General criteria included projects:
1. Small-scale (less than 5 MW)
2. Renewable energy (solar photovoltaic, wind energy, run of the river hydroelectric, biogas)
3. Located in a rural community
Following are the criteria for development project selection:
1. Productive-use (income-creating or enhancing) application
2. Implemented for at least 2 years and still working
3. Community owned
The criteria for climate change mitigation project selection follow:
1. A Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), a Voluntary Carbon Offset (VCO) or
an Early Warning System (EWS) project
Disaster Relief projects were chosen following these criteria:
1. Developed as part of a relief or reconstruction program.
And adaptation related criteria?
I added two projects because their governance structures provided useful
answers to the research questions although they did not fit the criteria of being
community owned and of a productive-use application. These two separate projects
consisted of individual home lighting solar photovoltaic systems; one of them a
loan program implemented by a government Ministry in communities which would
benefit from the national electric grid extension in the short to medium terms and
one implemented by a national NGO in isolated communities that would never
benefit from grid extension. Table 11.2 categorizes the case studies by country, type
and renewable energy resource.
Figures 11.3 and 11.4 below show the geographical distribution of the projects.
As mentioned above, in the cases where I evaluated programs, the star indicates
where the cluster of projects is located.
The projects were evaluated on economic, developmental and climate change
indicators, which included indicators focusing on sustainable development, poverty
alleviation, emissions reductions, and climate vulnerability. I examined how the
type of common property governance, local historical and environmental background and project implementation process influenced the project success in meeting multiple objectives of climate adaptation, mitigation and development. Data
collection methods included participatory poverty assessment techniques, semistructured interviews, stakeholder analysis, and a combination of rapid and participatory methods. The analysis of sustainable development and vulnerability used
Sustainable Livelihoods Approach methodologies and emissions reductions were
calculated using carbon reduction methodologies of the IPCC.
Figures 11.5 and 11.6 portray the logical flowcharts from which the indicators
for this research were derived for each of the two main research questions.
Tables 11.3 and 11.4 list the specific indicators used.
11 Sustainable Development, Climate Change, and Renewable Energy in Rural. . .
193
1. Small-scale (less than 5 MW)
2. Renewable energy (solar photovoltaic, wind energy, run of the river hydroelectric, biogas)
3. Located in a rural community
Following are the criteria for development project selection:
1. Productive-use (income-creating or enhancing) application
2. Implemented for at least 2 years and still working
3. Community owned
The criteria for climate change mitigation project selection follow:
1. A Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), a Voluntary Carbon Offset (VCO) or
an Early Warning System (EWS) project
Disaster Relief projects were chosen following these criteria:
1. Developed as part of a relief or reconstruction program.
And adaptation related criteria?
I added two projects because their governance structures provided useful
answers to the research questions although they did not fit the criteria of being
community owned and of a productive-use application. These two separate projects
consisted of individual home lighting solar photovoltaic systems; one of them a
loan program implemented by a government Ministry in communities which would
benefit from the national electric grid extension in the short to medium terms and
one implemented by a national NGO in isolated communities that would never
benefit from grid extension. Table 11.2 categorizes the case studies by country, type
and renewable energy resource.
Figures 11.3 and 11.4 below show the geographical distribution of the projects.
As mentioned above, in the cases where I evaluated programs, the star indicates
where the cluster of projects is located.
The projects were evaluated on economic, developmental and climate change
indicators, which included indicators focusing on sustainable development, poverty
alleviation, emissions reductions, and climate vulnerability. I examined how the
type of common property governance, local historical and environmental background and project implementation process influenced the project success in meeting multiple objectives of climate adaptation, mitigation and development. Data
collection methods included participatory poverty assessment techniques, semistructured interviews, stakeholder analysis, and a combination of rapid and participatory methods. The analysis of sustainable development and vulnerability used
Sustainable Livelihoods Approach methodologies and emissions reductions were
calculated using carbon reduction methodologies of the IPCC.
Figures 11.5 and 11.6 portray the logical flowcharts from which the indicators
for this research were derived for each of the two main research questions.
Tables 11.3 and 11.4 list the specific indicators used.
11 Sustainable Development, Climate Change, and Renewable Energy in Rural. . .
193