According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), 770 million people globally still had no electricity access in 2019, mostly in Africa. Meanwhile, Asian countries recorded significant growth: 96 percent of the continent's population had access to electricity in 2019, compared to only 67 percent in 2000. Indonesia showed a significant increase in electricity access, from 67.2 percent in 2010 to 98.89 percent at the end of 2019. This progress surpassed the 2019 target of 96.6 percent electrification set by the National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2015-2019.

However, there is a problem in Indonesia's definition for "electricity access". We use the electrification ratio as an indicator, which is calculated by dividing the number of households with electricity access by total households in the country. Statistics Indonesia (BPS) uses lighting sources to determine this “electricity access”, whereas the Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry adds together the number of state electricity company (PLN) customers and the customers of other electricity services, including recipients of solar-powered energy saving lights, or LTSHE. Another indicator is the "electrified village", which is more inexplicable because a village could be deemed “electrified”, even if only one house is connected to the national electricity grid.

Since our current indicators for electricity access are binary – connected or not connected – and focus on only one aspect of electricity – lighting – they do not indicate the reliability, quality and expected impacts of electricity access in Indonesia.

It is a common understanding that those connected to the PLN grid do not necessarily receive a full 24/7 electricity supply with stable voltage. The real-time monitoring set up in 2017-2018 by the IESR showed that PLN customers in Kupang, the capital of East Nusa Tenggara, experienced outages averaging 13 hours per month, compared to only 2 hours per month in the nation’s capital, Jakarta. The monitoring program also found that houses in densely populated areas of Jakarta had unstable voltages in contrast to suburban areas. The lack of voltage stability can cause damage to electronic appliances or induce higher power consumption.

The deliberate inclusion of LTSHE recipients in calculating the electrification ratio also highlights the gap in energy quality. The LTSHE program only provides essential lighting for 10-12 hours (low lumens) and charging mobile phones; it was also designed for optimal use over just three years. Yet, no clear plan has been developed for providing better electricity access to LTSHE recipients after the program ends.

Time is pressing for the government to evaluate and redefine electricity access. Multidimensional indicators of energy access are required that incorporate quality and minimum capacity, as well as the projected and expected impacts for end-users on all energy sources and systems.

The World Bank proposes using the multi-tier framework (MTF) for measuring energy access, which ensures that energy access is seen beyond infrastructure provision to focus more on quality and benefits. The MTF follows a tiered classification that starts from Tier 0 (no access) to Tier 5 (full access). Household electricity access, for example, is measured on the basis of seven parameters: peak capacity, availability, reliability, quality, affordability, formality or legal validity, and health and safety.

In its application, the framework underscores the energy inequality in Indonesia. Customers connected to the PLN grid, mainly in urban areas, are generally classified as Tier 4 or 5; customers on the PLN grid but experience frequent blackouts and LTSHE recipients are in the lower tiers. An empirical study the IESR conducted in 2019 showed that the majority of respondents in West and East Nusa Tenggara only had Tier 1 or Tier 2 electricity access.

In the absence of a better definition for “electricity access”, the default strategy for providing electricity will focus only on achieving a high electrification ratio and a high number of electrified villages without considering reliability, quality and energy use beyond basic service. The paradigm should be energy access that is capable of supporting productive activities, improving socioeconomic welfare and driving sustainable human development, and should be included in the national development agenda.

Evaluating the current approach in providing electricity and thoroughly measuring electricity quality and its impacts on end users can redefine energy access in general, and electricity access in particular. After this, electricity access should be standardized according to minimum capacity for productive uses, for example, the equivalent of Tier 3 in the MTF, with a follow-up plan for upgrading to the higher tiers in due time.

The government also needs to prioritize using local sources of renewable energy to provide reliable, cleaner and more sustainable electricity. Renewable electricity has become a least-cost measure for rural electrification worldwide, as it should also be in Indonesia in comparison to costly grid expansion and diesel generators.

PLN has stated an intention to replace 5,200 old diesel generators with renewable energy, preferably with private sector involvement. The government obviously cannot do this alone, but bureaucratic red tape in several related areas are driving away the private sector, as The Jakarta Post reported on Nov. 24.

For individual houses in remote and sparsely populated areas, the government can also install rooftop solar panels with a minimum capacity of 500 watt-peak that come equipped with batteries. This is the minimum capacity needed for proper lighting and the use of low-power electronic devices. A higher capacity would be even better and more relevant as a means of providing energy safety nets and measuring economic recovery during the current health emergency.

 ***

The writer is program manager for sustainable energy access, Institute for Essential Services Reform (IESR).