Technology innovation systems and technology ...

Technological Forecasting & Social Change 90 (2015) 318–330

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

Technology innovation systems and technology diffusion: Adoption of bio-digestion in an emerging innovation system in Rwanda Aschalew D. Tigabu a,⁎, Frans Berkhout a, Pieter van Beukering a a

Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences (FALW), VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105 1081 HV, Amsterdam, Netherlands

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 16 November 2012 Received in revised form 26 August 2013 Accepted 7 October 2013 Available online 31 October 2013 Keywords: Technological innovation systems Innovation system dynamics Functions approach to innovation systems

a b s t r a c t Ensuring modern household energy services is a key focus for national governments of many developing countries and of international development agencies aiming to support sustainable development issues, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. While renewable energy options are considered to have social and environmental benefits, and despite substantial efforts to support the dissemination of new and improved renewable energy technologies, rates of diffusion remain extremely low. For instance, biogas digester penetration in Rwanda accounts for just 1% of national potential as of 2012. This is in part due to the lack of innovation systems, which foster technology diffusion. This paper analyzes the development of a technological innovation system (TIS) for bio-digestion in Rwanda between 2000 and 2011. We apply the so-called ‘functions approach’ in analyzing the emergence of a Rwandan biogas technological innovation system. We show the accumulation through time of TIS functions, linking these to the weak diffusion of bio-digesters. We argue that international development assistance should aim to support to the build-up of technological innovation systems in their support for energy technologies. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Improving access to modern energy services in developing countries, where over two and half billion people do not have access, has been a key aspect of sustainable development efforts [1]. Among the measures, promotion of renewable energy has often been considered as one of the desirable and practicable options [2,3]. This is partly because sustainable modern energy can be generated from locally-accessible and affordable natural resources through the use of renewable energy technologies [4]. Bio-digesters are among the renewable energy technologies that have been thought to serve as robust sources of modern energy to households and communities of rural areas in sub-Saharan Africa [5]. As a result, a range of efforts has been made to promote bio-digestion in the continent. Despite growing optimism and support for biogas use, the number of units installed in the region remains in the order of a few thousands [6,7]. Much of the introduction and diffusion process ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 20 59 98 38 13. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.D. Tigabu). 0040-1625/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.10.011

has been driven by public initiatives, including the dissemination of biogas plants free of cost of investment on the part of beneficiaries in several African countries [5]. These programs aimed to demonstrate the benefits and the technical viability of the technology, with the hope that such efforts would initiate a sustainable market in the long run [5]. However, this and other policy approaches have fallen short of inducing widespread adoption and a well-functioning market for biogas. Indeed, many newly installed digesters have been rapidly abandoned by users [6,8]. In general, “…biogas initiatives in Africa failed to grow from a product-based project approach implemented by a single actor towards a market-oriented program in which various actors co-operate on the basis of institutional arrangements” [8]. To explain this low level of market diffusion, we propose a systematic approach that takes into account the complex institutional context in which the technology is promoted, diffused and adopted. The established theoretical insight on innovation and diffusion processes suggests that the introduction and adoption of new technologiesare consequences of both group and

A.D. Tigabu et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 90 (2015) 318–330

individual efforts [9–11]. Put differently, the introduction, diffusion and use of new or improved technologies into new social and economic settings are results of the activities of actors who are influenced by specific institutional characteristics, such as government policies, market structure, user preferences, cultural values and social norms. This institutional context around a particular technology has been called the technological innovation system (TIS) [12–14]. A TIS is believed to influence the rate and scope of diffusion of a newly introduced technology into the society. More precisely, it is claimed that, a TIS influences the absorption of a new technology by firms and other actors by fulfilling key activities and processes that often meet the challenges associated with the new technology, such as high cost, lack of legitimacy and lack of awareness by the society [15,16]. Such activities and processes (of a TIS), for instance, have been suggested to provide guidance to actors towards the use of the new technology, resources for its diffusion and adoption, market space that protect it from the competition of existing and mature alternatives, and so on [13]. This is particularly relevant in developing countries where the capacity to absorb new products and processes is often lacking [17]. Understanding the key features, activities and processes of TISs is, therefore, a valuable basis to understand the diffusion of new and improved renewable energy technologies, including bio-digesters. Our knowledge about the characteristics and functioning of TISs, in the sub-Saharan African context, is limited. Therefore, the main goal of this paper is to understand how a technological innovation system for bio-digestion has emerged in Rwanda and how this emergent TIS has influenced the diffusion of biogas plants. Specifically, the paper deals with four questions: What are the functions of the bio-digestion technological innovation system in Rwanda? How have these functions emerged during the 2000–2010 period? What are the functional strengths and weaknesses of this innovation system? How have these TIS functions influenced the diffusion of biogas digestion technologies to households and institutional users? We begin by describing the functional dynamics of a biogas TIS over the 2000–2010 period. We observe that national policy and international development assistance have played key roles in the emergence and evolution of the Rwandan biogas TIS. We evaluate current strengths and weaknesses of the innovation system and identify blockages to the functioning as it relates to diffusion of the biogas technology. We argue that overcoming these blockages in the functioning of the TIS should improve the potential for biogas diffusion in Rwanda. The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, a concise introduction on the theory of the ‘functions approach to TIS’ is provided. Section 3 provides an explanation on the methodological approach followed. Section 4 offers the empirical results and discussions of the case studied. Section 5 concludes by summarizing the key findings and presenting some policy recommendations and implications. 2. Theory The promotion of sustainable technologies in lessdeveloped countries has long attracted the attention of donors, bi-lateral aid institutions and governments. The approaches pursued have largely seen technical and economic

319

characteristics of innovations as primary determinants of the penetration of new technologies in rural areas of developing countries [18]. Accordingly, innovations that are labor intensive, demand responsive, easily producible with locally available and renewable resources, affordable by the majority of rural population and easy to operate and maintain have been prioritized [18]. Based on this, donor sponsorship of rural energy projects, for the most part, has been related to promoting technologies that are potentially compatible to local techno-economic conditions—also called ‘appropriate technologies’ [18,19]. However, this approach has been ineffective in terms of development and penetration rates of technologies and the attainment of associated economic and social benefits. Innovation scholars have noted that while techno-economic aspects of an innovation are important, they only partly determine change and diffusion of technologies. Other factors, such as regulations, supporting actor structures and their activities, norms, values, preferences, market structure, can also induce or block the development, dissemination and utilization of innovations [20]. Indeed, Murphy [21] has stated that “many [energy] projects [in developing countries] fail not for technological or economic reasons but because the project designers either ignored or oversimplified the social and cultural relationships existing in the implementation context.” A broader approach that considers technical, institutional, social, economical and organizational factors is therefore needed. One perspective that can serve this purpose is the innovation systems framework. An innovation system can be defined as “[t]he network of institutions in the public and private sectors whose activities and interactions initiate, import, modify and diffuse new technologies” [22]. Having roots in institutional and evolutionary economic theories, the innovation systems approach argues that innovation is a socially-embedded process that involves interactive efforts [9,11]. The generation, market introduction and adoption of a new technology are inter-related processes, which are determined by individual-level efforts as well as the action and interaction of other market and non-market actors and institutions [23–26]. The literature provides several innovation system approaches delineated in different analytical units. For example, an innovation system can be national innovation system (NIS) when it is bounded by a nation-state [27]. There is also sectoral innovation system (SIS) when it is delineated for an economic sector [28]; and TIS when the actor–network and institution contour are drawn around a specific technology [13,16]. Bergek [29] suggested that if the goal is to comprehend the factors that contribute to or hinder the development and diffusion of sustainable technologies, it is the features and characteristics of the innovation systems that must be examined, identified and supported or corrected. To examine an innovation system, it is first important to specify the right level of analysis. Carlsson et al. [30] stated that this decision “… matters, for example, whether we are interested in a certain technology, product, set of related products, a competence bloc, a particular cluster of activities or firms, or the science and technology base generally—and for what geographic area, as well as for what time period.” There have also been concerns applying innovation systems approaches for empirical and policy purposes. For

320


example, the national innovation system (NIS) framework has been questioned for assuming that innovation systems are purely national in an increasingly integrated world in terms of trade connectivity and knowledge flows [13,31]. Conversely, the vast number of actors and institutions makes it complex to analyze the emergence and dynamics of national systems [13]. As a result, Carlsson et al. [30] and Balzat & Hanusch [32] noted, most studies that investigated NIS are static, resulting in limited insights in their evolutionary features. Hekkert et al. [13] and Balzat and Hanusch [32] have suggested that since insights in the dynamics of innovation processes are needed, a variant of the innovation system framework that allows for a dynamic analysis is preferred. A technology-based system has relatively fewer actors, institutions and relationships, since it is built around a particular technology. This is especially true when the focal technology is being introduced to a new setting. A TIS is defined by Carlsson and Stankiewicz [12] as: […] network(s) of agents interacting in a specific economic/industrial area under a particular institutional infrastructure or set of infrastructures and involved in the generation, diffusion, and utilization of technology. From this definition, it is apparent that a TIS has three structural elements—actors, networks and institutions. Actors are public or private, governmental or non-governmental organizations involved in the development, dissemination and adoption of a particular technology [33]. Networks are communication channels that facilitate the exchange of information and knowledge among actors [34]. Institutions are formal and informal rules that guide the actions and interactions of actors within the innovation system [35]. A fundamental insight within the TIS perspective of conceptualizing innovation processes is that a technological choice is determined by market and technical factors, as well as features of the institutional setting in which actors are operating [34]. A key theoretical development in the last decade or so is that a TIS performs certain functions, which are essential for achieving its ultimate goal, i.e. development, diffusion and utilization of a technology [10,25,26]. These system functions, simply termed as ‘functions’, are defined as “contributions” made by a structural constituent or set of constituents of a TIS so as to achieve its overall goal [25,26]. Scholars have argued that TIS functions can be mapped, described and analyzed, and by doing so insights on how TISs create the enabling environment can be generated [10,25,26]. The approach has been applied in a series of academic studies to reveal either the current status of innovation systems or their historical dynamics and their role on the development and diffusion of sustainable technologies in the western countries; see for example [14,15]. Example functions include: knowledge development, resource mobilization, guidance of search, and so on (see Hekkert et al. [13] and Bergek et al. [16] for lists of seven functions recently developed based on extensive review of existing innovation system literature). Existing functions have been applied and validated by empirical studies in Western countries. However, it is not clear whether similar or different set of functions are served by TIS in least-developed country contexts.

Functions are claimed to be interdependent. Their interaction can be circular, setting in motion of virtuous feedback loops, also called cumulative causations [10]. This leads to rapid buildup of TIS. Insights into the importance of cumulative causation have led researchers to focus empirical studies on identifying typologies of such interactions and mechanisms that lead to the development of positive interactions among functions in the recent years (see e.g. [36,37]). In this study, we map and analyze the dynamics of the biogas TIS in Rwanda by applying the functions approach to innovation systems. This is an attempt to apply the theory in the context of a least-developed country with the purpose of identifying the functions the biogas TIS serves, assessing the intensity of these functions and their influence on the diffusion of the technology as well as the determinants of the functioning of TIS. Ultimately, our aim is to generate insights into policy measures that can be taken to improve the diffusion of biogas in Rwanda (and some policy implications to less-developed countries in general) from the innovation systems perspective.

3. Methodology This study explores the functional evolution of the bio-digestion TIS in Rwanda by mapping the activities and processes related to the key players, their collaborations and institutions with a historical perspective. To achieve this, a longitudinal methodology—the so-called ‘process analysis’—is employed [38–40]. This methodology has been extensively applied to analyze TISs; see for an overview [36,37,41]. Central to process analysis is explaining social and economic processes and outcomes through the temporal sequence of activities and processes or events [38–40]. We gathered event data employing two strategies. The first was collecting primary data through interviews. We conducted interviews in two phases. The first phase involved a total of 31 key informants. The informants included actors, experts and decision makers of bio-digestion in Rwanda (see Table A2 in the Appendix for the number and categories of actors interviewed). We asked the informants to cite major historical activities that were undertaken by stakeholders (actors) and institutional changes around biogas technology in Rwanda. In addition to interviews, we collected and reviewed documents, such as reports, case studies and policy papers related to biogas promotion in Rwanda. Our aim was to collect activity or process data related to the emerging TIS and the adoption of bio-digesters. We sought to develop a complete picture of the major activities and processes contributed by actors and institutions involved in biogas in Rwanda. The data collection, for the most part, was an iterative process and it was ended when no more new relevant information on activities and processes became apparent. The data collected from various sources were compared (triangulated) to ensure reliability. Finally, the collected data were organized and refined based on which a historical description or narrative of activities and processes was generated. Subsequently, the chronological events were coded to TIS functions.1 Once the TIS functions were identified, second-phase interviews were carried out to map the perceived intensity of 1 Additional notes on how this coding is conducted are included in Section 4.2.1 for better clarity.


the functions and their blockages. This involved interviews with 11 experts.2 4. Results and discussion This section provides the results of the TIS case for bio-digestion in Rwanda. We begin with a technical overview of biogas technology and then provide a functional analysis of the biogas TIS. Finally, we present the results and discussions of the functional strengths and weaknesses of the TIS. 4.1. The bio-digester technology A biogas plant (bio-digester), in the Rwandan context, is a technology largely made from cement, brick, stone, sand and pipe structures that are buried under the ground. Inside this structure, wet organic matter is fermented in the absence of oxygen at a temperature greater than 35 °C. A bio-digester is, thus, an air-free chamber that creates an environment conducive for microbes to ferment organic materials, such as cattle dung and pig manure and, in that manner, produce a combustible gas called biogas [42,43]. Biogas is mainly composed of a methane gas [44]. Biogas can be used for cooking and lightning purposes, which is cleaner, more flexible and of higher quality as compared to traditional fuel alternatives, such as firewood and charcoal. The ultimate waste from biogas production called the bio-slurry can also be used as a high quality organic fertilizer to enhance agricultural productivity [42]. 4.2. A functional analysis of the Rwandan biogas TIS In the following, a historical overview of biogas promotion in Rwanda is given. The descriptions reflect the major activities and processes in relation to the diffusion of biogas from 2000– 2011. 4.2.1. Early functioning of the TIS and emergence of institutional direction The formal introduction of biogas in Rwanda was made by the Centre for Innovation and Technology Transfer (CITT) of the Kigali Institute of Science and Technology (KIST) in the late 1990s as a means of improving the daunting hygiene conditions of Rwandan prisons [45–47]. Overcrowded prisons were an outcome of 1994 Rwandan genocide [47]. In the early 2000, CITT was the only major actor contracting and installing large units of institutional bio-digesters. Later on CITT began training medium-sized private companies that were mainly involved in the building sector as part of the government's effort to introduce biogas technology to other potential sectors, such as schools. CITT trained companies who acted as sub-contractors, under close supervision of the institute [45,48]. Along with these private companies, the CITT began installing large biogas systems in schools and, as a result, new and additional links with other sectors and public organizations, such as the Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) began emerging [49]. The government's investment in institutional digesters 2 Additional clarifications are also included in Sections 4.3 and 4.4 to make the presentation clear. It is omitted here to avoid redundancy.

321

construction at schools was mainly undertaken to develop public awareness about biogas. Following the “positive experiences” of the institutional biogas installations [46], governmental and non-governmental organizations began to consider biogas as an alternative modern cooking and lightning fuel that could be promoted in rural areas. As a result, biogas began to be reflected in key development plans of the country [46,50]. In 2002, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), for instance, highlighted biogas promotion in the country as among the priority activities in Rwanda [49]. Additionally, the Rwandan Energy Policy Framework-2004 pointed out that the promotion of alternative fuels and efficient end-use energy technologies and indigenous innovations was vital for minimizing the rapid depletion of natural resources in the country [51]. This was in line with the ‘Vision 2020’ target of reducing the rate of the national wood energy use from 94% of the total population as of 2000 to 50% of the total population by the year 2020 [51]. A cabinet retreat in December 2004 also suggested that finding alternative ways of addressing the fuel-wood crisis in the country, by promoting alternative solutions, such as biogas, was crucial for sustainable development [49]. As a result of these developments, interest in developing a large-scale biogas program in the country, which not only met institutional demands but also household energy challenges, emerged. For instance, in December 2004, Sam Nkusi, the Minister of State for Energy and Communications, announced his country's desire to expand biogas use at the conference of ‘Energy for Development’ in Noordwijk, the Netherlands. This interest was also followed by Albert Butare, the Minister of State, who requested development assistance by clearly indicating the government's willingness and commitment to support biogas use in Rwanda [49]. This was in line with the increasing emphasis placed by the government on environmental protection and clean energy use. With respect to this, Dekelver et al. [49] stated that “… according to the Organic Law determining the modalities of protection, conservation and promotion of the environment in Rwanda (law N° 4/2005 of 08/04/2005), the State is obliged to promote the use of renewable energy and to discourage wastage of sources of energy in general and particularly that derived from wood.” The government's ‘zero grazing’ and ‘strict tree cutting monitoring’ policies and agricultural development programs were taken as basic foundations on which a large-scale biogas program can be implemented [52,53]. Because of the continued attention biogas was getting from the government, two technical training sessions were organized in Kigali, where Chinese experts offered technical courses. In total, 34 trainees participated and two biogas systems were installed [49]. At the same time, the institutional biogas installations in prisons and schools won the 2005 Global Ashden Environment Award as a result of its impressive outcomes in terms of reducing the firewood bills of prisons (by 30 to 50% over a period of roughly 2000 to 2004) and its role in tackling the prominent waste challenge of overcrowded prisons [46,47]. 4.2.2. Research activities on the feasibility of promoting biogas to households Following the Ashden award, a short fact finding mission was carried out by the Netherlands Development Organization

322


(SNV) in February, 2005 upon the request of the Rwandan Government. The mission investigated the possibilities for a large-scale biogas project and recommended a detailed feasibility study on undertaking a national biogas promotion program be carried out [54]. Consequently, the Ministry of Infrastructure (MININFRA) conducted a feasibility assessment in March 2005 with the support of SNV. The assessment focused on the opportunities, constraints, potential and viability of a market-oriented domestic biogas program development in Rwanda [55] The results of the study suggested that about 110,000 households could potentially adopt biogas technology [56]. It also confirmed that other infrastructures and institutional capacities are reasonably mature [50]. The feasibility study results led to a memorandum of understanding to be signed in October, 2005 between the MININFRA of the Republic of Rwanda (ROR) and the SNV, and the launch of a National Domestic Biogas Program (NDBP) in 2006 [55,57]. The program aimed at developing a commercial biogas sector with a target of installing 15,000 units of domestic digesters by the end of 2010 [49,56]. Existing development programs, such as the ‘one cow per family’ and ‘send a cow’ presented an environment conducive for the development and implementation of the program [53]. Whereas this program targeted domestic users, a significant number of institutional biogas systems were also planned to be installed in schools, prisons, hospitals and military bases [52]. Subsequently, an implementation plan was developed for the execution of NDBP and endorsed in September 2006 [58]. Following the endorsement of the implementation plan, MININFRA made available US $272,277 for the construction of 150 demonstration biogas plants in four potential districts [55]. In this pilot phase, training of masons, technicians and supervisors was conducted by a team of experts supported by the Biogas Sector Partnership Nepal (BSP-Nepal) and SNV advisors [48,52], and a number of demonstration digesters were constructed by CITT with technical and advisory assistance from SNV [56,59]. As part of its experience in biogas development in developing countries, SNV continued providing capacity development services to NDBP and to the partnering actors [60]. The pilot phase experiments with digesters were well received by households and gained attention from other potential actors, including banks, donors, civil societies and the private sector [56]. It also saw a growth of requests for biogas installations by households, which in turn, triggered the enthusiasm of other actors, such as private companies who could build and maintain digesters [56]. 4.2.3. Functional boom of the TIS—more activities to enhance biogas take up A special momentum for the countrywide biogas program was generated by the renewed inspiration gained during the “Biogas for Life” conference held in Kenya. The conference claimed that there is untapped potential for biogas development in the region and confirmed the rising interest in many African countries to take advantage of this resource [8]. In 2008, in addition to Rwandan government's finance, funding from the Netherlands Directorate-General of Development Cooperation (DGIS) was made available through the management of GTZ-Rwanda [48,52]. Public campaigns were

made using television and radio spots, signposts, billboards, handouts, posters, meetings with local authorities, and faceto-face discussions with households by field technicians and agricultural field extension officers [61]. These promotion activities led to the entry of a number of companies into the biogas business with high expectations of market benefits [62–64]. Training of masons was executed with the support of SNV/Rwanda and Rwanda Workforce Development Authority (WDA) at Integrated Polytechnic Region Center (IPRC) in Kigali [52] and a number of field technicians were mobilized to work at local levels (districts) [43]. The trainings have mainly focused on the theoretical and technical aspects of bio-digester construction and maintenance, and the social and economic aspects of marketing, awareness rising and after-sales services [65]. Similarly, training of trainers (TOT) on the construction of bio-digesters was conducted at Tumba College of Technology (TCT) in collaboration with MININFRA [66]. ‘Biogas Programme and Technology Promotion’ workshops were also organized by the District Biogas Programme Offices (DBPOs) [49]. By the end of 2008, over 390 domestic biogas systems had been installed through the help of the subsidies channeled from the DGIS/EnDev funding, managed in-country by GTZ [52]. Since the aim of the program was establishing a viable market for construction companies who are engaged in biogas installation in the long run, efforts were geared at strengthening the capacity of construction firms and guiding them to perform formal business activities through legal certification formalities. Companies were offered offices in the districts for their convenience. They were also encouraged to perform promotion activities. To do so, NDBP designed an innovative scheme of incentives named ‘promotion bonus’ where additional money is paid for companies that persuaded a larger number of households to install digesters [56,67]. In September 2008, the government began the formulation of a comprehensive biomass energy strategy (BEST) with the objective of “…increasing the sustainable supply of wood fuels; increasing energy use efficiency; promoting the production of alternative fuels; and developing institutional capacity to deal with biomass crisis in the short and medium term” [65]. The development of this strategy provided a profound legitimacy to biogas promotion in Rwanda, with the biogas program viewed as contributing to meeting the goals of the BEST [65]. Then again, as part of the efforts in adapting the technology to local conditions, the Rwandan Institut de Recherche Scientifique et Technologique (IRST) conducted experiments for developing new designs and modifying existing models. The institute built an experimental ‘fixed dome’ plant in which various feed materials were tested and research on the use of bio-slurry was carried out. This was in line with ‘the Republic of Rwanda's Policy on Science, Technology and Innovation’ on energy that includes specific strategies, such as undertaking “… research and analysis of waste and recycling options” for energy production [68]. The institute also constructed small-scale digesters in schools for the purpose of awareness building among school communities and spreading information to the larger public [49]. Besides the development and modifications of complementary appliances, such as biogas burners, market assessments and analysis of the impact of biogas use on the environment were carried out [47]. In March 2009, a forum of biogas companies was formed in an effort to advocate the challenges faced by the biogas


construction companies. The key objectives of this forum were undertaking advocacy about biogas, expanding linkages among the bio-energy actors, creating a platform where challenges are collectively advocated to the government and to the NDBP organizers [69]. The forum along with the program partners lobbied important sectors to contribute to the introduction and diffusion process. For instance, they approached Cimenterie du Rwanda (CIMERWA) requesting a fair price of cement for household clients wishing to install digesters. Similarly, they negotiated with SONATUBE, a gas pipe supplier, to cooperate with adopting farmers [65]. As such, the biogas forum was able to attain a 20% discount on the price of biogas accessories [69]. Though significantly delayed, in May 2009, Banque Populaire du Rwanda (BPR) began providing loans3 to households who wished to adopt a biogas plant, while meeting the eligibility requirements set by the bank and NDBP [52,56,65,70]. “This has created the opportunity for a substantial portion of households to be able and willing to invest in the [biogas] technology” [49]. By the mid 2009, the number of certified and operating construction companies had increased from the initial 10 to 36 [59]. However, some companies by then had also abandoned their construction works due to unmet expectations and the rising cost of construction raw materials [71]. Whereas the progress of the biogas program did not achieve planned levels, the government continued to support the introduction process [72,73]. The midterm review undertaken in 2009 by a team of SNV, GTZ and independent evaluators confirmed this by stating the program “… is guided by a dedicated government” [73]. This increasing enthusiasm of the government towards biogas influenced district authorities to include biogas targets in their annual performance contracts with the Government [60,62,65]. As part of the district performance agreement, about 1170 biogas installations were planned for 2009 [52]. This was also related to the enforcement of the ‘strict tree cutting and monitoring’ policy. This policy was among the driving forces for biogas use in Rwanda [60]. Lutheran World Federation (LWF)4 and Vi-Life5 were actively cooperating with NDBP and provided additional biogas subsidies amounting to RWF 300,000 and RWF 200,000, respectively, to their project beneficiaries [74,75]. As such, about 100 domestic digesters were constructed through the financial support of the LWF [72]. Vi-life also installed two demonstration plants in each sector6—for a total of 24 sectors—where it is operating [76]. By the end of 2010, the rate of installation of biogas digesters was significantly lower than the desired level due to the continued withdrawal of construction companies from the market after taking some part of their contractual money. 3

The loan disbursed by BPR for biogas was the money deposited by the Netherlands Development Finance Company (FMO) (about 400 million Euros) based on the agreement reached between FMO and PBR [70]. 4 The LWF is a global communion of Lutheran Christian churches. In 2009, the LWF signed an agreement with the Rwandan government to support financially the construction of 100 biogas systems in rural areas [74]. 5 Vi-Life is a Swedish funded cooperative organization. In Rwanda, it is mainly involved in agro-forestry with the goal of improving the livelihood of small-scale farmers. It also provides financial support to households, which have adopted its agro-forestry technologies, to install domestic biogas digesters [75]. 6 Rwanda has administrative divisions of five provinces (as of 2011). The provinces are further subdivided into 30 districts and the provinces into 416 sectors.

323

Table 1 Identified major activities and processes of the biogas innovation system and corresponding system functions. Identified processes

activities/ Description of the shared theme of the activities and processes

Entry of firms Withdrawal of firms Constructing bio-digesters Conducting feasibility studies/market assessments/pilots Conducting impact assessments Developing new designs/prototypes Adapting or modifying existing models Developing complementary technologies Training (of entrepreneurs, technicians, and so on) Conducting awareness campaigns Organizing conferences/ workshops/ seminars/meetings Demonstrations Setting targets Designing favorable regulations and policies Providing awards Providing directions/ showing interest Publicizing feasibility studies and pilots Sharing the cost of investment (subsidies) Public procurement Regulatory reform Standardization Providing financial incentives, grants Mobilizing human resources Providing credit services Funding diffusion programs Conducting advocacy activities/providing legitimacy (lobbying)

Activities that involve commercial practices, start ups or market exit around biogas Activities and processes that involve learning and generating knowledge about the socio-economic and technical aspects of biogas

System function Entrepreneurial activities

Knowledge development

Activities and processes that diffuse information and knowledge about biogas

Knowledge diffusion

Processes and activities that guide the expectations of actors about the future of biogas

Guidance of the search

Activities that create market for biogas by enhancing its competitiveness with existing alternatives

Market formation

Activities related to mobilizing financial, human and physical resources needed for biogas development and promotion

Resource mobilization

Activities that increase the legitimacy of biogas by the eyes of key actors and hence encourage them to support the promotion activities

Creation of Legitimacy/ Advocacy

This also caused challenges in providing sufficient promotion and after-sales services to biogas plant owners [43,77]. 4.2.4. The diffusion of bio-digesters Though early feasibility studies suggested that there were over 110,000 Rwandan households as potential adopters

324


(see also Table A1 in the Appendix for the analysis). For simplicity, we assume that a TIS function has emerged when a single activity or process corresponding to that function is observed. The Rwandan biogas TIS began functioning by serving three key functions: entrepreneurial activity, knowledge diffusion and guidance of search (Table 2). New functions were added in the period 2000 to 2008, showing an evolutionary build-up of the Rwandan biogas TIS. The function appearing most consistently through time is guidance of search, to which almost continuous attention was paid, with greater attention in the middle period of our observations (2004 to 2005). Knowledge diffusion, followed in time quite quickly by knowledge development shows moderate occurrence. Most entrepreneurial activities occur towards the end of the period, and correspond with the emergence of resource mobilization and market creation functions. A more or less complete set of functions can be observed by 2008. Their existence does not mean that they were mature and effective.

[49,78], only 1200 households had installed bio-digesters in February 2011 [60]. The NDBP target of installing 15,000 units by the end of 2010 had not been met. Additionally, by February 2011, 10 prisons (out of the 14 prisons in Rwanda) and over 25 schools were equipped with institutional bio-digesters—all for processing human waste [46,47]. Interviewed experts were asked to rate the level of diffusion as ‘low’, ‘medium’, ‘high’ and ‘very high’. 99% of the experts scored the diffusion of biogas plants in Rwanda as ‘low’ and ‘medium’. 4.2.5. The key functions of the TIS From the historical description provided above, key activities and processes over the 2000 to 2011 period were identified. The subsequent analytic procedure followed was to aggregate the activities and processes into common thematic categories. This was achieved by collecting related activities and processes into categories and generating a definition representing the shared theme for each category. For instance ‘entry of firms’, ‘withdrawal of firms’ and ‘constructing biodigesters’ were categorized under the theme defined as “activities that involve commercial practices, start ups or withdrawals around biogas” (Table 1). The next step was ascribing the categorical themes to the seven TIS functions. We found that the thematic categories, which aggregated observed activities and processes involved in the introduction and promotion of biogas in Rwanda matched well with the seven functions of TIS documented in the TIS literature; see Hekkert et al. [13]. These functions are entrepreneurial activities, knowledge development, and knowledge diffusion, guidance of the search, market formation, resource mobilization and creation of legitimacy/advocacy.

4.3. Functional strengths and weaknesses of the TIS Having described the emergence of TIS functions, we need to develop further insight into the functional strengths and weaknesses of the innovation system. That is how well the functions have been fulfilled so that they are creating incentives for biogas adoption and market development. This will help to identify the weak areas or gaps of the innovation system that may need policy attention. To do this we asked 11 experts in Rwanda to score the intensity of each TIS function (1 = low or weak, 2 = medium or fair, 3 = high or strong), using proxy for each function. The analyzed data is provided in Table 3. The table shows that guidance of search is viewed as the most ‘strongly’ fulfilled function— confirming our analysis of functions above—whereas the knowledge diffusion and resource mobilization functions are

4.2.6. The accumulation of TIS functions Ascribing the key activities and processes of the TIS to the key functions (based on the analysis presented above) over time reveals the emergence of functional patterns

Table 2 Evolution of functions in the Rwandan biogas TIS: 2000–2011. Around 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Years with event

Guidance of search

8

Entrepreneurial activities

4

Knowledge diffusion

3


2

Creation of legitimacy

2

Resource mobilisation

2

Market formation

1

Key Events/year 1 2 to 3 4 to 5


325

Table 3 Functional intensity of the biogas TIS in Rwanda based on experts' evaluation. System function

Measurement proxy

Intensity average (standard deviation)

Guidance of search Entrepreneurial activities Knowledge diffusion Knowledge development Creation of legitimacy/advocacy Resource mobilization Market formation

Expectations on biogas business growth Entrepreneurial intensity Intensity of promotion Intensity of research and development Intensity of advocacy activities Availability of resources needed for biogas promotion Sufficiency of market forming incentives

2.73(0.47) 1.36(0.5) 1.91(0.3) 1.27(0.47) 1.27(0.47) 2.00(0.45) 1.55(0.69)

‘fairly’ well served. The results also clearly show that other functions are ‘weakly’ served in relation to biogas promotion in Rwanda. The empirical observations documented in the scientific literature suggest that a well-functioning TIS is necessary for a newly introduced technology to be well diffused and adopted [14,15]. Thus, one can deduce that the TIS for biogas in Rwanda has an acceptable strength in serving the guidance of search and fairly fulfilling knowledge diffusion and resource mobilization functions, whereas it exhibits weaknesses in the functions knowledge development, creation of legitimacy, market formation, and entrepreneurial activities. We argue that these functional weaknesses partly explain the failure of NDBP to achieve its target of installing 15,000 biogas units at the end of 2010. This means that even though a functional boost was observed from 2007 onwards as part of the national biogas program, NDBP's diffusion target was too ambitious as compared to the observed functioning level of the innovation system. Important here is to explain these functional weaknesses and suggest ways for (future) interventions so that the diffusion of the technology would be improved. Table 4 The key blockages of the functions of biogas TIS in Rwanda. System functions

Blockages

Entrepreneurial activities

•Low level of entrepreneurial skill and attitude •Expectation crisis •Presence of other profitable and competitive industries •Limited amount of incentive, e.g. low profit margin •Lack of road infrastructure •Lack of sufficient trained man power/low level technical capacity of research institutes •Limited financial budget for research and development •Limited linkage between the private sector and public agencies •Strict monitoring in favor of a single model promotion •Lack of sufficient number of promotion experts •Lack of road and telecommunication infrastructure •Resource limitation of the government and partners (for increased subsidies) •Excessive focus at market and sense of ownership development •Strict bank procedures (of BPR)


Knowledge diffusion Market formation

Resource mobilization Advocacy

•Lack of strong unity among companies •Lack of flexibility of NDBP •Resource limitations of advocacy groups

4.4. Blockages to TIS functions Another key objective of this paper is to identify the obstacles to the functioning of the TIS that may be responsible for insufficiently developed functions. Table 4 presents the list of such blockages identified through a review of the literature on technology, innovation and policy in Rwanda, and through interviews with experts. In the following, some substantiation on the blockages of the functions is provided. The entrepreneurial activities function is blocked by at least four key factors. First, it is blocked by the low level of entrepreneurial skill and attitude prevailing in Rwanda [79]. In line with this, the interviewed actors repeatedly mentioned the fact that college graduates in Rwanda often seek white-collar jobs in government rather than seeking business opportunities for themselves. Second, this function has been compromised by the crisis of expectations in construction companies and burner producers alike. The ‘unmanaged’ promotion efforts of biogas program organizers (2004–6) resulted in the entry of enthusiastic masonry companies with high expectations of market benefits. Since the actual market did not meet expectations, many companies quickly withdraw from the market again. A third blocking element cited is the presence of other profitable and competitive industries, such as the housing construction sector, particularly for highlyqualified construction companies. This is also related to the fourth blockage, i.e. the limited market benefit or profit from the business. A forth blockage for entrepreneurial activities function is lack of road infrastructure in rural areas. Because of this, delivery and construction of the biogas plants in remote areas have been difficult. The knowledge development function appears to be blocked by four leading factors. First, it is blocked by the lack of sufficient trained personnel, which led technology research institutes, such as CITT, IRST, to have low technical capacity for high-level research around biogas. Second, knowledge development is obstructed by limited budgets (from governmental and non-governmental organizations). For example, the funding from the key donor, DGIS, for the most part, is used to support directly the running of the national biogas program, which aims at specific biogas plant installation targets, rather than funding research initiatives that can tailor the biogas system to local needs and conditions. Third, the build-up of knowledge capabilities is blocked by the limited linkage between the private sector and public agencies. In Rwanda, technology research centers and training institutes are marginal partners

326


of the biogas program. As noted above, the program has focused at fund acquisition and for this reason international donors and non-government organizations are considered as key stakeholders. Finally, the knowledge development function is blocked by the strict stance of the National Domestic Biogas Programme in favor of promotion of a single model of biogas digester. NDBP has adopted the Modified GGC Model from Nepal to be installed by construction companies without any modifications. This has reportedly affected possible tailoring and development activities on the part of companies. The knowledge diffusion function is also blocked by lack of sufficient number of promotion experts that could reach grassroots level. Indeed, due to the lack of sufficient expertise, field technicians reported that they are overburdened by promotion activities in addition to their formal duties, which are controlling and monitoring the quality of installed digesters. Knowledge diffusion is also blocked by inadequate road and telecommunication infrastructure. One of the key challenges for biogas business, revealed by construction companies, was a lack of key infrastructures, such as road networks. As such, it has blocked the campaigning effort of companies aiming at persuading remote clients who are located deep within villages. The market formation function is blocked by two key factors. First, this function is blocked by resource limitations of the program for increasing subsidies, which is the major request from construction companies. The second blockage is the major focus of the program on the market and a sense of ownership development, which, in turn, limits the amount of subsidy per digester. According to program experts, increased subsidies are thought to compromise the key goal of the project, which is developing a viable market sector in the long run. As such, subsidies are needed to be systematically limited and ultimately removed. Additionally, since continued management and supervision as well as operation and maintenance are needed for the sustainable functionality of installed digesters, the program intends to develop the sense of ownership by beneficiaries by limiting the subsidy provided and increasing the bearing of risk and participation of households The resource mobilization function is reported to be blocked by the strict procedures of the major lender, the BPR, which is characterized by complicated and lengthy loan processing. According to the banking rule of BPR, its 101 sub-branches in the country, where biogas loan clients are mainly clustered, cannot issue a loan of above RWF 100,000. Applications of eligible clients are processed by sub-branches and forwarded to main branches for decisions to be made. This takes a substantial amount of time and causes confusion and impatience on the part of households. Because of this, the amount of credit mobilized has not been at the level desired by NDBP [70]. Finally, the creation of legitimacy/advocacy function has been weakened by the lack of strong unity among companies. Many biogas company managers reported that disagreements on the advocacy agenda and misunderstandings are common among member company owners. This has inhibited the emergence of a common voice. Additionally, this function is blocked by lack of flexibility from the part of NDBP. The biogas companies' forum (BCF) does not have a legal status because of the NDBP's stance that it should be organized as a cooperative society rather than a forum. The Rwanda Association for

Sustainable Energy (ARED)7 is attempting to raise some of the key challenges that compromise biogas business with the government, academia, banks, NGOs and so on. However, such efforts are restricted by human and financial resource limitations. In the previous sections, the functional strengths and weaknesses of the TIS were reviewed. This section has further attempted to identify and assess some of the possible factors that explain the weaknesses in the emerging Rwandan biogas TIS. Relative to the established theoretical insights, our empirical observations suggest that in order to ensure the proper functioning and healthy development of the TIS for bio-digestion in Rwanda, policy measures should be targeted at strengthening the weak functions by eliminating the blockages. 5. Conclusions and policy implications This paper has provided an in-depth investigation of the development of a bio-digestion innovation system in Rwanda by focusing on four major questions: What are the functions of the bio-digestion technological innovation system in Rwanda? How have these functions emerged during the 2000–2010 period? What are the functional strengths and weaknesses of this innovation system? How have these TIS functions influenced the diffusion of biogas digestion technologies to households and institutional users? By doing so, it has revealed a dynamic and complex picture of an emergent innovation system in a less-developed country context, and identified weaknesses and gaps where systematic policy interventions may be needed to shape, strengthen and ensure effective functioning of the innovation system. Such steps are important preconditions for achieving widespread diffusion of bio-digesters in Rwanda and perhaps in (similar) other sub-Saharan African countries. Additionally, the paper has shown that the TIS approach as applied here is a promising analytical tool for analyzing the innovation processes of renewable energy technologies in developing countries. This becomes relevant when considering the fact that the approach has had a limited practical application in the global south so far. The historical development of the innovation system began with the introduction of bio-digestion to Rwandan prisons in the late 1990s in response to a mounting human waste crisis. Positive experiences from institutional digesters led governmental and non-governmental organizations to introduce domestic digesters to improve energy access, especially in rural areas. The historical overview of these phenomena over a period of a decade reveals that a large number of key activities and processes were fulfilled by the emergent network of actors and institutions around biogas that include: entry of companies, conducting baseline surveys, training entrepreneurs, conducting awareness campaigns, providing subsidies, and so on. Our analysis of these activities and processes suggests that all of them can be ascribed to 7 ARED is an association of over 50 private energy companies with the aim of educating, advocating and promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency especially in rural areas of Rwanda. BCF is a platform where biodigester construction companies exchange information pertaining to biogas business in Rwanda. It is organized with the objective of advocating business challenges as well as strengthening partnership between governmental and non-governmental actors in solving these challenges.


the seven system functions identified in the TIS literature. Additionally, we identified a particular pattern in which functions emerged that is characterized by consistent activity around the guidance of search and gradual accumulation of other functions. The pattern of accumulation of TIS functions raises a number of fundamental questions. How has the diffusion of biogas plants been influenced by the historical pattern of accumulation, phasing and balance of TIS functions reported here? Is the sequence in which functions emerged in the Rwandan biogas case in some senses ‘natural’ or is it specific? Is the rate of accumulation of functions and their balance through time specific to Rwanda and biogas, or do fixed patterns occur? Does knowledge diffusion generally come before the creation of innovation capabilities through knowledge development and entrepreneurial activities? We find that the emergence of TIS functions related to Rwandan biogas was greatly influenced by national public policy, by international development assistance and transnational flows of knowledge. We also observed that there is an interaction between the emergence of TIS functions and the emergence of policy. For instance, the CITT's early development of biogas plants in prisons led to political awareness and the development of early national policies to diffuse biogas more broadly. Could policy have developed differently and so influenced the emergence of TIS functions in a different way, or is there always a unique historical pattern of interaction at play? Perhaps more importantly for our purposes, what is the relationship between the pattern of emergence of TIS functions and the pattern of technology diffusion? Would a different pattern of accumulation of TIS functions have resulted in a slower or faster diffusion of biogas in Rwanda? While it is clear that institutional factors had an important role in influencing awareness and incentives around the adoption of biogas digesters in Rwanda, we are unable on the basis of a single case study to answer these more fundamental questions. Moreover, each case has a unique history in which serendipity and emergence of unexpected processes play a role. Finally, one may speculate that there is a ‘natural’ order for the emergence of different TIS functions in developing countries. But there are also patterns that are suggestive of opportunities for policymakers to intervene in the accumulation of the TIS. For instance, the apparent correlation that can be seen between entrepreneurial activities, resource mobilization and market creation suggests such an opportunity. The subsequent focus was on determining the strengths and weaknesses of the innovation system on the basis of the intensity of the functions it fulfils. Our analysis shows that the guidance of search function is a well addressed function, followed by knowledge diffusion and resource mobilization functions. Others were found to be least-well served. The final issue was to identify the blockages, which are responsible for the weakness of functions. Our analysis shows that most of the functions served by the biogas innovation system face obstacles. Based on this, we suggested that the identified blockages of each function need to be appropriately tackled through policy interventions to ensure that the innovation system becomes stronger and more effective in achieving technology diffusion. However, addressing blockages of every weak function simultaneously may not be feasible.

327

Thus, we recommend that priorities need to be set, addressing especially the blockages of the entrepreneurial activities and the market formation functions. This is because these are among the functions that play a pivotal role in the buildup and positive functional dynamics of an innovation system in its early stage of development [41]. Recent efforts, such as establishment of Business Development Centers by the Rwanda Development Board (RDB) to encourage business start ups and the launching of a new institute within the KIST— Technology and Business Incubation Facility (TBIF)—can be seen as examples of policy interventions to enhance entrepreneurial activities. On the other hand, premature withdrawal of firms may be avoided by reducing unnecessary expectations of firms. This can be done by providing better information on the benefits, costs and risks in a new sector. The blockages that hinder the market formation function also warrant early attention. Thus, avoiding the blockages for current market-forming arrangements and creating more innovative incentives are necessary to ensure the development of a self-sustained and fully functioning market for bio-digestion in Rwanda. More generally, however, the TIS framework as applied in this article has several implications for policymaking with respect to supporting the deployment and diffusion of sustainable technologies in less-developed countries. We highlight two of the most important points. First, it implies that systematic and focused support targeting on the determinants of innovation goes well beyond addressing the often-stressed technological and economic factors of past approaches. Determinants of diffusion and adoption of new technologies also include organizational, institutional and social elements that block the development of powerful activities, processes and institutional structures. This is important since the major barriers of adoption of technologies in less-developed countries are related to lack of enabling business environment and these can be addressed by multi-dimensional functions proposed by the functions approach to TIS. Second, it implies that a systemic and evolutionary perspective that captures the complexities of innovation processes and activities is more beneficial than the linear interventions and conceptualizations of innovation processes prevalent in less-developed countries. The systemic conceptualization allows going beyond identifying technologies relevant to local users' contexts by development agents to a collaborative approach where the focus is empowering and capacitating market actors to make their own choices and decisions with regard to new technologies and ultimately enable them to influence institutional environments in favor of them. Therefore, development assistance to the promotion of sustainable technologies in less-developed countries needs to be redirected to focus on addressing weak functions and their blockages and, by doing so, facilitate the buildup of TISs, which nurture the diffusion of new technologies. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for useful comments, which have significantly improved the quality of this paper. We are also grateful for the financial support from the Department of Research and Communication (DCO) of the Ministry of Development Cooperation (DGIS).

328

A.D. Tigabu et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 90 (2015) 318–330 Table A1 (continued)

Appendix A

Table A1 Events and corresponding functions of the Rwandan TIS based on the historical description provided in Section 4.2 and the analysis made in Section 4.2.1. Year

Incident

Function

Around 2000 2000

Companies were trained by CITT.

Knowledge diffusion Guidance of search

Around 2000 Around 2000 2002

2004

2004

2004

2004

2005

Around 2005 2005 2005 2005

2005

2005 2005 2006

2006 2006 2006

2007

Vision 2020 targeted at reducing the rate of the national wood energy use from 94 to 50% by the year 2020. CITT and companies installed biogas systems in schools. Installations at schools served as demonstration plants. The PRSP reflected biogas as among the alternatives that are need to be promoted in Rwanda. Rwandan Energy Policy Framework reflected the need for promoting alternative energy sources, including biogas, as means of lowering biomass resource depletion. A cabinet retreat suggested the need for tackling the fuel-wood crisis by promoting alternative solutions, such as biogas. Mr. Sam Nkusi, the former Minister of State for Energy and Communications, explained Rwanda's desire for large-scale biogas introduction in Noordwijk, the Netherlands. Mr. Albert Butare, the Minister of State, explained government's willingness and commitment to promote biogas use in Rwanda. The State was obliged to promote the use of renewable energy and to discourage wastage of sources of energy in general and particularly that derived from wood by the law N° 4/2005 of 08/04/2005. Technical trainings were offered by Chinese experts. Institutional installations won the 2005 global Ashden environment award. SNV conducted a fact finding mission on domestic biogas introduction MININFRA and SNV conducted feasibility assessment for domestic digesters promotion. Results of feasibility study indicated the presence of 110,000 households that can potentially buy domestic biogas plants. 15,000 units of digesters were targeted to be installed by NDBP. A significant number of institutional digesters were planned to be installed. MININFRA made available US $272,277 for constructing 150 demonstration biogas plants in four districts. Masons and supervisors were trained by experts from BSP-Nepal. A number of demonstration digesters were constructed. Rwanda's Policy on Science, Technology and Innovation' on energy included strategies, such as undertaking “research and analysis of waste and recycling options” for energy production that includes biogas. Pilot phase experimentations gained attention from potential actors, such as donors.

Entrepreneurial activities Knowledge diffusion Guidance of search Guidance of search

Year

Incident

2008

Funding from the DGIS was made available.

2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008

2008 2008 2008 2008

Guidance of search

2008

Guidance of search

2008 2008

Guidance of search

2009 2009

Guidance of search

2009 2009 2009

Knowledge diffusion Guidance of search Knowledge development Knowledge development

2009 2010

Function

Resource mobilization Public campaigning using mass media Knowledge outlets began to be undertaken diffusion A number of companies joined the business. Entrepreneurial activity Technicians were mobilized. Resource mobilizations Biogas Programme and Technology Knowledge Promotion' workshops were organized. diffusion Subsidies were channeled. Market formation Market Promotion bonus was also arranged to formation encourage companies persuade more number of households. BEST began to be formulated. Guidance of search IRST conducted experiments of developing Knowledge new designs of digesters. development IRST conducted experimentations on Knowledge modifying existing designs. development IRST installed demonstration digesters at Knowledge schools. diffusion Knowledge IRST conducted research on development development and modification of complimentary appliances. Market assessments pertaining to biogas Knowledge were carried out. development Impact assessments on biogas use were Knowledge carried out. development Biogas forum attained 20% discount on the Advocacy price of biogas accessories through lobbying. BPR began providing biogas loans to Resource households. mobilization Companies entered and their number Entrepreneurial increased from 10 to 36. activities Companies began withdrawing. Entrepreneurial activities District authorities began to include biogas Guidance of installation targets within their performance search contracts. WLF and Vi-Life provided additional Resource subsidies to their project beneficiaries. mobilization Entrepreneurial Construction companies continue activities withdrawing after receiving part of their contractual money.

Guidance of search Guidance of search Guidance of search Resource mobilization Knowledge diffusion Knowledge diffusion Guidance of search

Guidance of search

Table A.2 Number of interviewees under key categories of actors within the Rwandan bio-digestion innovation system. Actor category

Number of interviewees

Government agency Non-governmental organization Academic and research institute Financial institute Enterprise (company) Technology user Total

6 4 2 1 12 6 31


References [29] [1] T. Takama, F. Lambe, F. Johnson, A. Arvidson, B. Atanassov, M. Debebe, L. Nilsson, P. Tella, S. Tsephel, Will African consumers buy cleaner fuels and stoves? A household energy economic analysis model for the market introduction of bio-ethanol cooking stoves in Ethiopia, Tanzania and Mozambique, research report, Stockholm Environmental Institute, 2011. [2] M. Qurashi, T. Hussain, Renewable Energy Technologies for Developing Countries Now to 2030, Publications of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization –ISESCO, 2005. (1426 A.H./2005A.D). [3] A. Chaurey, M. Ranganathan, P. Mohanty, Electricity access for geographically disadvantaged rural communities—technology and policy insights, Energy Policy 32 (2004) 1693–1705. [4] REN21, Energy for Development: The Potential Role of Renewable Energy in Meeting the Millennium Development Goals, 2010. [5] J. Rogers, R. Hansen, S. Graham, Innovation in Rural Energy Delivery: Accelerating Energy Access Through SMEs, Report, Navigant Consulting and Soluz USA, Massachusetts, 2011. [6] Africa Biogas Initiative, Potential for Growth and Models for Commercialization: Annotated Bibliography, Winrock International, 2007. [7] A. Mshandete, W. Parawira, Biogas technology research in selected sub-Saharan African countries—a review, Afr. J. Biotechnol. 8 (2009) 116–125. [8] W. Nes, T. Nhete, Biogas for Better Life, An African initiative, Report, 2007. [9] A. Saxenian, Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1994. [10] S. Jacobsson, A. Bergek, Transforming the energy sector: the evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology, Ind. Corp. Chang. 13 (5) (2004) 815–849. [11] C. Edquist, B. Johnson, Institutions and organizations in systems of innovation, in: C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of Innovation—Technologies, Institutions and Organizations Institutions and Organizations in Systems of Innovation, Pinter, London, 1997. [12] B. Carlsson, R. Stankiewicz, On the nature, function, and composition of technological systems, J. Evol. Econ. 1 (1991) 93–118. [13] M.P. Hekkert, R.A.A. Suurs, S.O. Negro, S. Kuhlmann, R.E.H.M. Smits, Functions of innovation systems: a new approach for analyzing technological change, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 74 (4) (2007) 413–432. [14] S.O. Negro, M.P. Hekkert, R.E. Smits, Explaining the failure of the Dutch innovation system for biomass digestion—a functional analysis, Energy Policy 35 (2) (2007) 925–938. [15] S.O. Negro, R.A.A. Suurs, M.P. Hekkert, The bumpy road of biomass gasification in the Netherlands: explaining the rise and fall of an emerging innovation system, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 75 (1) (2008) 57–77. [16] A. Bergek, S. Jacobsson, B. Carlsson, S. Lindmark, A. Rickne, Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis, Res. Policy 37 (3) (2008) 407–429. [17] R. Nelson, H. Pack, The Asian miracle and modern growth theory, Econ. J. 109 (1999) 416–436. [18] A. Akubue, Appropriate technology for socioeconomic development in third world countries, J. Technol. Stud. 26 (1) (2000) 33–43. [19] E. Martinot, A. Chaurey, D. Lew, J.R. Moreira, N. Wamukonya, Renewable energy markets in developing countries, Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 27 (1) (2002) 309–348. [20] F. Geels, Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi level perspective and a case study, Res. Policy 31 (2002) 1257–1274. [21] J.T. Murphy, Making the energy transition in rural east Africa: is leapfrogging an alternative? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 68 (2) (2001) 173–193. [22] C. Freeman, Technology and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan, Pinter, London, 1987. [23] S. Jacobsson, A. Johnson, The diffusion of renewable energy technology: an analytical framework and key issues for research, Energy Policy 28 (2000) 625–640. [24] C. Edquist, Systems of innovation: perspectives and challenges, in: J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery, R.R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004. [25] A. Johnson, Functions in innovation system approaches, Unpublished Working Paper, Department of Industrial Dynamics, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, 1998. [26] S. Jacobsson, The emergence and troubled growth of a “biopower” innovation system in Sweden, Energy Policy 36 (4) (2008) 1491–1508. [27] B.-Å. Lundvall, B. Johnson, E.S. Andersen, B. Dalum, National systems of production, innovation and competence building, Res. Policy 31 (2) (2002) 213–231. [28] S. Breslchi, F. Malerba, Sectoral innovation systems: technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial Boundaries, in: C.

[30] [31] [32] [33]

[34]

[35] [36]

[37]

[38]

[39] [40]

[41]

[42] [43] [44]

[45] [46] [47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57]

[58]

[59]

329

Edquist (Ed.), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, Pinter Publishers, London, 1997, pp. 130–156. A. Bergek, Shaping and Exploiting Technological Opportunities: The Case of Renewable Energy Technology in Sweden, Department of Industrial Dynamics, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden, 2002. B. Carlsson, S. Jacobsson, M. Holmén, A. Rickne, Innovation systems: analytical and methodological issues, Res. Policy 31 (2002) 233–245. L. Soete, B. Verspagen, B. ter Weel, Systems of Innovation, CPB Discussion Paper, 2010. M. Balzat, H. Hanusch, Recent trends in the research on national innovation systems, J. Evol. Econ. 14 (2) (2004) 197–210. R.A.A. Suurs, Motors of Sustainable Innovation: Towards a Theory on the Dynamics of Technological Innovation Systems, Utrecht University, Utrecht, 2008. S. Jacobsson, A. Bergek, A Framework for Guiding Policy Makers Intervening in Emerging Innovation Systems in “Catching Up” Countries, RIDE/IMIT Working Paper No 84426-013, 2005, p. 84426. D. North, Institutions, J. Econ. Perspect. 5 (1991) 97–112. R.A.A. Suurs, M.P. Hekkert, R.E.H.M. Smits, Understanding the build-up of a technological innovation system around hydrogen and fuel cell technologies, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 34 (24) (2009) 9639–9654. R.A.A. Suurs, M.P. Hekkert, Cumulative causation in the formation of a technological innovation system: the case of biofuels in the Netherlands, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 76 (8) (2009) 1003–1020. A.H. Van de Ven, M.S. Poole, Methods for studying innovation development in the Minnesota Innovation Research Program, Organ. Sci. 1 (1990) 313–335. A. Abbot, Sequence analysis: new methods for old ideas, Annu. Rev. Soc. 21 (1995) 93–113. A.H. Van de Ven, G.P. Huber, Longitudinal field research methods for studying processes of organizational change, Organ. Sci. 1 (1991) 213–219. M.P. Hekkert, S.O. Negro, Functions of innovation systems as a framework to understand sustainable technological change: empirical evidence for earlier claims, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 76 (4) (2009) 584–594. NDBP (National Domestic Biogas Programme), Modified GGC Model Biogas Plant for Rwanda, Construction Manual, Kigali, Rwanda, 2007. C. Murinda, Interview with Cyimana Murinda, Senior Biogas Technician, MININFRA, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. A. Karki, J. Shrestha, S. Bajgain, Biogas: as Renewable Source of Energy in Nepal Theory and Development, BSP-Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal, 2005. A. Munyehirwe, P. Kabanda, Performance Assessment of Institutional Biogas Systems in Rwanda, Report, Kigali, Rwanda, 2008. J. Uwizeye, Interview with Jean Claude Uwizeye, Head of Institutional Biogas, MININFRA, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. A. Rwigema, Interview with Dr. Anastase Rwigema, Board of Deputy Director Center for Innovation and Technology transfer (CITT), KIST, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. A. Ndahimana, D. Dekelver, The Rwandan National Domestic Biogas Programme: Creating a Cheaper, Eco-Friendly Energy Source, SNV Rwanda Biogas Case, Kigali, Rwanda, 2007. G. Dekelver, A. Ndahimana, S. Ruzigana, Implementation Plan: National Programme on Domestic Biogas in Rwanda, SNV/Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda, 2006. S. Ruzigana, Interview with Silas Ruzigna, Energy Expert in Charge of Biomass and Alternatives and Member of National Steering on Climate Change, MININFRA, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. ROR (Republic of Rwanda), Energy Policy, Ministry of Infrastructure, Republic of Rwanda (ROR), Kigali, Rwanda, 2004. NDBP (National Domestic Biogas Programme), Rwanda National Domestic Biogas Programme, Midterm review, Kigali, Rwanda, 2009. D. Owekisa, Financing Domestic Biogas in Rwanda, SNV-Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda, 2008. J. Lam, Report on the First Biogas Visit SNV, 2005. W. Nes, Investigation on the National Domestic Biogas Programme in Rwanda, Final report, Kigali, Rwanda, 2007. SNV (Netherlands Development Organization), Rwanda, Financing Domestic Biogas in Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. MININFRA (Ministry of Infrastructure), GTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft f für Technische Zusammenarbeit), National Domestic Programme Rwanda Baseline Study Report, 2007. MININFRA (Ministry of Infrastructure), Endorsement of the implementation plan of the National Domestic Biogas Plan in Rwanda Minister of State in Charge of Energy and Communications, Kigali, Rwanda, 2006. O. Kibazohi, Validation of baseline and methodology, and verification of the completed digesters in 2008–2009 of the National Domestic

330

[60] [61]

[62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68]

[69]

[70] [71]

A.D. Tigabu et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 90 (2015) 318–330 Biogas Programme (NDBP) of Rwanda, Final report, Department of Chemical and Process Engineering University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, 2010. A. Ndahimana, Interview with Anaclet Ndahimana, Renewable Energy Advisor, SNV Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. GTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit), SNV (Netherlands Development Organization), Current Status of the National Domestic Biogas Programme, Presented to the GTZ/SNV evaluation mission, 2010. N. Pierre, Interview with Nzaramba Jean Pierre, Manager, RCC, Biogas Company, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. M. Theogene, Interview with Musoni Theogene, Manager, REC, Biogas Company, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. B. Innocent, Interview Bizimungu Innocent, Manager, ECOBI, Biogas Company, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. SNV (Netherlands Development Organization), SNV Practices: Developing Capacities in Rwanda, Case studies, 2009. MININFRA (Ministry of Infrastructure), Bi-Annual Report, Kigali, Rwanda, 2008. B. Emmanuel, Interview with Bizimana Ruti Emmanuel, Owner of MPS Biogas Company, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. UNU-IAS, MSTSR (Republic of Rwanda's Ministry of Science, Technology and Scientific Research), The Republic of Rwanda Policy on Science, Technology and Innovation, The Republic of Rwanda Ministry in the President's Office in Charge of Science, Technology and Scientific Research, Kigali, Rwanda2006. E. Shingiro, Interview with Ehudi Shingiro, Chairman of Biogas Companies Forum (BCF) and Managing Director of ACSES International, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. E. Mutabazi, Interview with Elie Mutabazi, Biogas Programme Lending Manager, BPR, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. K. Timothy, Interview with Kayumba Timothy, Coordinator of NDBP, MININFRA, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011.

[72] MININFRA (Ministry of Infrastructure), Bi-Annual Report, Kigali, Rwanda, 2009. [73] SNV (Netherlands Development Organization), Domestic Biogas Newsletter: Issue, 22010. [74] F. Heegde, A. Michel, M. Raats, National Domestic Biogas Programme (NDBP) Mission report, Kigali, 2010. [75] F. Rwamuhizi, Interview with Faustin Rwamuhizi, Dpr. and Head of Environment and Climate change, Vi-Life, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. [76] J. Ntahompasaze, Interview with Jean Baptiste Ntahompasaze, Sustainable Land Management and Energy Officer, Vi-Life, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. [77] U. Naila, Interview with Umubyeyi Naila, Ag. Head, Department of Technology Transfer, Center for Innovation and Technology Transfer (CITT), KIST, Kigali, Rwanda, 2011. [78] D. Nkezabahizi, Principaux résultats du module agricole attaché au recensement general de la population et de l’habitat, MINAGRI, Kigali, Rwanda, 2002. [79] R. Aggarwal, Director, Center for Innovation and Technology transfer (CITT), Kigali Institute for Science and Technology (KIST), Personal communication, 2011. Aschalew Demeke Tigabu is a PhD student studying innovation systems of renewable energy technologies in East Africa at the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM) of the VU University in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Frans Berkhout is a Professor of Innovation and Sustainability, and Director of the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM) and the Amsterdam Global Change Institute, both at the VU University in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Pieter van Beukering is an Associate Professor at the Institute for environmental Studies (IVM), VU University in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.