Building a P-E-T triangle

Donor/government intervention models can be characterized by the relative importance given to P, E and T aspects of the program.

Policy
  • Government pricing schemes
    • ie LPG (Ghana), graduated electricity tariffs (Philippines), etc.
  • Centralized energy distribution
    • ie grid extension (S. Africa), cookstove program (China)

Technology
  • R&D
    • ie ???
  • Skills training
    • ie MFP artisan training
  • Technology "transfer" (as opposed to diffusion)
    • ie solar lantern distribution (Philips Lighting)

Enterprise
  • Enterprise finance
    • ie GEF SGP, E+Co
  • Services
    • ie E+Co

Cross-cutting/complementary initiatives
  • Policy measures that encourage private sector participation
    • ie power sector deregulation, bureaucratic streamlining
  • Targeted financial support for enterprises
    • ie "smart" subsidies, tax holidays, low import tariffs on RE equipment
  • Others?

Several types of "triangles" are examined:
  • P > E + T ; E > P + T ; T > E + P (insert graphic)
    • Cannot form a triangle! The intervention is jeopardized by lack of supporting "sides."
    • examples
  • There is a triangle, but one side dominates. (insert graphic)
    • Impact (represented by the area) may be limited in terms of outreach, effectiveness, or financial sustainability
    • examples
  • The triangle, though not equilateral, is balanced. (insert graphic)
    • The area (impacts) is increased and the program is more stable having addressed all the relevant factors.
    • examples