DAY 1 – Monday 2 May – 15:30-17:00
Swiss Tech | Room 2C | Level Garden
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland
Marina Cracco is a sustainable development professional with experience working on project and program evaluations, biodiversity, climate change adaptation, environmental and social safeguards, gender and protected areas. She has over 17 years of experience in regional, non-governmental organizations and multilateral development funds. Prior to joining CODEV as the Education Program Coordinator, she was task-managing the First Phase of the Adaptation Fund Evaluation, and the Cuba Country Portfolio Evaluation and the Peru Impact Study for the GEF Independent Evaluation Office.
Technology for development interventions must achieve a double set of impacts; those related to the innovation or technology, such as effective performance, uptake (which includes social acceptance and access) and sustainability in particular and those concerning development and social and environmental impacts brought by the technology solution in general. Evaluating these impacts could be challenging depending on the technology per se and context where it is applied.
This session will devote time presenting experiences and discussing approaches that could offer researchers and practitioners ideas on how to develop pathways towards development impacts of technology interventions and how to approach the measure of such impacts. This will be achieved by the presentation of four case studies, focusing on the evaluation of small-scale energy interventions and technologies or approaches to evaluation of such interventions. A discussion will follow and will be guided by one or two main discussion questions. These questions may include: What are the major challenges faced when evaluating the impact of small-scale energy or other technology interventions? How much does the technology performance compared to other factors hinder or facilitate the achievement of development impacts and sustainability of energy or other technology interventions? What are best practices that could be applied when evaluating the impact of urgent technology interventions and solutions in humanitarian aid settings? What are the success stories in the evaluation of technology interventions?
Caroline Khene, Rhodes University, South Africa, A Comprehensive Evaluation Approach To Iterative And Incremental ICT4D
ICT4D initiatives that are iterative and incremental should have some sort of direction in order to play a strategic role in enhancing the development initiative it supports. Informed decisions need to be made along the process, with continuous evaluation to inform decision making in ICT supported development initiatives. The Rural ICT Comprehensive Evaluation Framework (RICT-CEF) proposes a comprehensive evaluation approach to iterative and incremental ICT for development, emphasising the need to incorporate various evaluation domains in implementation processes. A design science methodology was used to develop and implement this framework in two case studies in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Various lessons have been learned overtime to revise the framework, reflecting on its suitability and shortcomings in practice. The research is on-going, and continues to reveal other aspects of evaluation that need attention in the ICT4D field.
Kathleen Lask, University of California Berkeley, United States of America, Lessons Learned from a Comparison Study of Charcoal Stoves for Haiti [PDF Full Paper]
Biomass cooking is heavily prevalent in Haiti, where it creates burdens on both the environment and the Haitian people. Following the 2010 earthquake in Port-au-Prince, the need for fuel-efficient cookstoves was higher than ever. Although several relief organizations were quite interested in stove dissemination efforts, there was little knowledge about the performance and usability of the proposed stoves. To help fill the knowledge gap, the stove group from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory evaluated and compared the performance of several cookstoves intended for dissemination in Haiti. This paper discusses the decisions made throughout the course of the comparison project, from project identification and approach through the dissemination of results. It highlights the challenges faced and how they were addressed, while briefly presenting the data from stove performance evaluated using Water Boiling and Controlled Cooking Tests.
Abigael Piemo, Center for Training and Integrated Research in Arid and Semi Arid Lands Development, Kenya, Greenhouse Gas Assessment of Alternative Value Chains of Biomass Energy for Cooking in Kenya and Tanzania
Wood-based biomass energy remains vital in meeting local energy demands for cooking in many regions of the developing world due to its availability and affordability to the world’s poor population. However, increasing scarcity of the feed-stock and negative socio-economic and environmental outcomes associated with inefficient production and consumption technologies call for alternative solutions that benefit local people without harming the environment. Tackling energy poverty is therefore considered as an important aspect of efforts aimed at meeting sustainable development goals at the household level. On a global scale, the reduction of greenhouse gas emission has gained importance over the years. The present paper focuses on greenhouse gas emissions as one aspect of environmental performance of alternative biomass energy solutions while the overall research takes a broader approach which also includes economic aspects. It compares the greenhouse gas emission of firewood, charcoal, biogas, jatropha oil and crop residue briquettes by conducting a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) focusing on selected technologies for biomass energy production and consumption in two case study sites in Kenya and Tanzania. It further explores the potential for alternative biomass energy value chains based on their environmental performance. Finally, it reflects on LCA as a methodological approach for evaluating technological options for sustainable development in developing economies currently experiencing rapid population growth, urbanisation and industrial development. Results indicate that emissions caused by use of firewood vary depending on the type of wood and the cooking device used. Jatropha oil value chain indicates greatest potential for greenhouse gas emission reduction. The charcoal value chain generates the highest greenhouse gases. The results provide first relevant information that LCA can help to raise awareness, inform stakeholders as well as decision makers on alternative and viable biomass energy value chains especially if combined with results from a Life Costing Analysis (next research step).
Julia Terrapon-Pfaff, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, Germany, What Impacts Do Small-Scale Energy Projects in Developing Countries Really Have? Findings from a Repeated Post-Evaluation
It is widely recognized that access to sustainable and affordable energy services is a crucial factor to reduce poverty and enhance development. In particular, small-scale and community-based renewable energy projects are seen as important forms of development assistance for reaching the energy poor in developing countries. Like all development interventions, these energy projects are not intended to produce short-term outputs, but to create long-term impacts. However, to date only a few empirical evaluations exist which analyze and compare the impact of these projects on local living conditions and their sustainability ex-post implementation. To better understand if and how these type of technical interventions can create positive livelihood impacts and which conditions influence their sustainability, a post-evaluation of over 20 local development projects was conducted in 2012 and repeated in 2015. A standardized evaluation design was applied to the cross-sectional samples that compromised projects that implemented different renewable energy technologies in various geographic locations, thereby delivering results that are relevant across project boundaries. While the findings from the first evaluation already provided evidence on factors that contributed to the creation of positive impacts the second evaluation reveals further valuable insights on how to achieve positive and avoid negative social impacts.