Three Case Studies of Rural Electrification in Peru

Inclusive Innovation in Rural Communities: Three Case Studies of Rural Electrification in Peru Ursula Andrea Harman Canalle Master of Technology and Innovation Management and Policy Bachelor of Social Sciences in Sociology A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2017 School of Agriculture & Food Sciences Abstract Indigenous people in Latin American countries are often socially excluded, with their communities characterised by limited access to basic social services (education and health), basic infrastructure (roads, energy, potable water and sewage), underemployment, lack of democratic representation, cultural discrimination and other restrictions on the full exercise of citizenship. Under the inclusive development approach, policies and policy instruments of science, technology and innovation (STI) are believed to contribute to rural communities’ social inclusion. Recent models within the inclusive development framework understand innovation in terms of both outputs and social processes that considers the participation of different types of actors, including marginalised groups. The concept of inclusive innovation, then, refers to a structural change in which rural communities are active citizens in the decision-making and learning processes that aim to find new solutions to given problems. Peru faces a significant challenge in reducing poverty, especially in rural areas where Indigenous communities, in particular, experience extreme poverty. According to Peru’s national strategy of STI, the transfer of technology, in the form of the delivery of the goods and services needed by marginalised rural communities, is a mechanism for social inclusion. One key technology transfer intervention is electrification through projects that aim to foster the development and capacity of rural communities by transferring new energy technologies such as photovoltaic panels and mini/micro-hydropower systems. While access to energy is recognised as a social right, there is little evidence about how technology transfer interventions for rural electrification are contributing to the reduction of social exclusion in poor Indigenous communities. Considering the complexity of an innovation process for social inclusion, this thesis explores the extent to which technology transfer interventions for rural electrification contribute to social inclusion. The thesis presents three case studies of Indigenous communities who had participated in the same rural electrification project in Cusco region in Peru. The methods used in the case studies were rapid rural appraisal, unstructured interviews and participant observation. The data gathered using these methods answered research questions concerning the process of adoption of the new energy system, the impact of the energy usage in the community, the involvement of the communities in the process of innovation, and the emergence of inclusive learning institutions. Further, in order to explore the orientation of innovation policies towards social inclusion, the study used focus groups and semi-structured interviews with STI ii stakeholders in Cusco city and the nation’s capital, Lima; and unstructured interviews with STI stakeholders in rural localities. The empirical findings on the adoption of the new energy system showed that the lighting of rooms in the home had made the daily life of families more comfortable. In addition, the collective management of the energy system had enhanced the organisation of the community. However, the results demonstrated that the rural electrification project was a top-down intervention that had excluded community members from the design and implementation of the energy system. Technical training was also incomplete, restricting the access to information, exchange of knowledge and learning interactions among the users. This limited the users’ ability to adapt the new system to their own energy needs. Furthermore, the provider/client relationship between the energy provider and the local people seemed to be common in other capacity-building activities by other technology providers in the case study communities. Even though the STI stakeholders interviewed in this research recognised the importance of participatory processes in technology transfer interventions, their concept of inclusive innovation corresponded to the mainstream or traditional innovation models that tend to address exclusion simply in terms of innovation outputs. This work provides the first comprehensive assessment of different factors that interact in the process of innovation, such as the technical attributes of the new technologies, community capitals, local knowledge and modes of learning and the capacity of political institutions to support learning and collaborative networks. The study confirms previous findings and contributes additional evidence that indicates that technology transfer interventions for social inclusion in Latin America are framed largely as economic opportunities. Consequently, the users, who are positioned as consumers, are often excluded from participating in decision-making and learning processes and collaborative relationships within STI activities. These findings are particularly relevant because they enhance our understanding of the complexity of innovation for social inclusion and recognise those dynamics and interactions that occur in unequal structures and perpetuate the subordinated position of excluded groups. Finally, this study provides important insights into the role of citizenship for structural change that involves the reorientation of top-down technology transfer interventions into more inclusive innovation processes. Therefore, the study has a number of practical implications iii for the participation of Indigenous communities as citizens through the building of collaborative relationships over time, the support of horizontal learning processes and the strengthening of local institutions. iv Declaration by author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my research higher degree candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis. v Publications during candidature Magazine of the International Association for Community Development: Harman, U., Cavaye, J., Ross, H. (2016). The limitations of the technology transfer approach for community development in rural Peru. Practice Exchange 6. Conference abstracts: Harman, U., Ross, H., Cavaye, J. (2017). Inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge in Innovation Processes: Case Studies of Rural Electrification in Cusco, Peru. Abstract for the “Sustainably yours, community development and a sustainable just future!" Conference. Auckland: February 15-17, 2017. Harman, U., Cavaye, J., Ross, H. (2016). Interactive Learning Spaces for Social Inclusion of Rural Communities: Case Studies of Rural Electrification in Cusco, Peru. Abstract for the “Sustaining Community Change – Building Local Capacity to Sustain Community Development Initiatives” Conference. Minnesota: July 24‐27, 2016. Publications included in this thesis No publications included. Contributions by others to the thesis No contributions by others. Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree None. vi Acknowledgements I wish to express my gratitude to the Australian Government’s Australia Awards program for the granting of a scholarship that enabled me to study at The University of Queensland. I owe special gratitude to my supervisors, Professor Helen Ross and Professor Jim Cavaye, for their support and commitment to my research and for providing guidance at each stage of the research over four years. Through their understanding of complex concepts and extensive experience in the field, Professor Ross and Professor Cavaye encouraged me to critically rethink many aspects. I also owe a debt of gratitude to each of the research participants in Llancama, Pampayllaqta and Ccanccayllo for taking the time to participate in this study, for sharing information and knowledge with me and for extending their hospitality during my stay in their communities. I thank the interviewees from

Load more