Imagine planning a big event, like a community festival. You need to think about the budget, what activities people will enjoy, and how to make sure everyone feels included. Now, picture planning how a whole country will get its energy—like switching from coal to solar power. It’s a similar challenge, but on a much bigger scale. Traditionally, energy planning focuses mostly on numbers: how much energy is needed, how much it costs, and how much pollution it creates. But just like that festival, there’s more to it than just the numbers. We also need to consider what people from the community want to do there, what groups with certain interests might want, and whether the festival set-up can handle unexpected challenges, like bad weather or an dip in the economy.
A new study published in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (2025), written by Neve Fields, Alycia Leonard, Martin Mutembei, Anne Nganga, Leigh Martindale, Marissa Bergman, Mwansa Kaoma, Mark Howells and Ed Brown offers a fresh approach to planning energy transitions, especially for developing countries. This method blends the usual number-crunching with insights from people’s lives, opinions, and local challenges. It’s designed to make energy planning more practical, fair, and successful. We use the term GESI or GEDSI to explicitly refer to the need to better consider Gender, Equity, Disability and Social Inclusion. Let’s break it down and see why it matters for government officials, funders, and investors.
THE PROBLEM WITH OLD-SCHOOL ENERGY PLANNING
For years, energy planning has relied on models—think of them as advanced computer programmes—that predict things like how much energy a country needs or which technologies to use. These models are great for the technical stuff, but they often miss the bigger picture:
What do people think? If a community doesn’t like a new energy project, it might flop, even if the numbers add up. Who benefits? Does the plan help everyone, or just some groups? What about older people or people with a disability who might have different energy needs? What if things go wrong? Can the plan survive a natural disaster or a sudden change in funding? In many developing countries, skipping these questions can lead to energy projects that fail, waste money, or leave some people behind. This new approach fixes that by adding these “human” factors into the planning process.
A SMARTER WAY TO PLAN: FOUR SIMPLE STEPS
The study suggests a four-step process to make energy planning more inclusive and effective. Here’s how it works in plain language:
Step 1: Listen First (Pre-Modelling) Before crunching numbers, talk to the people who live there—local leaders, citizens, and experts. What do they need? What worries them? Gather information about real life, like how people use energy or what challenges they face. This could mean chatting with communities or running surveys.
Step 2: Tell Stories (Storytelling and Narratives) Use what people say to create “stories” about the future. For example, one story might imagine everyone getting clean energy, while another shows what happens if a storm knocks out power. These stories make sure the plan reflects real possibilities, not just perfect scenarios.
Step 3: Build a Better Model (The Model) Tweak the computer model to include: FAIRNESS (Does it help everyone and not just a few?), STRENGTH (Can it handle tough times like extreme weather?), FUTURE-PROOFING (Can it adapt to climate change?). Instead of just picking the cheapest option, the model looks for what’s best for people and the planet too.
Step 4: Share and Teach (Beyond the Model) Explain the results so everyone—not just experts—can understand them. Teach local teams how to use these tools, so they can keep improving plans long after the project ends. Think of it like planning that festival: you ask people what they want, plan for rain, and make sure everyone can join in—you don’t just focus on the cost of the food.
WHY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS SHOULD TAKE NOTE
If you’re a government official, your job is to make energy plans that work for your country. Here’s how this approach helps:
Plans People Support: By listening to communities, you can create policies they’ll back, reducing pushback or failures.
Target What Matters: If rural areas need electricity for schools and health centres, or women need safer cooking options, this method helps you focus there—not just on big cities or generic fixes.
Save Money: Realistic plans that avoid mistakes mean you spend public funds wisely.
Hit Global Targets: Many countries promise to cut pollution and provide clean energy for all. This method helps you deliver on those goals while meeting local needs.
Imagine updating your planning process to include these steps—it could mean more successful projects and happier citizens.
WHY FUNDERS SHOULD BE INTERESTED
If you’re a funder – like an aid agency or international group – and you give money and support to energy projects. Here’s what you will gain:
Real Impact: By understanding local needs, your programmes can make a true difference, not just look good in reports.
Lasting Change: Teaching local teams to use these tools means your work keeps going even after you’re done.
Better Reports: You often need to show how your money helped. This method gives you solid data—like how many people were involved or how projects adapted to challenges—to share with your stakeholders.
Updating your technical assistance (TA) programmes with these ideas could make your funding go further and prove its worth.
WHY INVESTORS SHOULD GET ON BOARD
If you’re an investor—especially one offering lower-cost loans for social good—you want projects that succeed and do right by people. Here’s the payoff:
Safer Bets: Plans that consider social and political factors are less likely to fail, protecting your investment.
ESG Wins: ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) rules matter to you. This approach boosts the “social” and “governance” parts—like including communities and ensuring fairness—making your projects shine.
Rich Data: You can show real-world impacts, like how a project helped a village or cut pollution, with detailed evidence from this method.
Adding these considerations to your analytics could make your investments smarter and more responsible.
A Real-Life Example: Cleaner Cooking
Let’s see this in action. In many developing countries, people cook with wood or charcoal, which harms their health, their children’s health and the environment. An old-school model might say, “Switch everyone to electric stoves.” But what if:
- People can’t afford them?
- The power grid keeps failing?
- They prefer cooking with fire for cultural reasons?
This new approach starts by asking communities what they need. It might suggest cleaner cookstoves that use less wood or small solar systems for unreliable areas. It also checks that both men and women are happy about it – since women often cook – and that the plan holds up during blackouts. That’s a win for everyone.
THE BIG PICTURE
Energy planning isn’t just about numbers—it’s about people, fairness, and the future. This new method offers a practical way to make energy transitions work better, especially in developing countries. For government officials, it’s about smarter policies that help their people prosper. For funders, it’s about bigger impact. For investors, it’s about safer, more meaningful returns.
If you’re in government, funding, or investing, this could change how you work. It’s time to move past outdated methods and plan energy in a way that reflects your world.
WANT TO DIG DEEPER? READ the full free gold open access peer-reviewed study here or CONNECT with our CCG energy planning experts to see how this can support your projects.