Combined Methods Case study: Yemen Energy Reform PSIA

Stakeholder development and capacity building were central to the PSIA process and extensive consultations with Government and non-Government representatives took place during the course of the ESMAP study. The study was initiated with a workshop composed of 20 experts from key ministries, women's groups and academia. This workshop endorsed the scope of the study and the analytical approach.  After the household survey fieldwork was completed the team conducted a meeting with representative from ministries, local government and energy companies where the work program and the framework for the economic and financial analysis were presented. Draft findings were discussed at a later stage with the group. The team presented its findings in multiple group meetings including a stakeholder analysis meeting with government and civil society (sponsored by DFID) and a meeting with government and civil society representatives sponsored and chaired by the PRSP monitoring unit to discuss the distributional impacts of energy subsidies. The final study was presented at various meetings in order to derive concrete policy recommendations that could be included in the study.

The PSIA adopted a sequenced mixed-method approach in which participatory assessment informed the design of a household survey and complemented the quantitative analysis.   The qualitative analysis of energy use among poor and middle-income communities provided an understanding of how and from what sources the poor obtained their energy and their strategies for obtaining it under shifting economic conditions, and identified the forms of energy that would improve their well-being. A household energy survey was built using this information and distributional analysis predicted the nature and extent of distributional change. The final ESMAP report, Energy Access for Poverty Reduction in Yemen, was a synthesis report using data from the qualitative and quantitative field research in the exploration of the social and economic implications of various policy options. The synthesis of the two methods was not merely in the report's conclusion but the qualitative and quantitative methods complemented and informed each other throughout the report according to the different topics covered.

The Participatory Rapid Assessment (PRA) provided qualitative and quantitative information on the ways in which people use energy and cope with energy poverty and was carried out in the four Governorates where most of the poor are concentrated Taiz, Ibb, Sana'a and Hodeida (57% of the nation's poor are found in these Governorates, and the Governorates with the highest incidence of poverty are Taiz and Ibb). The PRA allowed direct consultation with communities in nine locations to understand patterns of energy use. Twelve teams composed of four researchers each conducted gender segregated focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with key men and women informants such as sheiks, community leaders, elected representatives, shop owners, energy suppliers, teachers and health workers. Geographic and poverty mapping exercise, stakeholder analysis and participant observation was carried out. The approach allowed researchers to observe energy use behavior and to seek explanation from users of the choices they have with regard to energy sources and service providers. It explored the attitudes of users on the choices they face, their level of satisfaction with the energy services they can obtain and what they would like to see changed. Energy use in community institutions such as health centers, schools and municipal offices was also investigated. The PRA was conducted first in order to inform the design of the household survey questionnaire for the energy survey. The Household Energy Survey provided quantifiable data on household electricity and the different energy forms, their supply characteristics prices paid, and their end uses from a sample of 3,540 households. Economic and financial analysis then provided a combined cost benefit, financial, macroeconomic and policy linkages report using the results of the household and supply surveys. It was focused on the distributional impact of energy policies such as petroleum product subsidies.

The PRA yielded many important insights into the energy use among the poor and the major findings have been highlighted below.

Only three of the twelve localities in the research sample were connected to grid electricity. Primary uses of electricity are for lighting, television and some refrigeration by well-off and poor households. In the lowlands and coastal areas, it is also important for cooling (ventilation or air conditioning) during the hot seasons. The very poor primarily use electricity for lighting.

The connection fees for electricity are 10,000 YR in rural areas and 25,000 YR in urban areas. Most poor and very poor households in urban and rural areas alike regard the initial cost of electricity connections as a significant obstacle to access. The PRA reported that to avoid paying high connection fees, some poor households in urban areas connect illegally to a neighbor's line. In some cases households make illegal direct connections to the power lines. In part, those who connect illegally do so to avoid paying the connection charges. Respondents suggested smoothing payments throughout the year to lower the costs.

Very poor households in rural areas are most dependent on wood for cooking all meals (rice, stews, tea). Urban households use significantly less wood than rural families. The poorer the household, the less the number of meals they will consume and the smaller the portions of energy consumed. The very poor in rural areas cook on average once a day. The PRA also found that women and girls are more involved than men and boys in wood and other biomass collection. In rural areas, regardless of social category, women and especially girls 10 years and older are responsible for collecting wood.  Respondents pointed out that collection poses a risk of injuries in hilly terrain and contributes to girl's low school enrolment.

Kerosene is available year round, but prices vary seasonally in rural areas especially in areas without all-weather roads. Very poor and poor households cope by traveling to locations where they can purchase kerosene more cheaply, by borrowing small amounts from neighbors, and by either collecting or buying more wood. In the PRA, women expressed a strong dislike for cooking with kerosene explaining that its bad smell affects the taste of food and causes headaches. Respondents throughout the study area also described kerosene as a safety risk. Both men and women also dislike the poor quality of kerosene light, which they say is insufficient for doing any type of work at night. Parents complained that children are unable to study or do their homework with kerosene lamp.