POLICY MATTERS REGULATORY INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY © 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW | Washington DC 20433 | USA 202-473-1000 | www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. 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 as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Pub- lications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; pubrights@worldbank.org. ESMAP would appreciate a copy of or link to the publication that uses this publication for its source, ad- dressed to ESMAP Manager, The World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC, 20433 USA; esmap@ worldbank.org. All images remain the sole property of their source and may not be used for any purpose without written permission from the source. Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: ESMAP. 2018. Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy. ESMAP Report. Washington, DC: World Bank. Photo Credits: Cover: © World Bank Introduction: © World Bank Overview: © World Bank Electricity access: © World Bank Clean cooking: © World Bank RE: © GettyImages EE: © Mobisol/Lighting Global Appendices: © World Bank POLICY MATTERS REGULATORY INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY WHAT IS RISE? RISE—Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy— is a global inventory of policies and regulations that support the achievement of SDG7 – electricity access, clean cooking, energy efficiency, and renewable energy. RISE tracks the regulatory indicators that can be compared across 133 developed and developing economies—from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe—and over time, from 2010 to 2017. As a tool for policymakers, RISE allows them to benchmark their own country’s progress against that of peers and identify areas for policy and regulatory reform; as a tool for private investors, it supports their due diligence process for new projects, products, and services. This second edition of RISE incorporates several improvements, including: policy time trends since 2010; greater emphasis on tracking regulations that support enforcement; broader coverage of the heating and transport sectors in addition to electricity; and a pilot assessment of the policy environment for clean cooking in a dozen major ac- cess-deficit countries. RISE indicators are scored between 0 and 100, and all have equal weight when summed to reach a total score for each of the three areas: universal access, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. Scores are grouped into three categories based on a “traffic light” system: green for the highest third of scores (67 – 100), indicating a relatively mature policy and regulatory environment; yellow for the middle range (34 – 66), indicating that the country has begun to make serious efforts to develop a policy and regulatory framework; and red for the lowest scores (0 – 33), indicating that policy and regulation adoption remains at a very early stage. It is important to bear in mind that these report scores are not meant as endorsements (or disapprovals) for investments. Rather, the RISE scores are intended to measure how close or far a country is from offering an attractive policy and regulatory environment. The RISE data platform hosts an extraordinary wealth of data on sustainable energy by highlighting global regional and countries trends across sustainable energy policies and making available detailed information on best practices in comparable country and detailing 133 country policy profile: http://rise.esmap.org/. The data presented in RISE 2018 are current as of December 31, 2017. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS T he Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE) report was produced by the Global Energy and Extractives Practice of the for All (SEforALL), The Global Alliance For Clean Cookstoves, United Nations Statistics Division (Department of Economic and Social World Bank Group. It benefited from the sup- Affairs), UNECE (United Nations Economic port and guidance of Senior Director Riccardo Commission for Europe). Puliti and Energy Sector Management Assis- tance Program (ESMAP) Practice Manager RISE is underpinned by individual data collec- Rohit Khanna. tion efforts in each of the 133 countries cov- ered. The full list of those who provided infor- RISE was managed by a core team led by mation in each country is posted on the RISE Vivien Foster and Elisa Portale, and including website (Rise.esmap.org). The team would like Daron Bedrosyan, Juliette Besnard, and Tigran to particularly recognize the project managers Parvanyan. Specifically, the work was coordi- for each of the firms that led data collection nated by the following staff and consultants: across multiple countries: Matt Van Roosmalen and Felipe Berger (Emerging Markets Asia); §§ Electricity access: Juliette Besnard, Yi Xu, Sylvana Bohrt and Alexander LaBua (Green- Sharmila Bellur, and Dana Rysankova. max Capital Advisors); Michel Layec and Re- §§ Energy efficiency: Daron Bedrosyan, Sarah becca Lamas (Stantec); Akram Al Mohamadi, Moin, and Ivan Jaques. Maged Mahmoud, and Rana El-Guindy (Re- §§ Renewable energy: Tigran Parvanyan, gional Centre for Renewable Energy and En- Chris Jackson, Sharmila Bellur, and Zuzana ergy Efficiency); and Analía Marsella and Se- Dobrotkova. bastien Raoux (Transcarbon International). §§ Clean cooking: Sharmila Bellur, Sarah Hill- An editorial and design team comprising Marc ware, Daron Bedrosyan, Yabei Zhang, and DeFrancis and Duina Reyes significantly ele- Caroline Adongo Ochieng. vated the quality and visual presentation of the final report. The online platform (http:// The core team also received valuable support rise.esmap.org/) was developed by Sreejith from Hua Du, Denisa Pacholska, Anshul Rana, K.S., Narayanan R., Rony George, and Ram Melissa Taylor, and Yao Zhao at various stages Prasad of PanApps Inc., with communications of the project. The team is grateful for the con- input and guidance from Nick Keyes, Heather structive feedback provided by peer reviewers Worley, Nansia Constantinou, Anita Rozowska Marianne Fay, Dana Rysankova, Jas Singh and and Aarthi Sivaraman. Gabriela Elizondo Azuela. The team would also like to express its gratitude to the staff The financial and technical support of the of the World Bank’s Energy and Extractives ESMAP is also gratefully acknowledged. practice, which contributed to validating in- ESMAP—a global knowledge and techni- formation and data, country by country. cal assistance program administered by the World Bank—assists low- and middle-income Many World Bank colleagues and external countries to increase their know-how and in- partners provided formal and informal guid- stitutional capacity to achieve environmen- ance throughout the development of this re- tally sustainable energy solutions for poverty port. reduction and economic growth. ESMAP is The following organizations contributed valu- funded by Australia, Austria, Canada, Den- able time to review results and provide feed- mark, the European Commission, Finland, back: CLASP, International Energy Agency France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Lithua- (IEA), International Renewable Energy Agen- nia, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Norway, the cy (IRENA), Siemens, SNV (Netherlands De- Rockefeller Foundation, Sweden, Switzerland, velopment Organization), Sustainable Energy the United Kingdom, and the World Bank. iii Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................................. 2 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................5 2. Overview: The Global Landscape Since 2010 ....................................................................................11 3. Electricity Access..............................................................................................................................35 4. Clean Cooking..................................................................................................................................57 5. Renewable Energy ..........................................................................................................................69 6. Energy Efficiency..............................................................................................................................81 References .............................................................................................................................................................98 APPENDICES........................................................................................................................................99 1 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY S ustainable energy is at the heart of the global development and climate change agenda. Reaching the targets set by the Unit- each region and income group. All five coun- tries that have made the largest improvements to their policy environment in recent years are ed Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal 7 non-OECD economies – Côte d’Ivoire, United (SDG7) will require a rapid increase in energy Arab Emirates, Rwanda, Jordan, and Egypt, access, renewable energy and the efficient use Arab Rep. of existing energy resources. Public debate centers on securing adequate finance to meet A significant share of the global population these global targets, but evidence demon- and global energy consumption are covered by policies for sustainable energy. Although strates that policy can often be a prerequi- only 25 percent of countries score green for site for mobilizing finance. RISE 2018 demon- energy efficiency, they account for 66 percent strates that progress on sustainable energy of world energy production. Similarly, while outcomes has often been preceded by long- only 26 percent of countries score green for term efforts to strengthen policy and regula- renewable energy, these countries account tory environments. for 33 percent of world energy consumption. Precisely because policy matters, it is im- And while only 28 percent of highest access portant to track how well countries are doing deficit countries score green for energy ac- in creating the regulatory environment need- cess, these countries are home to 48 percent ed to accelerate achievement of sustainable of the world’s population without access to energy goals. RISE provides such a global electricity. scorecard which summarizes countries’ regu- Nevertheless, the world as a whole is only latory environments. It does so by tracking the about half way towards the adoption of ad- adoption of good-practice policies with re- vanced policy frameworks for sustainable spect to energy access, energy efficiency, and energy. The overall average country score renewable energy at the country level as of for RISE in 2017 is 58 out of 100, still in the December 2017, scoring them on a scale from 1 yellow zone, indicating only an intermediate to 100, and classifying the strength of a coun- stage of development and plenty of room for try’s policy environment according to a “traffic improvement in many countries. The same is light” system with green for advanced, yellow true whether one looks at policy frameworks for intermediate, and red for early stage. for energy access, renewable energy, or ener- gy efficiency. RISE 2018 shows significant improvement in sustainable energy policies globally: the This slow pace of policy adoption threatens number of countries with advanced policy the achievement of the SDG7 goals by 2030 frameworks for sustainable energy has more as well as the Paris Agreement climate goals. than tripled over the past eight years. In The global average RISE score has been in- 2010, only 17 countries had advanced as well creasing steadily by more than two percent- as (green) scores on their policy environment age points each year since 2010, and under for sustainable energy, and these were largely present trends would not reach the green zone confined to the OECD. As of 2017, the number before 2025, jeopardizing progress towards of countries with green scores had risen to 59. the sustainable energy goals for 2030. Nev- Income levels or geography are not a deter- ertheless, when certain policies capture the mining factor – strong performers are found in attention of governments, there can be rapid 2 uptake or policy leapfrogging. Among the 133 There is some evidence that policymakers countries surveyed, those that showed most are beginning to take more notice of the improvement increased their RISE scores by clean cooking agenda, but much remains to more than four percentage points per year be done. Cooking has been the most over- since 2010; this is twice as fast as the global looked area of the sustainable energy agen- average. For example, the number of coun- da, with very little progress being made on tries establishing minimum energy efficiency clean cooking access globally. A pilot exercise performance standards for heating and cool- in RISE 2018, covering 12 populous countries ing appliances doubled from 2010 to 2017. that represent more than half the world’s pop- ulation without access to clean cooking, sug- Clean energy policies show a strong focus gests that there has been some evolution of on electricity, but heating and transportation policy frameworks since 2010, particularly in sectors are often overlooked by policymak- the area of planning. However, there has been ers. Whereas the renewable share of electric- relatively little progress on standard-setting ity has been climbing steadily in recent years, for cookstoves or on consumer and producer there has been relatively little progress in har- incentives to stimulate adoption of clean tech- nessing renewable energy sources for heating nologies. Moreover, greater attention has been and transportation, which together represent paid to developing the policy environment for 80 percent of global energy use. The differ- improving efficiency of cooking with solid fu- ence in outcomes is clearly reflected in the rel- els focusing on the climate impacts than to ative evolution of the policy environment for supporting fuel switching focusing on end-us- each of these energy uses. Policies for electric- er cleanliness and affordability. ity have nearly double the scores for transpor- tation and heating and cooling with respect Poor creditworthiness of utilities undermines to renewable energy, and nearly four times the sustainable energy agenda. Power utili- the scores for transportation and heating and ties are among the central actors in the ener- cooling with respect to energy efficiency. The gy sector in most countries, and their financial difference is least pronounced among OECD health is critical for the viability of investments countries, and most pronounced in South Asia across the sustainable energy agenda. As of and Sub-Saharan Africa. 2016, however, only about half of all power utilities met several basic creditworthiness re- In low-access countries, policymakers are in- quirements. Moreover, performance on almost creasingly turning their attention to enabling all dimensions of creditworthiness has deteri- off-grid solutions for electrification. The cost orated since 2012. The situation is particularly of solar photovoltaic energy has declined dra- acute in low-access countries, where the num- matically since 2010, prompting a targeted fo- ber of utilities meeting basic creditworthiness cus for policymakers in low- access countries criteria has dropped, falling from 63 percent in to create a favorable enabling environment 2012 to 37 percent in 2016. for off-grid electricity. The share of low-ac- cess countries adopting measures to support Good institutions and enforcement are also mini-grids and solar home systems has soared necessary elements to achieve sustainable from around 15 percent in 2010 to 70 percent energy results. Adopting good practice pol- in 2017. In fact, as of 2017, over half of these icies will not yield results without strong in- countries received a green score for their pol- stitutions and consistent enforcement. RISE icies on solar home systems. Over the same 2018 has incorporated proxy enforcement in- time frame, the enabling environment for grid dicators to provide some sense of the level of electrification has remained relatively stag- attention that countries are giving to enforce- nant and now scores lower than that for off- ment issues. grid solutions. 3 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy CHAPTER ONE IN TR O D U CTIO N INTRODUCTION Introduction 4 1. INTRODUCTION Introduction R ISE is built on the premise that policies matter along with good institutions and enforcement. RISE is based on a wealth of em- RISE 2018 has new indicators and additional country profiles. In this 2018 edition of RISE, several important innovations have been add- pirical evidence which shows that policies and ed to improve the relevance of the indicators regulations matter when countries are seeking and to align with shifting global trends in sus- to attract investment and establish a sustain- tainable energy (Figure 1.1). able energy agenda. Therefore, it is relevant to assess the existence of policy and regulation RISE 2018 has the following new features: to understand the investment environment 1. Considerable increase in the number of for sustainable energy. However, there may be countries, from 111 in RISE 2016 to 133 in many factors that influence investment deci- RISE 2018. The number of countries has sions, from the existence of good practices, to been expanded in RISE 2018 to cover 97 quality and content of the policies, and their percent of the global population. Further actual enforcement. expansion will be considered for the future RISE provides national policymakers with a editions of RISE to include all European tool to benchmark their energy sector frame- countries and small island states. work against regional and global peers’ poli- 2. Refinement of indicators and sub-indi- cy and regulations, as well as track their own cators, to incorporate key innovations re- progress over time. RISE is a systematic plat- lating to assessment of implementation form for comparison, that highlights global effectiveness and regulatory enforcement and regional trends across sustainable energy process; uptake of off-grid electricity ac- policies, and provides detailed information on cess technologies and how this impacts good practices and successful approaches in rural electrification strategies; renewable comparable countries. By focusing on actions energy and energy efficiency solutions in within the ambit of policymakers, RISE can the transport, heating and cooling sectors; also contribute to domestic policy debates, the assessment of implementation effec- while providing a global reference point on tiveness and the regulatory enforcement good practices. process, and gender considerations in pol- RISE informs private sector actions. RISE is icies (Figure 1.2). a valuable source of information to private in- ­ onvenient addition of a time stamp on 3. C vestors and developers of sustainable energy policies that enable trend analysis for the projects, products, and services. It provides in- period 2010-2017. RISE allows users to vestors with a starting point for country-level discern the historical adoption of policies analysis, as the data presented in the report covered in this edition dating back to 2010 is supported by documents from government to track progress in policy adoption over ministries and/or local consultants, and is val- time. This “time stamp” element of RISE idated by World Bank country experts. Given provides a valuable means for policymak- this context, RISE can help complement the ers, researchers, and private sector actors toolkit that investors and developers use when to monitor progress in specific countries assessing the investment climate for sustain- and analyze potential causal or corollary able energy in a given country. relationships between reforms and results.1 5 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy FIGURE 1.1 INNOVATIONS IN RISE 2018 What is new for RISE 2018? Score New countries Time Stamps Clean Cooking New questions Questions comparison added added pillar added added revised available Understand In keeping 133 countries linkage 2010, 2015 Granular policy with the covered, between and 2017 Pilot for 12 details and evolving including 22 legislation and scores countries enforcement policy new additions policy impacts compared of policies landscape Source: World Bank RISE 2018 FIGURE 1.2 RISE INDICATORS PER PILLAR Policies and Regulations • Existence and • Grid electrification • Affordability of • Utility implementation of electricity creditworthiness • Mini grids Electricity Access electrification plan • Utility transparency • Standalone systems • Scope of and monitoring electrification plan • Planning • Scope of planning • Standards and • Incentives and Clean cooking labelling attributes • Legal framework • Network connec- • Planning for • Counterparty risk for renewable tion and use renewable energy energy expansion • Carbon pricing and Renewable Energy • Incentives & regu- monitoring • Attributes of finan- latory support for cial and regulatory renewable energy incentives • National energy • Energy efficiency • Building energy • Minimum energy efficiency planning entities codes performance standards • Types of electricity • Mandates & • Information rate structures incentives: large provided to • Carbon pricing and Energy Efficiency consumers electricity monitoring • Mandates & consumers incentives: utilities • Financing • Transport energy mechanisms for • Mandates & efficiency • Energy labeling energy efficiency incentives: public system entities Source: World Bank RISE 2018 Introduction 6 FIGURE 1.3 TRAFFIC LIGHT SYSTEM USED TO ASSESS THE RISE POLICY ENVIRONMENT Introduction Green zone: scores between 67 and 100. Most elements of a strong policy framework to support sustainable energy are in place Yellow zone: scores between 34 and 66. Significant opportunities exist to strengthen the policy framework. Red zone: scores 33 or lower. Few or no elements of a supportive policy framework have been enacted. 4. Innovative pilot of indicators for clean ongoing improvement of indicators to main- cooking solutions, covering 12 countries tain relevance and consistency with best prac- that account for over 55 percent of the tices. RISE continues to engage with its users global clean cooking access deficit. to find new approaches and methods to im- prove its accuracy and relevance to interested The scoring methodology for RISE 2018 has stakeholders. The next edition of RISE will aim not changed. All indicators are scored be- to include a section on country readiness to tween 0 and 100 and have equal weights to embrace disruptive energy technology, such reach a total score for each pillar. Pillar and as battery storage, to enhance human capital, indicator scores are grouped into three cate- and to include additional indicators on policy gories based on a “traffic light” system (Figure adoption. 1.3). Measuring the enforcement of policies re- RISE pillars are related but remain indepen- mains challenging. The RISE library is intend- dent. The pillar indicators were created by ed to provide an objective overview of the different subject matter experts, and while legislation, policies, and strategies that have an attempt was made to make all three pillars been developed and made available by gov- equally rigorous, there are nuanced differenc- ernments. RISE 2018 has added several layers es. Therefore, the results across pillars are not of questions to try and capture the enforce- directly comparable. Moreover, as markets ability of existing policy regulations across the mature, policies need to adjust, and this is re- three pillars. However, existence of regulations flected in changes to the questions asked in do not necessarily reflect actual enforcement. every new edition of RISE. Accordingly, this remains an ongoing area of research and refinement within RISE. The sustainable energy market is dynamic, and so is RISE. As energy technologies devel- The RISE score is not an endorsement for in- op and mature, policymakers are constantly vestment. RISE is intended to measure how far tasked with developing new policies to sup- a country is from offering an attractive policy port their deployment, drive investment, and environment, and not how much investment achieve both national and international cli- is likely to be deployed within the country un- mate goals. In this regard, RISE must adapt der its current policy environment. Investment its indicators and focus with each new edition in sustainable energy is heavily influenced by to stay relevant, while recognizing that it can factors well beyond what can be governed by only ever show a snapshot in time. energy sector policies, namely the establish- ment of strong institutions, access to credible Feedback from users is important. Since data, appropriate financing mechanisms and the release of the first RISE report, feedback a robust private sector. RISE scores should gathered from various RISE users—from the not be interpreted as a comprehensive eval- public sector, private sector, civil society, and uation of whether a country is attractive for academia—has been instrumental in ensuring 7 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy investment. Moreover, RISE scores should this regard, the availability of the RISE data li- not be viewed as a predictor or indicator of brary online provides a resource for research- SDG7 results. Nevertheless, RISE helps explain ers to experiment with other methodological trends in sustainable energy investment and approaches. outcomes to some extent. RISE scores can be analyzed at a more granular level to fully un- The RISE website has an extraordinary wealth derstand its components, which can then be of data on sustainable energy. While the re- used to inform decisions. port highlights overarching global, regional and pillar-specific trends, the RISE website Richness of RISE data allows for different an- contains all the raw data disaggregated at alytical frameworks. The RISE report employs the question level. It allows users to search a specific methodology to calculate scores of for specific information and download data a country’s policies framework. By employing for their own analysis. The website also allows different weighting, grouping of questions, or users to view and download overall data for question types and time frames, contrasting each pillar, and country profiles with numerical conclusions can be derived. It is also worth scores by pillars. The most useful feature is the acknowledging that the degree of complexity comprehensive library with all the supporting and technical sophistication needed to adopt documents from government ministries and/ certain policies in one pillar of RISE may not or local consultants that has been validated by be comparable to that for other pillars. While World Bank country experts. The details of the RISE has worked with external advisory indicators are made available in indicator pag- groups, comprising well-respected organiza- es, where users can look up the description of tions across the four core pillars, to develop each indicator, the list of questions, and the the analytical approach presented in this re- scoring distribution. port, there are other approaches possible. In ENDNOTES 1 Note that the normative RISE 2015 score in this report based on time stamps is different from the RISE 2015 score in the previous edition of RISE. Since the publication of the previous edition of RISE in 2016, the RISE methodology has evolved to include new questions, resulting in revised scores for RISE 2015. Introduction 8 CHAPTER TWO OVERVIEW Overview THE GLOBAL LANDSCAPE SINCE 2010 Overview 10 2. OVERVIEW: THE GLOBAL LANDSCAPE SINCE 2010 KEY MESSAGES: §§ Since 2010, the number of countries adopting advanced policy frameworks in support of sustainable energy Overview has more than tripled (from 17 to 59). Despite variations in performance by region and income group, there are strong performers in every region and in every income group. §§ Among the countries that have made the greatest progress on sustainable energy, there have also been signifi- cant improvements in the enabling environment, indicating that policy matters. §§ Many of the world’s largest countries have been proactive in improving their regulatory environment. This means that about two thirds of global energy consumption takes place in countries covered by advanced policy frameworks for energy efficiency, while almost half the global population without access to electricity lives in countries with advanced policy frameworks for energy access. §§ Nevertheless, as of 2017, the world as a whole is still little more than half way towards the adoption of support- ive policies for sustainable energy. At the current pace of improvement, the average global RISE score would not reach the green zone (or advanced stage) until 2025, jeopardizing the achievement of the SDG 7 targets by 2030 as well as the Paris Climate Goals. §§ While the world as a whole has only been able to improve its RISE score by two points per year, the most proac- tive countries have increased their scores by more than four points per year. §§ Concerns about climate change have lent considerable momentum to the adoption of clean energy policies, with an evident surge in the uptake of targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency in the run-up to the 2015 Paris Climate Accord. §§ Yet, outside of the OECD, policies to support renewable energy and energy efficiency primarily target the elec- tricity sector, overlooking the fact that 80 percent of energy consumption is in the heating and transportation sectors. §§ In the cooking sector, there is some evidence that policymakers are beginning to take more notice of the clean cooking agenda, but significant room for improvement remains, specifically with regards to institutional capac- ity, scope of planning, and financial incentives. §§ Policies alone cannot deliver results unless they are complemented by institutional capacity for effective en- forcement. While efforts on enforcement have been improving, they continue to lag behind compared to adop- tion of regulations “on paper”. §§ The financial health of power utilities is also a key enabler of investment in sustainable energy. Yet only half of utility companies were deemed creditworthy in 2016, and average financial performance has even deteriorated relative to 2012. 11 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy FIGURE 2.1 GLOBAL +2.4 in +2.4 2010 OVERVIEW OF RISE SCORES, in VS. 2017 +2.4 in +2.4 in Average RISE Average AverageAverage RISE Average Average RISE RISE 41 score/ 53 score/ 140 58 41 score/ 53 score/ 58 140 2010 2017 year year year year 13% 13% Number of countries Number of countries 120 120 35% 35% 100 100 44% 44% 80 51% 80 51% 60 42% 60 42% 37% 37% 40 40 20 36% 20 36% 23% 19% 23% 19% 0 0 2010 2015 2017 2010 2015 2017 ≤33 33US15 cents Note: The time series for utility creditworthiness is available only for 20 out of 54 access deficit countries 100 Source: World Bank, RISE 2018 Change in RISE A ordability score from 75 Zambia Côte d'Ivoire 50 Kenya Pakistan Indonesia Niger Uganda Bangladesh Mozambique 25 2015 to 2017 Guatemala Cambodia Cameroon IndiaSudan Philippines0 South Africa 100 -75 Togo-50 -25 0 25 50 75 Guinea -25 Zimbabwe - -50 -75 -100 Change in Utility creditworthiness score from 2014 to 2016 Low income country Lower/Upper middle income country Tari /kwh>US15 cents Electricity Access 54 ENDNOTES 9 Electricity access policies were assessed in countries where less than 90% of the population or more than 5 million people lack access to electricity. 10 Tracking SDG 7: The Energy Progress Report was authored by the International Energy Agency, International Renewable Agency, United Nations Statistics Division, World Bank, and the World Health Organization. It is available online at https://trackingsdg7.esmap.org/ This calculation is used to determine household affordability of electricity. 30 kWh per 11 month is considered the minimum electricity consumption for subsistence. E lectricity Access 55 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy CHAPTER FOUR CLEAN COOKING CLE AN CO O KING CLEAN COOKING 56 4. CLEAN COOKING KEYS MESSAGES: §§ The RISE pilot on clean cooking solutionsa includes 12 countries that constitute 55 percent of the unserved pop- ulation. §§ In all pilot countries, there has been considerable progress in clean cooking planning activity, but to achieve universal access to clean cooking by 2030, more aggressive policy and financing support are needed. §§ Most countries are not yielding adequate results in the uptake of modern clean cooking solutions as described under SDG7 for two main reasons: i. There is a wide chasm between policy and outcome for clean cooking. This maybe owing to the fact that uptake of clean cooking is contingent upon and largely driven by consumer preferences. Therefore, having enabling policies, while important, is still insufficient to increase access; ii. The most progress in regulations is focused on improvements in biomass stoves, which are not tracked as a clean cooking option in SDG7, which tracks only primary clean cooking fuels (biogas, LPG, ethanol, electrici- ty, natural gas). The RISE pilot has demonstrated that the standards and definitions of “clean” with respect to cooking solutions vary depending on country context. §§ Standards, labeling, and testing for clean cooking fuels and technologies are critical. To ensure cleanliness of cooking solutions for end users, about half of the pilot countries include standards for emissions, efficiency and safety in their policy frameworks. CLE AN CO O KING WHY THE FOUR INDICATORS? The choice of the four indicators in this pilot covers four distinct facets of the clean cooking policy apparatus: i. Planning indicator: includes government plans to scale-up access, household-level data on access, budgetary allocation, and institutions responsible for setting strategies, monitoring and tracking progress. These features form the foundation on which clean cooking industry can thrive. ii. Scope of planning indicator: accounts for policies tailored to gender and vulnerable communities, awareness strategies to drive adoption of clean cooking solutions, and last-mile distribution measures. A broad scope of planning ensures that the planning process is inclusive and reaches all pockets of the population. iii. Standards and labels indicator: includes efficiency, emissions, and safety of clean cooking solutions and checks whether they are devised through testing and approved by accredited labs. The objective of this indicator is to ensure that solutions that are considered clean are tracked and enforced to be clean. iv. Financial incentives indicator: tracks financing mechanisms and incentives for both consumers and suppliers of clean cooking solutions. This indicator captures active policies to increase consumer affordability and market competitiveness for clean cooking fuels and/or technologies. a Throughout the entirety of this report, any reference to “clean cooking solutions” applies to the combination of stove technologies and fuels that produce lower particulate and carbon emissions levels than the current baseline in a given country. Details about emission levels and efficiency are defined by the ISO Tiers of Performance for the indoor emissions indicator, within the Global Alliance’s Monitoring and Evaluation framework. http://cleancookstoves.org/technology-and-fuels/standards/iwa-tiers-of-performance.html 57 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy The RISE pilot on clean cooking solutions OVERVIEW OF CLEAN COOKING POLICY includes 12 countries: China, Ghana, Guate- FRAMEWORK mala, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lao PDR, Madagascar, Nepal, Rwanda, and Uganda. The countries were selected because they According to the Tracking SDG 7 report, ac- make up over 55 percent of the global popula- cess to clean cooking solutions12 , including tion without access to clean cooking solutions stoves and fuels, is not currently on track to and include countries with the highest elec- reach universal access by 2030. A little less tricity access deficits as well as those with the than three billion people, or over 40 percent lowest clean-cooking access rates. They were of the world’s population, cook with solid fu- also selected to account for different regions els, including wood, charcoal, coal, animal globally, varying degrees of dependence on dung, and crop waste, using open fires and hydrocarbons within households, and various traditional stoves. These are the primary en- trade barriers that might impede the import ergy sources for cooking throughout Asia, of clean cooking solutions. In 10 out of the 12 Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, the Ca- pilot countries, the governments have at least ribbean, and Eastern Europe. Although many moderately evolved policy frameworks that countries have experienced a rapid scale-up can help scale up access to clean cooking of electrification among households in the (Figure 4.1). US$500–US$1,000 per capita income bracket, access to clean cooking solutions takes much Policy frameworks for clean cooking solu- longer to develop, and shows increased up- tions have been receiving more traction take at household income levels of US$12,000 since 2010, but it has not yielded substantial per capita13. outcomes in terms of clean cooking uptake. While policymakers in the pilot countries have There are significant climate, public health, devoted increasing attention to issues sur- economic, and social impacts of cooking and rounding policies for clean cooking solutions heating with solid fuels and traditional stoves. since 2010, only one third of the countries Cooking with traditional stoves and solid fuels score in the green zone (Figure 4.2). Kenya is a lead­ing cause of indoor air pollution and has made the most progress relative to where one of the most significant contributors to it was in 2010, followed by Nepal and Lao PDR. climate change in developing countries as it Although progress is seen in all the countries, emits global warming gases and particulates, they are at different points in the process of including carbon dioxide, methane, and black developing a robust clean cooking policy ap- carbon. It is one of the largest contributors to paratus. disease and early mortality, contributing to more deaths than malaria, TB, and HIV com- Among the 12 pilot countries, clean cooking bined. In South Asia, for example, more than planning has seen substantial increase since half of black carbon comes from the use of 2010, and this has been complemented by a inefficient cookstoves.14 If adopted at scale, robust scope of planning. Since 2010, in the clean cooking solutions could effectively re- RISE pilot countries, there has been a flurry of duce black carbon emissions. Research shows clean cooking planning activity that is also in- that decreasing short-lived climate pollut- clusive, but the countries have been slow in in- ants in conjunction with controlling long-lived stituting standards and incentives (Figure 4.3). greenhouse gases could help limit global tem- perature rise to below 2ºC, a Paris Agreement goal for avoiding severe impacts of climate change. CLEAN COOKING 58 FIGURE 4.1 CLEAN COOKING POLICY FRAMEWORK SCORES FOR THE 12 PILOT COUNTRIES, 2017 China 81 Nepal 73 India 72 Lao PDR 68 Kenya 66 Indonesia 64 Uganda 63 Ghana 61 Guatemala 53 Madagascar 50 Haiti 28 Rwanda 26 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 RISE clean cooking score (out of 100) Source: World Bank RISE 2018 Average Average Average Average Average Average 41 67 76 28 42 49 12 ON ACCESS TO CLEAN COOKING, 2010–2017 12 4.2 DISTRIBUTION OF COUNTRY SCORES FOR POLICY FRAMEWORKS FIGURE 2 2 Number of countries Number of countries 10 +4.4 in 10 +6.5 in 4 5 Average 7 Average 2 Average 8 RISE 8 8 RISE 5 24 46 59 12 score/ score/ 2 1 6 year year 2 Number of Countries 3 6 10 4 4 4 8 8 3 5 3 6 2 8 5 2 6 2 1 0 0 6 2010 4 9 2015 2017 2010 2015 2017 CLE AN CO O KING 2 ≤33 3310MW) is cost competitive (e.g. through auctions for PPAs?) Source: World Bank RISE 2018 FIGURE 5.6 EVOLUTION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY SCORES BY REGION, 2010-2017 80 RISE score 70 100 60 90 50 80 RE score 40 70 Average 30 60 20 50 RISE 10 40 300 20 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 10 High Income Lower Middle Income 0 2010 2011Upper2012 2013 Middle Income 2015 2014 Low Income 2016 2017 East Asia & Pacific Latin America & Caribbean OECD High Income Sub-Saharan Africa Europe & Central Asia Middle East & North Africa South Asia Source: World Bank RISE 2018 100% 90% ed the policy es that have 80% 70% RENEWABLE ENERGY 72 60% 50% Average Average 30 Average Ave 29 46 50 140 20 5% 120 20% 10 27% 30% 0 Number of Countries 100 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 80 51% High Income Lower Middle Income 45% Low Income 60 Upper Middle Income FIGURE 5.7 RENEWABLE ENERGY SCORES 65% BY REGION, 2017 40 20 29% 28% 0 OECD High Income 2010 2015 2017 Europe & Central Asia ≤33 3310MW) is cost competitive 80 70 Average RISE score 60 High Income 50 Upper Middle Income 40 Lower Middle Income Low Income 30 20 10 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Source: World Bank RISE 2018 not a pre-requisite to achieving a well de- OECD High Income as Uganda, Malawi and Rwanda. At the same veloped framework. Indeed several lower in- time, one third of high income countries are Europe & Central Asia come countries are notable for having strong still in the yellow and red zone. RENEWA B LE ENERGY renewable energy policy frameworks despite Middle East & North Africa modest levels of& national Latin America Caribbean income e.g. Ghana, The development of regulations and policies Tunisia and India. Only East Asia & Pacific the high-income group to support the deployment of renewable en- achieved an average score in the green zone ergy has been making steady progress. The South Asia (≥ 67) by 2017, and only the low-income group number of countries achieving a green zone Sub-Saharan Africa remained in red zone (<33) according to their score has increased from 6 in 2010 to 35 in average RISE renewable 0 energy 5 10 15 scores 20 25 (Fig- 30 35 40 2017. 45 50Within 55 60 seven 65 70 years, 75 80 the 85 90 number 95 100 of coun- ure 5.8). Nevertheless, among all countries tries scoring in the red zone with few or no scoring in the green zone, there are some low- meaningful renewable energy policies has de- er middle-income countries and many coun- clined from 88 to 37. The global renewable en- tries from the low-income group showing ergy score, however, still suggests significant considerable improvement since 2010, such room for improvement (Figure 5.9). 73 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy FIGURE 5.9 RISE RENEWABLE ENERGY SCORE, BY COUNTRY, 2017 Germany 97 United Kingdom 91 Switzerland 87 India 87 France 86 Italy 84 Korea, Rep. 83 Slovak Republic 83 Bulgaria 82 Netherlands 82 Canada 82 Greece 82 Ireland 81 Sweden 80 In 2010 six countries were Hungary Denmark 80 79 considered to have strong Ghana 79 and robust renewable Portugal 78 Japan Australia 78 77 energy frameworks. By Tunisia South Africa 76 76 contrast, in 2017 there Turkey Norway 75 74 were already 36 countries, Chile 73 among which Egypt and United Arab Emirates 72 Czech Republic 71 Jordan, which jumped from Brazil 71 Finland 70 scoring 10 to 68 and from Belgium 69 Mexico 69 6 to 63 in just 7 years. Egypt, Arab Rep. 68 Israel 68 Romania 68 Vietnam 67 Morocco 67 China 66 Spain 66 Armenia 66 Austria 66 Jordan 63 Ukraine 63 Philippines 62 Kazakhstan 60 Russian Federation 60 Dominican Republic 59 Iran, Islamic Rep. 59 Argentina 59 United States 58 Malaysia 58 Croatia 56 Uruguay 56 Uganda 56 Kenya 56 Malawi 56 Lebanon 56 Sri Lanka 55 Panama 55 Pakistan 55 Côte d'Ivoire 54 Jamaica 54 New Zealand 54 Singapore 54 Serbia Peru 53 52 Over half of the countries Zambia Costa Rica 52 52 surveyed have already El Salvador 50 developed some level Bolivia 50 Rwanda Guatemala 50 49 of renewable energy Nicaragua Thailand 49 regulation, but there is 47 Indonesia Belarus 47 still a significant room for 47 Cameroon 47 improvement. Senegal 46 Algeria 45 Poland 45 Zimbabwe 44 Colombia 44 Bangladesh 42 Tanzania 42 Cambodia 41 Ethiopia 41 Nepal 40 Honduras 39 Benin 39 Paraguay 38 Sierra Leone 38 Burkina Faso 37 Congo, Dem. Rep. 36 Papua New Guinea 36 Tajikistan 36 Niger 36 Ecuador 36 Togo 33 Kyrgyz Republic 32 Azerbaijan 31 Eritrea 31 Uzbekistan 31 Saudi Arabia 31 Lao PDR 31 Nigeria 30 Solomon Islands 30 Angola 30 Burundi 29 West Bank and Gaza 29 Congo, Rep. 29 Mongolia 29 Liberia 28 Qatar 28 Myanmar 28 Bahrain 27 Afghanistan Mozambique 25 Nevertheless, almost a third 25 Maldives 24 of the countries are still Central African Republic 23 Guinea 22 seriously lagging behind Madagascar 21 Yemen, Rep. 20 in terms of availability of Venezuela, RB 19 Sudan 19 regulations supporting of Mauritania Mali 17 18 renewable energy Chad 16 Oman 14 Haiti 14 Kuwait 13 Turkmenistan 8 South Sudan 7 Vanuatu 4 Somalia 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 ≤33 3310MW) is cost competitive (e.g. through auctions for PPA’s) scored) If so: 14.2 Is there a schedule for future bids/auctions available for investors? Yes – 16.7, No – 0 14.3 Is there a pre-qualification process to select bidders? Yes – 16.7, No – 0 14.4 Are tariffs indexed (in part or in whole) to an international currency or to Yes – 16.7, No – 0 inflation? 14.5 Are there provisions to ensure full and timely project completion (e.g. Yes – 16.7, No – 0 bid-bonds, project milestones) 14.6 Are projects awarded through auctions/bids online/on track to be online Yes – 16.7, No – 0 If the score X is: on stated date? x≥ 67 l 14.7 Have auctions/bids met stated target for installations? Yes – 16.7, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l 15 Fixed tariffs for small producers 33 ≤ x l 15.1 Can small producers (residential, commercial rooftop PV,etc ) connect to Yes – 16.7, No – 0 the grid? 15.2 Are contracts with fixed tariffs available for such producers? Yes – 16.7, No – 0 15.3 Is there a schedule or clear rules (e.g. capacity based limits) for adjusting Yes – 16.7, No – 0 the tariff level over time? 15.4 Are different tariffs available for different technologies and sizes of the Yes – 16.7, No – 0 generation plant? 15.5 Is there a mechanism to control the capacity built under each tariff? Yes – 16.7, No – 0 15.6 Are tariffs indexed (in part or in whole) to an international currency or to Yes – 16.7, No – 0 inflation? INDICATOR 5. NETWORK CONNECTION AND USE Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 16. Connection and cost allocation 16.1 Does the country have a grid code that clearly specifies connection Yes – 20, No – 0 procedures? If the score X is: 16.2 Do the connection procedures meet international best practices? Yes – 20, No – 0 x≥ 67 l 16.3 Does the grid code include measures or standards addressing variable Yes – 20, No – 0 renewable energy? 33 < x < 67 l 16.4 Are there rules defining the allocation of connection costs? Yes – 20, No – 0 33 ≤ x l 16.5 What is the type of the connection cost allocation policy (i.e. shallow/ Shallow – 20, Deep – 0 deep)? 104 INDICATOR 5. NETWORK CONNECTION AND USE (Continued) Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 17. Network usage and pricing 17.1 Do the rules define the size and allocation of costs for use of the trans- Yes - 50, No - 0 mission and distribution system (e.g. wheeling charges, locational pricing?) 17.2 Are the rules being used in practice? Yes - 50, No - 0 18. Renewable grid integration 18.1 Does the country carry out regular assessments of the flexibility of the Yes – 16.7, No - 0 electricity grid and the issues relating to renewables integration? If the score X is: 18.2 Can renewable energy projects sell into balancing/ancillary services? Yes – 16.7, No - 0 x≥ 67 l 18.3 Are there rules for exchanging power between balancing areas that Yes – 16.7, No - 0 33 < x < 67 l penalize variable renewable energy (e.g. through imbalance penalties)? * 33 ≤ x l 18.4 Are there provisions in the power exchange rules that allow for plant Yes – 16.7, No - 0 forecasting?* 18.5 Does the country integrate high quality forecasting for any variable RE re- Yes – 16.7, No - 0 sources (either through subscription service or provided by national agencies) into their dispatch operations? 18.6 Are dispatch operations being carried out in real time? Yes – 16.7, No - 0 *Only scored in countries with multiple balancing areas. INDICATOR 6. COUNTERPARTY RISK Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3.If there is one answer just look at that, otherwise average 19. Credit worthiness SUM 19.1. If counterparty is the utility, is it credit worthy? Based on the following financial ratios: Current ratio <1 -- 0 in between -- scale >= 1.2 – 25 EBITDA margin <0 – 0 in between -- scale >= 15% -- 25 Debt service coverage ratio <1 – 0 in between -- scale >= 1.2 – 25 If the score X is: Days payable outstanding >180 – 0 in between -- scale <=90 -- 25 x≥ 67 l 20. Payment risk mitigation 33 < x < 67 l 20.1 If the counterparty is a special purpose entity, is it Yes- 50, No-0 33 ≤ x l underwritten by a government guarantee or are there other mechanisms to ensure credit worthiness (e.g. through a letter of credit, escrow account, payment guarantee, or other)? 20.2 Are standard PPAs bankable? Yes- 50, No-0 105 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 6. COUNTERPARTY RISK (Continued) Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3.If there is one answer just look at that, otherwise average 21. Utility Transparency and Monitoring 21.1 Are the financial statements of the largest utility publicly available? a) Generation Yes – 25/8, No - 0 b) Transmission Yes – 25/8, No - 0 c) Distribution Yes – 25/8, No - 0 d) Retail sales Yes – 25/8, No - 0 If yes, are they audited by an independent auditor? e) Generation Yes – 25/8, No - 0 f) Transmission Yes – 25/8, No - 0 g) Distribution Yes – 25/8, No - 0 h) Retail sales Yes – 25/8, No - 0 If the score X is: 21.2 Are the following metrics published in a primary Yes – 25/8, No - 0 official document (by the utility, regulator or ministry x≥ 67 l and/or government)? 33 < x < 67 l a) Generation - Electricity available for sale to Yes – 25/4, No - 0 33 ≤ x l end-users b) Transmission - Transmission loss rate Yes – 25/4, No - 0 c) Distribution - Distribution loss rate Yes – 25/4, No - 0 d) Retail Sales – Bill collection rate Yes – 25/4, No - 0 21.3 Is the utility operating an incidence/outage record- Yes – 25, No – 0 ing system (or SCADA/EMS with such functionality)? 21.4 Is the utility measuring the SAIDI and SAIFI or any Yes – 25/3, No – 0 other measurements for service reliability? a) Are the measurements reported to the regulatory Yes – 25/3, No – 0 body? b) Are the measurements available to public? Yes – 25/3, No – 0 INDICATOR 7. CARBON PRICING AND MONITORING Questions Scoring Traffic light VI. Counterparty Risk Sum 24.1 Is there a carbon pricing mechanism (eg: carbon tax, emission trading) Yes – 50, No – 0 If the score X is: implemented? x≥ 67 l 25.1 Is there a monitoring, reporting and verification system for greenhouse Yes – 50, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l gas emissions in place? 33 ≤ x l 106 ENERGY EFFICIENCY INDICATOR 1. NATIONAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY PLANNING Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 1. National energy efficiency legislation/action planning 1.1 Is there legislation or a national action plan that aims to increase EE? Yes – 50, No – 0 1.2 Is there an energy efficiency goal or target at the national level? Yes – 50, No – 0 2. Sub-sectoral targets 2.1 Are there targets defined for any of the following sectors? If the score X is: • Residential sector Yes – 20, No – 0 x≥ 67 l • Commercial services sector Yes – 20, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l • Transport sector Yes – 20, No – 0 • Industrial sector Yes – 20, No – 0 33 ≤ x l • Power sector Yes – 20, No – 0 3. Scope of targets 3.1 Are targets derived from detailed analysis that is publicly available? Yes – 50,No – 0 3.2 Is there a requirement for periodic progress reports tracking data related to Yes – 50,No – 0 the efficiency target(s)? INDICATOR 2. ENERGY EFFICIENCY ENTITIES Questions Scoring Traffic light 4. Human Capital and Institutions 4.1 Are there governmental and/or independent bodies that carry out formu- lation and implementation of EE strategy, policy and regulation for each of the roles listed below: • Setting EE strategy For each role If the score X is: • Setting EE standards Yes – 50, No – 0 x≥ 67 l • Regulating EE activities of energy suppliers • Regulating EE activities of energy consumers Sum and divide by 33 < x < 67 l • Certifying compliance with equipment EE standards the 7 roles 33 ≤ x l • Certifying compliance with building EE standards • Selecting and/or approving third party auditors tasked with certifying EE standards 4.2 Are energy efficiency programs developed based on market analyses Yes – 25, No – 0 with plans open to public consultation and periodic evaluation? 4.3 Are there professional certification/accreditation programs mandated for energy efficiency activities. Select all that apply: If the score X is: • Energy auditing/energy management Yes to at least 1 – 25, x≥ 67 l • Energy efficiency financing No to all – 0 • Monitoring and verification of energy consumption/savings 33 < x < 67 l • Building energy efficiency construction/design 33 ≤ x l • Other 107 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 3. INFORMATION PROVIDED TO CONSUMERS ABOUT ELECTRICITY USAGE Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 4 5. Reports on electricity usage 5.1 Is it mandatory for the selected utility to provide the following Each sector: Yes – 33.3, No – 0 customers with reports of their energy usage, in a bill or by other means for residential customers, commercial services customers, and industrial customers? 6. Quality of information in report 6.1 At what intervals do they receive these reports (times per year)?  ≤1 month – 100 6.2 Do the reports include the price levels customers pay for energy 1-6 months – 75 usage? 6-12 months – 50 >12 months – 0 6.3 Does the regulator track the utility’s compliance with laws for Divide by 3 sectors providing energy usage information to customers? If the score X is: Each sector: Yes – 33.3, No – 0 Each sector: Yes – 33.3, No – 0 x≥ 67 l 33 < x < 67 l 7. Comparison with other users Each sector: Yes – 33.3, No – 0 33 ≤ x l 7.1 Do customers receive a bill or report which compares them to other users in the same region and/or usage class? 8. Information related to energy savings 8.1 Do customers receive a bill or report that shows their energy usage Each sector: Yes – 33.3, No – 0 compared to previous bills or reports over time? Divide by 3 sectors 8.2 Does the selected utility offer customers access real time feedback Yes – 33.3, No – 0 on energy usage (for either prepaid or post-paid systems)? 8.3 Does the selected utility offer customers the ability to manage ener- Yes – 33.3, No – 0 gy usage levels remotely (through apps or other technology mediums that can track real time usage) 108 INDICATOR 4. EE INCENTIVES FROM ELECTRICITY RATE STRUCTURES Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 9. Electricity rate structure 9.1 What types of electricity rate structure do the residential, commer- Flat fee – 33.3 cial services, and industrial customers face? Declining block – 0 (time stamping) please indicate the years in which the electrici- ty rate structure is in place for each type of customers. Constant block – 67 • Flat fee (per connection) Increasing block – 100 • Constant (uniform) block rates If a country selects more than • Declining block rates one option, the highest score is • Increasing block rates selected. Sum and divide by the 3 sectors 10. Demand charges (large customers) If the score X is: 10.1 Which of the following charges do electricity customers pay in the x≥ 67 l commercial services sector, and industrial sector? 33 < x < 67 l • Energy (kWh) Yes – 33.3, No – 0 33 ≤ x l • Demand (kW) Sum and divide by the 2 • Reactive power (kVAr) sectors 11. Time of use tariffs 11.1 Are any of the following time-of-use (TOU) rate structures applied to the residential sector, commercial services sector, and industrial sector? • Real-time pricing For each sector • Variable peak pricing Yes to 1 or more – 100 • Critical peak pricing No to all – 0 • Seasonal rate Sum and divide by the 3 • Peak-time rebates and/or time of day tariffs sectors 109 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 5. INCENTIVES & MANDATES: INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL END USERS Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 4 12. Mandates for large consumers 12.1 Are there any of the following energy-efficiency mandates for large energy Yes to 1 or more 33.3– , users? No to all – 0 • Targets (e.g. kWh savings or lower energy intensity or carbon dioxide reductions, etc.) • Mandatory audits • Progress/tracking reports • Energy-management system (computer technologies to optimize energy use) 12.2 Are there penalties in place for non-compliance with regulatory obliga- Yes – 33.3, No – 0 tions for EE? 12.3 Is there a requirement for periodic reporting of energy consumption in Yes – 16.7, No – 0 order to enforce and/or track progress of energy efficiency in large consumers’ If the score X is: facilities? Yes – 16.7, No – 0 x≥ 67 l 12.4 Is there a measurement and verification program in place? 33 < x < 67 l 13. Incentives for large consumers 33 ≤ x l 13.1 Are energy efficiency incentives in place for large-scale users? Yes – 100, No – 0 14. Small-medium size enterprises (SMEs) 14.1 Is there an energy efficiency mandate or incentive program for SMEs? Yes – 100, No – 0 15. Performance recognition 15.1 Is there a program to publicly recognize end users that have achieved Yes – 33.3 No – 0 significant energy savings measures? 15.2 Are energy savings and/or financial savings publicized? Yes – 33.3 No – 0 15.3 Does the program offer assistance (from a government or independent Yes – 33.3 No – 0 entity) to end users to identify energy savings investments opportunities? 110 INDICATOR 6. INCENTIVES & MANDATES: PUBLIC SECTOR Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 4 16. Obligations for public infrastructure 16.1 Are there binding energy savings obligations for public buildings and/or Yes – 100, No – 0 other public facilities (may include water supply, wastewater services, municipal solid waste, street lighting, transportation, and heat supply) ? 17. Tracking and enforcement of obligations Is there a reporting mechanism to track and enforce energy savings in public Yes – 100, No – 0 sector facilities (either in-house or by a third party)? 18. Public procurement of energy efficiency products 18.1 Is there a specific policy or mandated guidelines for public procurement of Yes on at least one If the score X is: energy-efficient products and services at the following levels: level – 50 x≥ 67 l • National level 33 < x < 67 l • Region/state/province level No to all – 0 33 ≤ x l • Municipal/city/county level 18.2 Are procurement guidelines updated periodically to reflect technological advances and best practices in energy efficient products and services? Yes – 50, No – 0 19. Ability to retain energy savings 19.1 Do public budgeting regulations and practices allow public entities to Yes on at least one retain energy savings at the following levels? Tick all applicable levels: level – 100 • National level • Region/state/province level No to all – 0 • Municipal/city/county level 111 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 7. INCENTIVES & MANDATES: UTILITIES Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 2 20. Mandates for utilities For each area: (i) generation, (ii) transmission and distribution networks, and (iii) Sum and divide by demand-side management: the 3 areas 20.1 Are utilities required to carry out energy efficiency activities in this area? 20.2 Are there penalties in place for non-compliance with EE requirements? Yes – 25, No – 0 20.3 Are energy savings or other target indicators measured to track perfor- Yes – 25, No – 0 mance in meeting EE requirements? Yes – 25, No – 0 If the score X is: 20.4 Are the requirements measured/validated by an independent third party? Yes – 25, No – 0 x≥ 67 l 21. Cost recovery for utilities 33 < x < 67 l 21.1 Are any of the following mechanisms available for utilities to recover costs 33 ≤ x l associated with or revenue lost from mandated energy efficiency activities: Public budget financing Compensation for revenue losses from EE activities via a tracking account Yes to 3 or more – 100 Revolving funds and/or credit lines for EE activities Yes to 2 or less – 50 Partial risk guarantees Program cost recovery No to all – 0 On-bill financing/pre-payment Decoupling INDICATOR 8. FINANCING MECHANISMS FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 2 22. Financing mechanisms available in each sector 22.1 Are any of the following financing mechanisms for energy efficiency For each sector, activities available in the (R) residential sector, (C) commercial services Yes to 3 or more – 50 sector, and (I) industrial sector? Yes to 1 or 2 – 25 (time stamping) If yes, please indicate the years in which the financing No to all – 0 mechanisms are available for each type of customers. Average of the 3 sectors • Discounted “green” mortgages • On-bill financing/repayment • Credit lines and/or revolving funds with banks for energy efficiency activities If the score X is: • Energy services agreements (pay-for-performance contracts) x≥ 67 l • Green or energy efficiency bonds • Vendor credit and/or leasing for energy efficiency activities 33 < x < 67 l • Partial risk guarantees 33 ≤ x l • Other *Market/government mechanism information was tracked but not incorporated into the scoring 22.2 How many financial and/or non-financial institutions offer financial For each sector, products for energy efficiency investments in each sector? More than 3– 50 • None Between 1-3 – 40 • Between 1-3 None – 0 • More than 3 Average of the 3 sectors 112 INDICATOR 9. MINIMUM ENERGY EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 2 23. Have minimum energy performance standards been adopted for? 23.1 Refrigerators For each category, 23.2 Heating, ventilation and/or air conditioning (HVAC) Yes – 100, No – 0 23.3 Lighting equipment Sum and divide by the 6 23.4 Industrial electric motors categories 23.5 Other industrial equipment 23.6 Light vehicles (heavy duty transport vehicles were tracked but not included If the score X is: in the scoring) x≥ 67 l 24. Verification and penalties for non-compliance For each category, 33 < x < 67 l 24.1 Are the standards mandatory? Yes – 20, No – 0 33 ≤ x l 24.2 Is there a requirement for periodic reporting to verify compliance with Yes – 20, No – 0 standards? 24.3 Is the verification of standards compliance carried out by a third party? Yes – 20, No – 0 24.4 Is there a penalty for non-compliance with energy efficiency standards? Yes – 20, No – 0 24.5 Is there a periodic update of standards to reflect technological advances and Yes – 20, No – 0 changes in best practices for energy efficiency standards? Sum and divide by the 6 categories INDICATOR 10. ENERGY LABELING SYSTEMS Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 2 25. Have energy efficiency labeling schemes been adopted for? 25.1 Refrigerators For each category, 25.2 HVAC Yes – 100, No – 0 25.3 Lighting equipment Sum and divide by the 6 25.4 Industrial electric motors categories If the score X is: 25.5 Other industrial equipment x≥ 67 l 25.6 Transport vehicles 33 < x < 67 l 26. Mandatory vs voluntary labeling system For each category, 33 ≤ x l 26.1 Are any of the above labeling schemes mandatory? Yes – 50, No – 0 26.2 Is there a periodic update of standards to reflect technological advances and Yes – 50, No – 0 changes in best practices for energy efficiency labels? Sum and divide by the 6 categories 113 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 11. BUILDING ENERGY CODES Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 5 27. New residential and commercial buildings 27.1 Are there energy efficiency codes for new residential buildings? Yes – 25, No – 0 27.2 Are there energy efficiency codes for new commercial buildings? Yes – 25, No – 0   27.2 Are the building energy efficiency standards required to be updated on a For each sector regular basis to reflect technological advances and changes in best practices for Yes – 25, No – 0 building energy efficiency? 28. Compliance system 28.1 Is commission testing for energy efficiency required for final building Yes – 33.3, No – 0 acceptance documentation? 28.2 Is there a requirement for periodic reporting to verify compliance with Yes – 33.3, No – 0 building energy efficiency requirements? 28.3 Is verification carried out by a third party? Yes – 33.3, No – 0 29. Renovated buildings For each sector If the score X is: 29.1 Are renovated buildings required to meet a building energy code, in resi- Yes – 25, No – 0 x≥ 67 l dential and commercial sectors? 33 < x < 67 l 29.2 Are the building energy efficiency standards required to be updated on a Yes – 25, No – 0 regular basis to reflect technological advances and changes in best practices for 33 ≤ x l building energy efficiency? 30. Building energy information 30.1 Is there a mandatory standardized rating or labeling system for the energy Yes – 33.3, No – 0 performance of existing buildings? 30.2 Are commercial and residential buildings required to disclose property Yes – 33.3, No – 0 energy usage at the point of sale or when leased? 30.3 Are large commercial and residential buildings required to disclose property Yes – 33.3, No – 0 energy usage annually? 31. Building energy efficiency incentives 31.1 Are there mandates or targets for new building stocks to achieve high Yes – 100 , No – 0 quality energy efficiency certifications, such as LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) (e.g. percentage of new building stocks that must be LEED certified)? 114 INDICATOR 12. TRANSPORT SECTOR Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 32. Planning 32.1 Is there a national database or national reporting system to periodically Yes to 1 or more – track and report the following transport efficiency metrics: 100, No to all – 0 • Fuel per mile driven • Average distance traveled per vehicle • Distance traveled by public transit as a share of total passenger distance traveled • Vehicle miles traveled per capita • Other 33. Private transport 33.1 Are there any mandate or incentive programs that support reduction of Yes to 1 or more – 50, transport demands or shifts to more energy efficient modes of transport for No to all – 0 personal use, such as: • Regularly scheduled teleworking • Bicycle and/or other non-motorized schemes • Car sharing If the score X is: • Public transit subsidies for consumers • Congestion charges x≥ 67 l • Electric vehicle programs 33 < x < 67 l • Other 33 ≤ x l 33.2 Is there a requirement for periodic reporting to verify compliance or prog- Yes – 50, No, 0 ress of the program(s)? 34. Commercial and/or industrial transport 34.1 Are there any mandate or incentive programs that support reduction of Yes to 1 or more – 50, transport demands or shifts to more energy efficient modes of transport for No to all – 0 commercial and/or industrial use, such as: • Heavy duty vehicle fuel economy standards (data already collected in Indicator 10 can be scored here) • Freight rail mandatory fuel economy standards or efficiency incentives • Energy efficiency procurement standards or incentives for municipal rail and bus fleets • Efficient fuel switching mandate or incentive programs for commercial/ industrial vehicle fleets • Other 34.2 Is there a requirement for periodic reporting to verify compliance or prog- Yes – 50, No, 0 ress of the program(s)? INDICATOR 13. CARBON PRICING AND MONITORING Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum If the score X is: 35.1 Is there a carbon pricing mechanism (eg: carbon tax, emission trading) Yes – 50, No – 0 implemented?” x≥ 67 l 35.2 Is there a monitoring, reporting and verification system for greenhouse gas Yes – 50, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l emissions in place? 33 ≤ x l 115 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy ENERGY ACCESS INDICATOR 1. EXISTENCE OF OFFICIALLY APPROVED ELECTRIFICATION PLAN Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 4 1. Existence ≤ 5 yrs – 100 1.1 Is there an officially approved national electrification plan? 5 > X ≤ 10 yrs - 50, other – 0 2. Public availability of electrification plan Yes – 100, No – 0 2.1 Are the electrification plan and the updates publicly available? 3. Targets and implementation Yes – 50, No – 0 3.1 Is there a requirement for periodic progress reports tracking progress Yes – 50, No – 0 towards the defined energy access target? If the score X is: 3.2 Does the reporting actually take place? x≥ 67 l 33 < x < 67 l 4. Institutions 33 ≤ x l 4.1 Are there institution(s) responsible for carrying out the following functions: For each role • Setting electrification strategy If yes to one or more • Setting electrification milestones and deadlines - 25, if no to all - 0 • Coordinating generation, transmission, and distribution plans and their implementation • Reporting progress towards the defined energy access target/milestones with periodic reports 4.2 Is the electrification plan developed based on demand assessment? Yes – 25, No – 0 4.3 Were there any public consultations while developing the plan? Yes – 25, No – 0 4.4 Is there a provision for the plan periodic evaluations? Yes – 25, No – 0 116 INDICATOR 2. SCOPE OF OFFICIALLY APPROVED ELECTRIFICATION PLAN Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 6 5. Service level target 5.1 Does the plan target a service level (e.g. power availability, number of Yes – 100, No – 0 guaranteed hours of power supply etc.)? 6. Inclusion of off-grid solutions 6.1 Does the electrification plan include off-grid solutions (either/or both Yes – 100, No – 0 minigrids and standalone systems)? 7. Inclusion of community and productive services 7.1 Does the plan include productive uses (e.g. agricultural, commercial, and Yes – 50, No – 0 industrial activities)? If the score X is: 7.2 Does the plan include community facilities (e.g. health centers, schools, Yes – 50, No – 0 administrative buildings)? x≥ 67 l 33 < x < 67 l 8. Inclusion of informally settled people Yes – 100, No – 0 33 ≤ x l 8.1 Does the plan include areas with informally settled people/groups? 9. Gender Sensitivity 9.1 Does the plan specifically address the electricity access of female-headed Yes – 50, No – 0 households? 9.2 Does the plan set up a specific target on female-headed households’ Yes – 50, No – 0 electrification? 10. Geospatial mapping 10.1 Are there geospatial maps conveying the timeframe of planned grid Yes – 50, No – 0 extension? 10.2 Are these geospatial maps made publicly available? Yes – 50, No – 0 117 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 3. FRAMEWORK FOR GRID ELECTRIFICATION Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 11. Funding support to grid electrification 11.1 Does the government have a dedicated funding line or budget for electri- Yes – 50, No – 0 fication (e.g. funded national program, budget item, rural electrification fund to finance grid extension)? 11.2 Are there capital subsidies paid to the utilities to provide distribution systems Yes – 50, No – 0 to rural areas/villages? If the score X is: 12. Funding support for consumer connections x≥ 67 l 12.1 Are there consumer financing mechanisms (i.e. utility loans, on bill financ- Yes – 100, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l ing, micro-loans etc.) and/or direct subsidies available to support the payment of connection fees by consumers? 33 ≤ x l 13. Standards of performance on quality of supply 13.1 Does the government specify standards of performance on reliability (e.g. Yes – 50, No – 0 number of guaranteed hours per day, duration of the electricity, frequency of outages, SAIDI, SAIFI etc.)? 13.2 Is there a periodic reporting system in place to ensure standards compliance? Yes – 50, No – 0 118 INDICATOR 4. FRAMEWORK FOR MINIGRIDS Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 5 14. Existence of national program 14.1 Are there programs which aim to develop minigrid systems or support the Yes – 50, No – 0 development of minigrids systems? 14.2 Do the regulations clarify what will occur when the interconnected grid reaches Yes – 50, No – 0 a minigrid?. 15. Legal framework for operation 15.1 Are minigrids legally allowed to operate in the country? Yes – 25, No – 0 15.2 Can minigrids be owned and operated by private operators? Yes – 25, No – 0 15.3 Do the regulations detail procedures for consumers to get connected to Yes – 25, No – 0 minigrids? 15.4 Do the regulations differ by size of minigrids? Yes – 25, No – 0 16. Ability to charge cost-reflective tariffs If the score X is: 16.1 Are minigrid operators legally allowed to charge a different tariff from the Yes – 100, No – 0 x≥ 67 l national tariff? 33 < x < 67 l 17. Financial incentives 33 ≤ x l 17.1 Are there publicly funded mechanisms to secure viability gap funding for Yes – 33.3, No – 0 operators? 17.2 Are there duty exemptions and/or capital subsidies for minigrid systems and/or Yes – 33.3, No – 0 individual components? 17.3 Are there specific financing facilities (access to credit etc.) available to support Yes – 33.3, No – 0 operators? 18. Standards and quality 18.1 Are there technical standards detailing the requirements for minigrids to Yes – 25, No – 0 connect to the main grid? 18.2 Are technical standards made publicly available? Yes – 25, No – 0 18.3 Are there safety standards for minigrids (e.g. overcurrent protection, system Yes – 25, No – 0 control etc.)? 18.4 Are safety standards made publicly available? Yes – 25, No – 0 119 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 5. FRAMEWORK FOR STANDALONE SYSTEMS Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 19. Existence of national program 19.1 Is there a national program which aims to develop standalone systems or Yes – 100, No – 0 supports standalone systems development? 20. Financial Incentives 20.1 Are there duty exemptions and/or subsidies to support standalone home Yes – 33.3, No – 0 systems? If the score X is: 20.2 Are there legal restrictions that limit the prices standalone home system No– 33.3, Yes – 0 retailers or service providers can charge? x≥ 67 l 20.3 Are there specific financing facilities available to support operators/consumers Yes – 33.3, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l to develop/ purchase standalone home systems? 33 ≤ x l 21. Standards and quality 21.1 Has the government adopted international quality standards for standalone Yes – 33.3, No – 0 systems? 21.2 Has the government adopted international testing methods or does it accept Yes – 33.3, No – 0 testing done in another country? 21.3 Are there environmental regulations on the disposal of solar devices and Yes – 33.3, No – 0 standalone home system products or components? INDICATOR 6. CONSUMER AFFORDABILITY OF ELECTRICITY Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 22. Cost of subsistence consumption If the percentage x is: 22.1 What is the annual cost of subsistence consumption (30kWh/month) as a X ≥10% - 0 percentage of GNI per household of bottom 20 percent of population? 5% < x < 10% - scale x ≤5% - 100 If the score X is: x≥ 67 l 23. Affordability of the connection fee X ≤ 12 months - 100 X between 12 and 36 33 < x < 67 l 23.1 How many months does it take for the consumer to pay the connection fee based on savings of the bottom 20 percent of population? months– scale 33 ≤ x l X ≥ 36 months - 0) 24. Policy to support low-volume consumers 24.1 Is there a mechanism to support low-volume consumers such as social or Yes – 100, No – 0 lifeline tariff? 120 INDICATOR 7. UTILITY TRANSPARENCY AND MONITORING Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 4 25. Public financial statements 25.1 Are the financial statements of the largest utility publicly available? a) Generation Yes – 12.5, No - 0 b) Transmission Yes – 12.5, No - 0 c) Distribution Yes – 12.5, No - 0 d) Retail sales Yes – 12.5, No – 0 25.2 If yes, are they audited by an independent auditor? e) Generation Yes – 12.5, No – 0 f) Transmission Yes – 12.5, No – 0 g) Distribution Yes – 12.5, No – 0 h) Retail sales Yes – 12.5, No – 0 If the score X is: 26. Public annual reports x≥ 67 l 26.1 Are the following metrics published in a primary official document (by the utility, regulator or ministry and/or government)? 33 < x < 67 l a) Generation - Electricity available for sale to end-users Yes -- 25, No -- 0 33 ≤ x l b) Transmission - Transmission loss rate Yes -- 25, No -- 0 c) Distribution - Distribution loss rate Yes -- 25, No -- 0 d) Retail Sales – Bill collection rate Yes -- 25, No – 0 27. Usage of outage recording system 27.1 Is the utility operating an incidence/outage recording system (or SCADA/EMS Yes -- 100, No – 0 with such functionality)? 28. Public reliability measurements 28.1 Is the utility measuring the SAIDI and SAIFI or any other measurements for Yes – 33.3, No -- 0 service reliability? 28.2 Are the measurements reported to the regulatory body? Yes – 33.3, No -- 0 28.3 Are the measurements available to public? Yes – 33.3, No -- 0 INDICATOR 8. UTILITY CREDITWORTHINESS Questions Scoring Traffic light Time stamping is from - to 2017. Sum Indicate “0” for “no” and “1” for “yes”. 29. Current ratio <1 -- 0 in between -- scale >= 1.2 -- 25 If the score X is: 30. EBITDA margin <0 -- 0in between -- scale >= 15% -- 25 x≥ 67 l 33 < x < 67 l 31. Debt service coverage ratio <1 -- 0in between -- scale >= 1.2 – 25 33 ≤ x l 32. Days payable outstanding >180 -- 0in between -- scale <=90 – 25 121 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy CLEAN COOKING SOLUTIONS INDICATOR 1. PLANNING Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 1. Tracking 1.1 Does the government track household level data on cooking solutions1? Yes – 33.3, No – 0 (time stamping) If yes, please indicate the year in which the tracking began 1.2 Is the data publicly available? Yes – 33.3, No – 0 1.3 Is the data gender disaggregated? Yes – 33.3, No – 0 2. Existence of plan 2.1 Is there a national or regional plan to scale up access to clean cooking Yes – 33.3, No –0 solutions, or is access to clean cooking solutions covered as a part of any other If the score X is: government plan (regardless of the sector)? x≥ 67 l 2.2 Has the plan gone through public consultation? Yes - 33.3, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l 2.2.1 Have consultations taken the gender of participants into account? Yes - 33.3, No – 0 33 ≤ x l 3. Institutional Capacity 3.1 Are there agencies dedicated to the following functions? If so, for each For each agency: agency, indicate whether it is a government agency or an independent body, Yes – 33.3, No – 0 has a dedicated budget or funding line, and the name of the agency: i. Setting clean cooking strategy/action plan ii. Setting, monitoring and enforcing standards for clean cooking solutions iii. Tracking access and adoption of clean cooking solutions (time stamping) If yes, please indicate the years in which each institution was given the responsibility(-ies). 122 INDICATOR 2. SCOPE OF PLANNING Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 4. Aspects of the plan 4.1 Does the plan take into account geographical and demographical consider- Yes – 50, No – 0 ations to prioritize the most vulnerable consumers2? 4.2 Does the plan include considerations and action items for involving women Yes – 50, No – 0 throughout the supply chain of clean cooking solutions? 5. Awareness strategy 5.1 Is there a targeted awareness raising strategy to drive adoption of clean Yes to one or more - If the score X is: cooking solutions? Select any of the following that apply: 50, No to all - 0 x≥ 67 l • Training programs for new stove technologies • Cooking competitions with stove technologies 33 < x < 67 l • Nationally-sponsored educational campaigns for new stove technologies 33 ≤ x l • Private sector advertising campaigns for new stove technologies • Partnerships with CSOs and community-based organizations • Other 5.2 Does the awareness strategy include targeted messages to both men and Yes – 50, No – 0 women? 6. Last mile distribution 6.1 Is there a last mile distribution strategy3 in place for cooking fuels? Yes – 50, No – 0 6.2 Is there a last mile distribution strategy in place for cooking technologies? Yes – 50, No – 0 123 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy INDICATOR 3. STANDARDS AND LABELING Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 3 7. Standards 7.1 Are there standards for the following aspects of clean cooking solutions: For each: i. Efficiency Yes – 33.3, No – 0 ii. Emissions i. If yes, what kind of standards? (eg: PM 2.5) iii. Safety 8. Monitoring and verification If the score X is: 8.1 Is there a verification program in place for standards? Yes – 25, No – 0 x≥ 67 l 8.2 Does the program work with a standards testing facility or lab? Yes – 25, No – 0 33 < x < 67 l 8.3 Does the stove testing facility or lab need to be accredited? Yes – 25, No – 0 33 ≤ x l 8.4 Have the standards been verified through field testing? Yes – 25, No – 0 9. Labeling 9.1. Have labeling schemes been adopted on clean cooking products for: For each: i. Efficiency Yes – 50, No – 0 ii. Emissions Yes – 50, No – 0 (time stamping) Please indicate the year in which each labeling scheme was adopted. 124 INDICATOR 4. INCENTIVES AND ATTRIBUTES Questions Scoring Traffic light Sum and divide by 2 10. Financing mechanisms 10.1 Are there specific financing facilities available to support suppliers/con- Yes – 50, No – 0 sumers to develop/purchase clean cooking solutions? Specify the aspects that apply: • Supplier or consumer • Type of fuel • Specific stove technology (time stamping) Please indicate the year in which each financing facility was first made available 10.2 Are there specific financing or subsidy programs for clean cooking solu- Yes – 50, No – 0 tions targeted to low income consumers? Select the aspects that apply: • Supplier/consumer If the score X is: • Type of fuel • Specific stove technology x≥ 67 l (time stamping) Please indicate the year in which each program was first made 33 < x < 67 l available 33 ≤ x l 11. Supplier incentives 11.1 Are there duty exemptions, tax benefits, and/or subsidies to support clean Yes – 50, No – 0 cooking solutions? Specify the aspects that apply: • Type of incentive • Type of fuel • Specific stove technology (time stamping) Please indicate the year in which each incentive was first made available 11.2 Are there programs for commercial entities to invest in efficient, low-emis- Yes – 50, No – 0 sion stoves? (time stamping) Please indicate the year in which each program was first made available CLEAN COOKING PILOT COUNTRIES South Asia East Asia & Pacific Latin America Sub-Saharan Africa India China Haiti Ghana Nepal Indonesia Guatemala Kenya Lao PDR Madagascar Rwanda Uganda 125 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy B. QUESTIONS TO ASSESS POLICY ENFORCEMENT ELECTRICITY ACCESS −− Is there a requirement for periodic progress reports tracking progress towards the defined energy access target? −− Does the reporting actually take place? −− Is there a provision for the plan periodic evaluation? −− Does the government specify standards of performance on reliability? −− Is there a periodic reporting system in place to ensure standards compliance? −− Are there publicly funded mechanisms to secure viability gap funding for operators? −− Are there duty exemptions and/or capital subsidies for mini grid systems and/or individual components? −− Are there specific financing facilities available to support operators? −− Is there a national program which aims to develop standalone systems or support stand- alone systems’ development? −− Are there specific financing facilities to support operators/consumers to develop/purchase standalone home systems? −− Is there a mechanism to support low-volume consumers such as social or lifeline tariff? −− Is the utility operating an incidence/outage recording system (or SCADA/EMS with such functionality)? −− Is the utility measuring the SAIDI and SAIFI or any other measurements for service reliabil- ity? −− Are the measurements reported to the regulatory body? −− Are the measurements available to public? RENEWABLE ENERGY −− Is there an institution responsible for tracking progress in renewable energy development? −− Is there any periodic reporting mechanism for renewable energy progress? −− Is current policy environment conducive to renewable energy deployment? −− Is the compensation due because of curtailment actually given out? −− Is there a pre-qualification process to select bidders? −− Are there provisions to ensure full and timely project completion (e.g. bid-bonds, project milestones) 126 −− Do the connection procedures meet international best practices? −− Are dispatch operations being carried out in real time? −− Are standard PPAs bankable? −− Are the measurements reported to the regulatory body? −− Is there a monitoring, reporting and verification system for greenhouse gas emissions in place? ENERGY EFFICIENCY −− Is there a requirement for periodic progress reports tracking data related to the efficiency target(s)? −− Are energy efficiency programs developed based on market analyses with plans open to public consultation and periodic evaluation? −− Is there a requirement for periodic reporting of energy consumption in order to enforce and/or track progress of energy efficiency in large consumers’ facilities? −− Is there a reporting mechanism to track and enforce energy savings in public sector facilities (either in-house or by a third party)? −− Are there penalties in place for non-compliance with EE requirements? Generation, T&D and DSM −− Are energy savings or other target indicators measured to track performance in meeting EE requirements? Generation, T&D and DSM −− Are the requirements measured/validated by an independent third party? Generation, T&D and DSM −− Is there a requirement for periodic reporting to verify compliance with standards? Refriger- ators, HVAC, lighting equipment, industrial electric motors, transport vehicles, other indus- trial equipment −− Is the verification of standards compliance carried out by a third party? Refrigerators, HVAC, lighting equipment, industrial electric motors, transport vehicles, other industrial equipment −− Is there a penalty for non-compliance with energy efficiency standards? Refrigerators, HVAC, lighting equipment, industrial electric motors, transport vehicles, other industrial equipment −− Is there a periodic update of standards to reflect technological advances and changes in best practices for energy efficiency labels? Refrigerators, HVAC, lighting equipment, indus- trial electric motors, transport vehicles, other industrial equipment −− Is commission testing for energy efficiency required for final building acceptance documen- tation? −− Is there a requirement for periodic reporting to verify compliance with building energy effi- ciency requirements? −− Is verification carried out by a third party? 127 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy C. THE 133 COUNTRIES IN THE 2018 EDITION OF THE RISE REPORT REGIONAL AND INCOME CLASSIFICATION (WORLD BANK, JUNE 2017) Economy Code Region Income group Afghanistan* AFG South Asia Low income Algeria DZA Middle East & North Africa Upper middle income Angola* AGO Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Argentina ARG Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Armenia ARM Europe & Central Asia Lower middle income Australia AUS OECD High Income High income Austria AUT OECD High Income High income Azerbaijan AZE Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Bahrain BHR Middle East & North Africa High income Bangladesh* BGD South Asia Lower middle income Belarus BLR Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Belgium BEL OECD High Income High income Benin* BEN Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Bolivia BOL Latin America & Caribbean Lower middle income Brazil BRA Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Bulgaria BGR Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Burkina Faso* BFA Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Burundi* BDI Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Cambodia* KHM East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Cameroon* CMR Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Canada CAN OECD High Income High income Central African Republic* CAF Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Chad* TCD Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Chile CHL OECD High Income High income China CHN East Asia & Pacific Upper middle income Colombia COL Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Congo, Dem. Rep.* COD Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Congo, Rep.* COG Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income 128 Economy Code Region Income group Costa Rica CRI Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Côte d'Ivoire* CIV Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Croatia HRV Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Czech Republic CZE OECD High Income High income Denmark DNK OECD High Income High income Dominican Republic DOM Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Ecuador ECU Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Egypt, Arab Rep. EGY Middle East & North Africa Lower middle income El Salvador SLV Latin America & Caribbean Lower middle income Eritrea* ERI Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Ethiopia* ETH Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Finland FIN OECD High Income High income France FRA OECD High Income High income Germany DEU OECD High Income High income Ghana* GHA Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Greece GRC OECD High Income High income Guatemala* GTM Latin America & Caribbean Lower middle income Guinea* GIN Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Haiti* HTI Latin America & Caribbean Low income Honduras* HND Latin America & Caribbean Lower middle income Hungary HUN OECD High Income High income India* IND South Asia Lower middle income Indonesia* IDN East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Iran, Islamic Rep. IRN Middle East & North Africa Upper middle income Ireland IRL OECD High Income High income Israel ISR Middle East & North Africa High income Italy ITA OECD High Income High income Jamaica JAM Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Japan JPN OECD High Income High income Jordan JOR Middle East & North Africa Lower middle income Kazakhstan KAZ Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Kenya* KEN Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Korea, Rep. KOR OECD High Income High income Kuwait KWT Middle East & North Africa High income Kyrgyz Republic KGZ Europe & Central Asia Lower middle income 129 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy Economy Code Region Income group Lao PDR* LAO East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Lebanon LBN Middle East & North Africa Upper middle income Liberia* LBR Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Madagascar* MDG Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Malawi* MWI Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Malaysia MYS East Asia & Pacific Upper middle income Maldives MDV South Asia Upper middle income Mali* MLI Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Mauritania* MRT Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Mexico MEX Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Mongolia* MNG East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Morocco MAR Middle East & North Africa Lower middle income Mozambique* MOZ Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Myanmar* MMR East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Nepal* NPL South Asia Low income Netherlands NLD OECD High Income High income New Zealand NZL East Asia & Pacific High income Nicaragua* NIC Latin America & Caribbean Lower middle income Niger* NER Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Nigeria* NGA Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Norway NOR OECD High Income High income Oman OMN Middle East & North Africa High income Pakistan* PAK South Asia Lower middle income Papua New Guinea* PNG East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Panama PAN Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Paraguay PRY Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Peru PER Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Philippines* PHL East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Poland POL OECD High Income High income Portugal PRT OECD High Income High income Qatar QAT Middle East & North Africa High income Romania ROU Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Russian Federation RUS Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Rwanda* RWA Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Saudi Arabia SAU Middle East & North Africa High income Senegal* SEN Sub-Saharan Africa Low income 130 Economy Code Region Income group Serbia SRB Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Sierra Leone* SLE Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Singapore SGP East Asia & Pacific High income Slovak Republic SVK OECD High Income High income Solomon Islands* SLB East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Somalia* SOM Sub-Saharan Africa Low income South Africa* ZAF Sub-Saharan Africa Upper middle income South Sudan* SSD Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Spain ESP OECD High Income High income Sri Lanka LKA South Asia Lower middle income Sudan SDN Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Sweden SWE OECD High Income High income Switzerland CHE OECD High Income High income Tajikistan TJK Europe & Central Asia Lower middle income Tanzania* TZA Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Thailand THA East Asia & Pacific Upper middle income Togo* TGO Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Tunisia TUN Middle East & North Africa Lower middle income Turkey TUR Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Turkmenistan TKM Europe & Central Asia Upper middle income Uganda* UGA Sub-Saharan Africa Low income Ukraine UKR Europe & Central Asia Lower middle income United Arab Emirates ARE Middle East & North Africa High income United Kingdom GBR OECD High Income High income United States USA OECD High Income High income Uruguay URY Latin America & Caribbean High income Uzbekistan UZB Europe & Central Asia Lower middle income Vanuatu* VUT East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income Venezuela, RB VEN Latin America & Caribbean Upper middle income Vietnam VNM East Asia & Pacific Lower middle income West Bank and Gaza PSE Middle East & North Africa Lower middle income Yemen, Rep. * YEM Middle East & North Africa Lower middle income Zambia* ZMB Sub-Saharan Africa Lower middle income Zimbabwe* ZWE Sub-Saharan Africa Low income *Countries included in the electricity access analysis. Electricity access policies were not assessed in countries with less than 10% of the population and fewer than 1 million people lack access to electricity 131 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy E nergy E fficiency 133 Regulatory Indicators For Sustainable Energy RISE report, customized analyses, datasets, and library of legal and regulatory documents are available in: http://RISE.esmap.org