energy
access and energy efficiency scores; Tanzania’s improvement stems solely from the spike in its renewable energy score.
FIGURE 5. THE EVOLUTION OF OVERALL RISE SCORES, 2017–19
Score increased between 17-33 points
Score increased between 0-17 points
No change in score
Source: World Bank, RISE 2020.
Good policies will not deliver SDG 7 targets without consistent enforcement. Reforms are adopted on paper, but they
often lack an enforcement body and mechanisms for implementation and compliance. RISE collects objective evidence
that a policy is in place. But the RISE methodology does not allow for field verification to ensure that the policy is being
enforced. The Global Electricity Regulatory Index (GERI) complements the RISE database with de jure and de facto data on
the structure and functioning of regulatory agencies (box 1).
RISE 2020 – SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM 14BOX 1. GLOBAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY INDEX (GERI)
The African Development Bank (AfDB) and the World Bank are collaborating to create the first global index of regulatory
frameworks in the power sector. The Global Electricity Regulatory Index (GERI) is based on the AfDB’s Electricity Regulatory
Index, launched in 2018, and a complementary index the World Bank developed in the same time period (Foster and Rana
2020).
By measuring the adoption of regulatory best practices, GERI enables countries to Identify gaps in their regulatory frame-
work and benchmark their performance against global peers. The index has two components: regulatory governance and
regulatory substance.
The regulatory governance component examines the institutional arrangement of each country’s regulatory regime to see
whether it embodies best-practice design. Indicators include legal mandate, clarity of role, independence, accountability,
transparency, predictability, stakeholder participation, and open access to information.
The regulatory substance component focuses on the actual content of regulation. Its major indicators are tariff setting
methodology, quality of service, licensing framework, and institutional regulatory capacity.
For 2020, as the AfDB collected data on 36 African countries, the World Bank conducted a pilot study of 20 countries spread
across other regions. In the next RISE cycle, data collection will be extended to all RISE countries outside Africa while the
AfDB continues to cover the African continent annually.
Although the data collected for the pilot countries are still being analyzed, significant results have already emerged. Where-
as the countries of East Asia and the Pacific have the lowest average score on governance (55 percent), they score the
highest on substance (73 percent). More detailed results can be found in AfDB and World Bank 2020.
FIGURE B1.1 COUNTRY SCORES ON GERI: HIGHER ON FORM THAN SUBSTANCE
1
Brazil
Turkey
Bolivia
Cambodia Malaysia
0.8 Algeria Sri Lanka Thailand
Uruguay Moldova Georgia
Guyana
Regulatory Substance
0.6 Indonesia Argentina (Tucuman)
Jordan Nepal
Myanmar Bangladesh Argentina (Salta)
Argentina (Jujuy) Argentina (Catamarca)
0.4
Argentina (Santiago)
0.2
Paraguay Uzbekistan
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Regulatory Governance
Source: GERI Pilot 2020, based on preliminary analysis
Average +2 in RISE EA
Average +4 in RISE EA
Average +5 in RISE EA
Average
25 score/year 35 score/year 43 score/year 53
100% 6%
90% 19% 13%
26%
80%
Share of countries
70% 48%
60% 54%
50% 54%
40% 81%
30% 15
20% 46%
33%
10% 20%Utilities are central to the power sector and play a crucial role in the promotion of the sustainable energy agen-
da. Financially healthy and creditworthy utilities are better able to attract financing and invest resources. As of 2018,
however, power distribution utilities in just 45 percent of the world’s countries met basic creditworthiness requirements
(figure 6), showing a marginal decline from 2016, when those in half of countries were creditworthy. The situation is more
dire in countries that have yet to electrify their entire population. There, distribution utilities were generally creditworthy
in just over a fifth of countries in 2018 (figure 7), down from a third in 2016. This is of great concern because utilities in
access-deficit countries shoulder the responsibility for expanding access and providing quality supply. Even in countries
with universal access, where utilities are the main off-takers of renewable energy and principal implementers of energy
efficiency programs, utilities in 20 percent of countries suffer from poor creditworthiness (figure 8).
FIGURE 7. UTILITY CREDITWORTHINESS, ACCESS-DEFICIT
COUNTRIES, 2018
Average
41
50
40 22%
Number of countries
30
FIGURE 6. UTILITY CREDITWORTHINESS, GLOBAL, 2018 31%
20
Average
56 10 47%
120
0
100
45% ≤33 331
Brazil
Turkey
Bolivia
Cambodia Malaysia
0.8 Algeria Sri Lanka Thailand
1
Uruguay Moldova Georgia
Brazil
Guyana Turkey
Bolivia
ELECTRICITY ACCESS:
Regulatory Substance
0.6 Indonesia Cambodia Malaysia
Argentina (Tucuman)
Jordan Algeria Sri Lanka
Nepal Thailand
0.8
Myanmar Bangladesh Moldova Argentina (Salta)
Georgia
Uruguay
MAJOR PROGRESS OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS
Regulatory Substance
0.4
0.6 Indonesia
Jordan
Argentina (Santiago)
Argentina (Jujuy) Argentina (Catamarca)
Guyana
Argentina (Tucuman)
Nepal
Myanmar Bangladesh Argentina (Salta)
0.2 Argentina (Jujuy) Argentina (Catamarca)
0.4 policies have advanced since 2010, with the advance quickening after 2017. Since 2017, more than
Electrification
Paraguay Uzbekistan
10 percent of the access-deficit countries moved into theArgentina
green (Santiago)
zone. Between 2017 and 2019, 13 percent improved their
access-related 0 regulations enough to move from the red zone to the yellow zone, leaving 20 percent of the access-deficit
0.2 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
countries without the basic set of policies needed
Uzbekistan
to accelerate
Regulatory electrification
Governance (figure 9). Notable is the steady progress
Paraguay
of Nigeria and several other countries with large access deficits. However, more than half the global population lacking
access to electricity
0 remained in countries with weak regulatory frameworks at the end of 2019 (figure 10).
0.5 0.6 0.7 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.9 1
Regulatory Governance
FIGURE 9. ELECTRICITY ACCESS: EVOLUTION OF RISE SCORES FOR PILLAR, 2010–19
Average +2 in RISE EA
Average +4 in RISE EA
Average +5 in RISE EA
Average
25 score/year 35 score/year 43 score/year 53
100% 6%
90% 19% 13%
26%
80% Average +2 in RISE EA
Average +4 in RISE EA
Average +5 in RISE EA
Average
25 35 43 53
Share of countries
70%
100% score/year 48% score/year score/year
6%
60%
90% 19% 13%
54%
50% 26%
80% 54%
40% 81%
Share of countries
70% 48%
30%
60% 54%
20% 46%
50% 33% 54%
10%
40% 81% 20%
0%
30% 2010 2015 2017 2019
20% 46%
≤33 33Although all regions have improved their policies and regulations on electricity access, progress has been uneven.
Progress in Sub-Saharan Africa is the most mixed. As of 2019, South Africa and Tanzania had some of the region’s most
advanced policy frameworks for electricity access, pulling up the region’s average score. The South Asia region remains
the highest scoring region, while the East Asia and Pacific region made the greatest improvement between 2010 and 2019
(figure 11). Bangladesh retained the most comprehensive enabling environment over the period, both in designing and
implementing effective electricity access policies.
FIGURE 11. ELECTRICITY ACCESS: EVOLUTION OF RISE SCORE BY REGION, 2010–19 6
100
90
RISE electricity access score (0-100) RISE electricity access score (0-100)
80
70
South Asia
60 Latin America & Caribbean
East Asia & Pacific
50 Sub-Saharan Africa
100
40
90
30
80
20
70
10 South Asia
60 Latin America & Caribbean
0 East Asia & Pacific
50 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Sub-Saharan Africa
40 South Asia Latin America & Caribbean East Asia & Pacific Sub-Saharan Africa
30 RISE 2020.
Source: World Bank,
20
Some progress has been observed in fragile and conflict-affected settings.7 In 2010, policy frameworks were poor
in 95 percent10of the countries characterized by fragility, conflict, and violence. This figure was halved by 2019, with 50
percent of fragile
100%
0 countries making strides toward adopting electricity regulations and moving out of the red zone (figure
9%
12). Sudan and90%Niger
2010 progressed
2011 after
2012 20172013on their2014electricity
2015 access 2016policies,
2017 especially
2018 for2019 mini grids and standalone
of fragile and conflict affected countries
systems. A trend
80% for fragile South
regions
Asia is that electrification
Latin America & Caribbeanplanning
East Asiaand frameworks
& Pacific for grid
Sub-Saharan Africa electrification have become
lagging indicators
70% (figure 13). In 2019, Nigeria, Cameroon, and Myanmar led in adopting electricity access policies. 50%
60%
FIGURE 12. ELECTRICITY ACCESS: THE EVOLUTION OF THE RISE PILLAR SCORE FOR COUNTRIES MARKED BY FRAGILITY,
CONFLICT, AND
50%VIOLENCE, 2010–19
40%
100%
30% 9%
90%
41%
countries
20%
80%
Share of fragile and conflict affectedShare
10%
70% 50%
0%
60%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
50%
≤33 3320% 41%
Share of
10%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
≤33 332019
2017
Utility transparency and monitoring Grid electrification framework 2010
Consumer affordability Framework for mini grids
Among countries with the highest access deficits, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Tanzania have made the most progress in
adopting corrective policies since 2017 (figure 15).forAmong
Framework standalonethese
systems countries, the greatest improvements are in frame-
works for mini grids, consumer affordability, and utility transparency.
FIGURE 15. ELECTRICITY ACCESS: RISE PILLAR SCORES FOR TOP 10 ACCESS-DEFICIT COUNTRIES AND 10 LEAST-ELECTRIFIED
COUNTRIES, 2017 AND 2019
Least-electrified countries Countries with the largest access deficit
30% 30%
3 countries 3 countries
40%
(Bangladesh, India, (DRC,Madagascar,
4 countries Uganda)
60% Mozambique)
2017
(Burkina Faso,
Liberia, Malawi, 6 countries
Niger) (Burundi, Chad, 40%
DRC, Madagascar, 4 countries
Sierra Leone, South Sudan) (Ethiopia, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Tanzania)
≤33 33CLEAN COOKING:
STEADY PROGRESS SINCE 2010
Of the four pillars of sustainable energy, clean cooking is the most often overlooked when it comes to policy mak-
ing. Yet RISE scores have improved consistently across the 55 countries reporting on deficits in access to clean cooking
since 2010 (figure 16). The number of countries with advanced policy frameworks rose from zero in 2010 to eight in 2019,
moving 15 percent of access-deficit countries into the green zone on the RISE index. Of the remainder, 22 countries made
moderate progress; in 25, the policy apparatus remains nascent.
FIGURE 16. CLEAN COOKING: PROGRESS IN RISE SCORE FOR PILLAR, 2010 –19
+3 in RISE +3 in RISE +3 in RISE
Average clean cooking Average clean cooking Average clean cooking Average
10 score/year 25 score/year 31 score/year 37
100% 5% 5% 7%
90% 15%
80% 27%
70% 42%
Share of countries
40%
60%
50% 95%
40% +3 in RISE +3 in RISE +3 in RISE
Average clean cooking Average
67% clean cooking Average clean cooking Average
30% 10 score/year 25 score/year 31 score/year 37
100% 51% 45%
20% 5% 5% 7%
90% 15%
10%
80%
0% 27%
70% 2010 2015 2017
42% 2019
Share of countries
40%
60% ≤33 33Countries experiencing fragility and conflict have seen few if any policy improvements in clean cooking. On every in-
dicator and in their overall scores for policy making, countries marked by fragility have on average half the score for clean
cooking of nonfragile countries. Standards and labeling are particularly weak in fragile countries; average scores on this
indicator are 15 percentage points lower than scores of nonfragile countries (figure 19). There is an urgent need for cook-
ing interventions in countries marked by fragility and conflict, where fuel-collection tasks not only expose women and girls
to violence but also damage the environment. Yet the clean cooking agenda is largely ignored in this group of countries.
FIGURE 19. CLEAN COOKING: RISE SCORES IN FCV AND NON-FCV COUNTRIES, BY INDICATOR, 2019
Clean cooking, overall score
Breakdown of RISE Clean Cooking Scores,
by indicator, for countries with and without
fragility and violence
Tracking, planning, and institutional capacity
Scope of planning and awareness
Standards and labeling
Financial incentives
Clean cooking, overall score
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Breakdown of RISE Clean Cooking Scores,
RISE 2020 clean cooking Score (out of 100)
by indicator, for countries with and without
fragility and violence Countries without fragility and violence Fragile and conflict-affected countries
Tracking,World
Source: planning,
Bank,andRISE
institutional
2020. capacity
Note: FCV = fragility, conflict, and violence.
Scope of100
planning and awareness
There are policy-making
90 disparities in clean cooking within and between regions. While Latin America and the Carib-
bean has shown the greatest
Standards and labeling gains since 2010, South Asian countries are leading on policy and regulatory frameworks,
80
where progress continues driven by consistent progress by Bangladesh, India and Nepal (figure 20). Although Sub-Saha-
South Asia
RISE clean cooking score (out of 100)
theFinancial
ran Africa has 70 lowest incentives
regional average, since 2010 it has shown a consistent uptick, albeit from a lower starting point.
In three out of60four access-deficit 0 regions—East
10 Asia20 and Pacific, 30 South Asia, 40 and Sub-Saharan
50 60Africa—RISE
70 scores range
from 0 to 83. In Latin America and the Caribbean, where only four
RISE 2020 countries
clean cooking Scorehave
(out of a significant access deficit (Guatemala,
100)
50
Haiti, Honduras, and Nicaragua), country-level scores on the pillar
Countries without fragility and violence
are less uneven, ranging from 24 toEast
Fragile and conflict-affected countries
53.Asia & Pacific
40 Latin America & Caribbean
FIGURE 20. CLEAN COOKING: EVOLUTION OF RISE SCORES BY REGION, 2010–19 Global average
30
100 Sub-Saharan Africa
20
90
10
80
0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 South Asia
2019
RISE clean cooking score (out of 100)
70
60 Global Average East Asia & Pacific Latin America & Caribbean South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
50
East Asia & Pacific
100 Latin America & Caribbean
40
India
90 Global average
30
80 Kenya
Indonesia Sub-Saharan Africa
20
Nepal
Uganda
70 Lao PDR
RISE clean cooking score (0-100)
10 Ethiopia
Niger Ghana
60 Mongolia
0 Rwanda Cameroon Bangladesh
Nigeria
2010 2011
Malawi Mali Tanzania
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Guatemala2019
50 Madagascar Benin South Africa
Zambia
Source: World Bank,40 Global
RISE Average
2020. East Asia & Pacific Latin America & Caribbean South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
Haiti
Honduras
30
Sudan
100 Burkina Faso Myanmar
20 Mozambique India
Somalia Angola
90
RISE 2020 – SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM
Chad
Pakistan 22
10 Burundi South Sudan Vanuatu Philippines
Indonesia
80 D.R.C Kenya
0 Afghanistan C.A.R Nepal Guinea Congo P.N.GClean cooking, overall score
Breakdown of RISE Clean Cooking Scores,
by indicator, for countries with and without
The top and
fragility regional
violence performers on the RISE index are also among the fastest improvers, gaining six to eight points annually
Tracking,
since 2010planning,
(tableand
1).institutional
But the capacity
concerted policy push seen in certain low-access countries (Lao People’s Democratic Republic,
Nigeria, and Tanzania) is particularly noteworthy.
Scope of planning and awareness
TABLE 1. CLEAN COOKING: FASTEST IMPROVERS, BY REGION
Standards
(RISE score on pillar and labeling
in 2020, annual rate of improvement in RISE score 2010–19, 2018 access rate)
Financial incentives
East Asia & Pacific Latin America & Caribbean South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Indonesia (83, 8.5, 80%) Guatemala (53, 5.9, 46%) Bangladesh (61, 6.8, 24%) Kenya (79, 8.8, 10%)
RISE 2020 clean cooking Score (out of 100)
Lao PDR (70, 6.9, 7%) Honduras (37, 4.9, 57%)
Countries Nepal (74, 6.8, Fragile
without fragility and violence 29%) and conflict-affected countries
Nigeria (57, 6.3, 10%)
Mongolia (61, 6.8, 50%) Haiti (35, 3.9, 4%) India (94, 3.5, 49%) Tanzania (55, 6.1, 4%)
100
Source: World Bank, RISE 2020.
90
Performance80on the RISE clean cooking index soars as income rises. There are notable exceptions, however, to this
link between70income and mature policy frameworks. Lower-income countries are concentrated in theSouth redAsia
zone, suggest-
RISE clean cooking score (out of 100)
ing that they have not yet developed policy frameworks for clean cooking. Meanwhile, green zone countries include
60
low-income nations like Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda, which have robust policy frameworks (figure 21). While the period
between 2010 50 and 2017 was notable for progress in upper- and lower-middle-income countries in Asia and Latin America
East Asia & Pacific
(e.g., Bangladesh,
40 Cambodia, China, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Mongolia, and Nepal), the periodLatin between
America &2017 and
Caribbean
2019 saw large gains in poorer Sub-Saharan Africa countries like Benin, Kenya, Nigeria, and Tanzania. The presence
Global average of
30
low-access countries among top RISE performers shows that prioritizing the policy agenda is notSub-Saharan enough. Scaling
Africa up
access on the20ground depends on the finer aspects of allocating resources and planning implementation. In low-income
countries like10Uganda and Ethiopia, scale-up will require gradually stepping away from artisanal production of biomass
stoves toward clean solutions (liquefied petroleum gas, biogas, and electricity). As this transition will occur over a longer
0
time period, interim2010solutions
2011 (such2012
as quality-assured
2013 2014biomass
2015 stoves)
2016will help
2017 to mitigate
2018 the
2019worst health impacts of
charcoal and firewood.
Global Average East Asia & Pacific Latin America & Caribbean South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
FIGURE 21. CLEAN COOKING: RISE SCORES AND GDP PER CAPITA, 2019
100
India
90
Indonesia
80 Kenya
Nepal
Uganda
70 Lao PDR
RISE clean cooking score (0-100)
Ethiopia
Niger Ghana
60 Mongolia
Rwanda Cameroon Bangladesh
Tanzania Nigeria
Malawi Mali Guatemala
50 Madagascar Benin South Africa
Zambia
40
Haiti
Honduras
30
Sudan
Burkina Faso Myanmar
20 Mozambique
Somalia Angola
Chad
Pakistan
10 Burundi South Sudan Vanuatu Philippines
D.R.C
0 Afghanistan C.A.R Guinea Congo P.N.G
$- $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,000.00 $4,000.00 $5,000.00 $6,000.00
GDP per capita, 2019 (USD)
Source: World Bank, RISE 2020.
23Even where planning frameworks for clean cooking are present, policies that drive wider adoption and set stan-
dards and labeling may lag. Examining progress at a granular level shows that maximum traction is driven by policies
that (i) track household-level access; (ii) establish institutional capacity to create action plans, set science-based standards
for solutions, and track adoption; and (iii) increase uptake of clean cooking solutions by raising awareness (figure 22).
Whether cooking solutions are clean or not depends on the technical attributes of combustion and heat-transfer efficiency,
as well as emissions and safety of use. Less than a third of the countries with significant access deficits have set standards
for efficiency, emissions, and safety related to cooking solutions.
FIGURE 22. CLEAN COOKING: PROGRESS BY RISE SUB-INDICATOR, 2010, 2017, AND 2019
Tracking progress
Financial incentives Planning scale-up
Financing mechanisms Insitutional capacity
2019
2017
Labeling Targeting beneficiaries 2010
Setting standards Creating awareness
Use of standards Last-mile distribution
Source: World Bank, RISE 2020. Tracking progress
Financial incentives Planning scale-up
Clean cooking is a cross-sectoral issue. It requires an institutional champion to help coordinate clean cooking ef-
forts across the sectors of energy, health, gender-inclusion, and climate change. Given the significant implications of
cooking practices on outcomes Financing mechanisms
in all four areas, the responsibility for Insitutional
policycapacity
making and implementation must be shared
7 out of 10 access-deficit countries
by government andSettingnongovernment 2019 for
strategy/action plan actors, engaging 29
multiple government 6
ministries/departments
2 1
have institutional capacity (figure
setting 23). Even the
2017 action plans
strategies deployed to build awareness and drive adoption are multifaceted. Most strategy and/or
countries devising
build their awareness strat-
Labeling Targeting beneficiaries 2010
to increase clean cooking uptake
egy on the health aspects of clean cooking; half use income, geography, and gender in their campaigns. In many coun-
Setting, monitoring and in all aspects Over half of the access-deficit countries
tries, the ministry of energy is involved 17 of policy
11 making
11 for
2 clean cooking—from
have institutions creating an action plan for
that are responsible
enforcingSetting
standards
uptake to setting standards and monitoring standards progress, emphasizingCreating the awareness
need for clean
for setting a coordinating
cooking standardsinstitution that can lead
policy deployment. Bangladesh has demonstrated Use of standards the effectiveness 4 outof10having
Only distribution
Last-mile suchinstitutions
countries have an institution. The Infrastructure De-
Tracking access and adoption 18 2 2
velopment Company Limited, a government-owned development finance institution, coordinates
that are tasked with tracking adoption of with nongovernmental
clean cooking solutions
organizations to strengthen the commercial market for clean cooking solutions, acting as a hub for the testing of improved
0 10 20 30 40
cookstoves and setting technical specifications. Number of clean cooking access-deficit countries (out of 55)
FIGURE 23. CLEAN COOKING: INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Ministry of Energy/Power/Renewable Energy FOR
Ministry of CLEAN COOKING, 2019 Ministry of Health
Forestry/Environment/Agriculture
Bureau of Standards Other Nongovernmental organization
7 out of 10 access-deficit countries
Setting strategy/action plan have institutional capacity for setting
29 6 2 1
strategy and/or devising action plans
to increase clean cooking uptake
Setting, monitoring and Over half of the access-deficit countries
17 11 11 2 have institutions that are responsible
enforcing standards
Financing mechanisms for consumers for setting clean cooking standards
Only 4 out 10 countries have institutions
Tracking
Financing access and adoption
for low-income consumers 18 2 2that are tasked with tracking adoption 36%
of
clean cooking solutions
Financing for consumers0 10 20 30 40 33%
Number of clean cooking access-deficit countries (out of 55)
Financial incentives
Ministry for suppliers
of Energy/Power/Renewable Energy Ministry of Forestry/Environment/Agriculture Ministry of Health
Bureau of Standards Other Nongovernmental organization
Subsidies for suppliers 24%
Source: World Bank, RISE 2020.
Tax benefits for suppliers 20%
Duty exemptions for suppliers 20%
Financing mechanisms for consumers
0 5 10 15 20 25
RISE 2020 – SUSTAINING THE MOMENTUM 24
Financing for low-income consumers Number of clean cooking access-deficit countries (out of36%
55)Setting strategy/action plan 29 6 2 1
strategy and/or devising action plans
to increase clean cooking uptake
Setting, monitoring and Over half of the access-deficit countries
17 11 11 2 have institutions that are responsible
enforcing standards
for setting clean cooking standards
Only 4 out 10 countries have institutions
Tracking access and adoption 18 2 2
that are tasked with tracking adoption of
If the overall cooking ecosystem is to improve, financial incentives must receive greater emphasis. Financial incen-
clean cooking solutions
tives for consumers and suppliers of solutions are available in about30a third of 40the access-deficit countries. Overall, there
0 10 20
Number of clean
is greater support for consumers of clean cooking cooking access-deficit
solutions than for countries (out of 55)
suppliers. Only a quarter of the countries in which
significant populations lack
Ministry access provide Energy
of Energy/Power/Renewable financial incentives to suppliers (figure 24).Ministry
Ministry of Forestry/Environment/Agriculture Subsidies
of Health are the most common
incentive, followed Bureau
by tax of Standards
benefits and duty exemptions. Other These incentives are usuallyNongovernmental
directed toward organization
biogas, liquefied
petroleum gas, and solar cookstoves.
FIGURE 24. CLEAN COOKING: SHARE OF COUNTRIES OFFERING INCENTIVES FOR SUPPLIERS AND FINANCING FOR
CONSUMERS, 2019
Financing mechanisms for consumers
Financing for low-income consumers 36%
Financing for consumers 33%
Financial incentives for suppliers
Subsidies for suppliers 24%
Tax benefits for suppliers 20%
Duty exemptions for suppliers 20%
0 5 10 15 20 25
Number of clean cooking access-deficit countries (out of 55)
Source: World Bank, RISE 2020.
25RENEWABLE ENERGY:
SLOWED PROGRESS OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS
Although renewable energy policies saw vast improvements between 2010 and 2017, progress has slowed in re-
cent years, decreasing by almost half during the 2017–19 period (figure 25). By 2019, a third of countries worldwide
had developed legal frameworks for renewable energy and related regulatory policies. Forty-five percent had begun
to develop and adopt policy measures but remained in the yellow zone, suggesting significant room for improvement.
Compared with 2017, fewer countries were in the red zone, which still groups nearly a quarter of all countries. Despite the
slowdown in global RISE scores for renewable energy, Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean made
significant progress between 2017 and 2019 (figure 26).
FIGURE 25. RENEWABLE ENERGY: PROGRESS IN RISE SCORES FOR PILLAR, 2010–19
Average Average Average Average
Average 22 Average 41 Average 50 Average 55
100% 22 2% 41 50 55
100% + 3.8 in + 4.5 in + 2.5 in
90% 2% 20%
3.8 in RISE + 4.5 in RISE + 2.5 in RISE
90% 24% + RISE score / 20% RISE score / 28% RISE score / 33%
80% 24% score / year score / year 28% score / year 33%
80% year year year
70%
70% 36%
60%
Share of Countries
60% 36%
Share of Countries
50% 43%
50% 43% 45%
40% 74% 45%
40% 74%
30%
30% 44%
20%
20% 44% 29%
10% 22%
29% 22%
10%
0%
0% 2010 2015 2017 2019
2010 2015 2017 2019
≤33 33You can also read
