Electrification and Transformation

The chapters in the third section of Cultures of Energy address the social and cultural impacts of changing structures of energy, in particular social change in the wake of the introduction of electricity. In the distinct cultural contexts examined by Thomas Love, Anna Garwood, Tanja Winther, and Michael Degani, it is apparent that changes in the technical circuitry of energy result in changes in social and moral circuitry within newly “electrified” communities. While energy circulates as an invisible force, it nevertheless becomes visible in the form of light and in the dynamics of people’s social relationships. The structures and maintenance of energy systems are entangled with political ideologies, practices, and relationships; are implicated in changing moral values and practices; and shape interpersonal relationships. In their chapters and in conversations among the authors, it is evident that energy technologies are socially embedded; change to the technical system affects change in the social system. Within these chapters and the ensuing discussions, authors responded to the following questions and engaged with each other’s responses. What impact does being on-grid or off-grid have on the social relationships of energy users? What is the relationship between different kinds of energy technologies and different kinds of social relationships? What is the relationship between political ideologies and energy technologies? In different political contexts, is energy viewed differently (e.g., as a public good, a state utility, or as a consumer good)? What is the relationship between the structure(s) of energy system(s) and the structures of sociality in communities that are recently “electrified”? Anna Garwood

Most of the rural communities where I’ve worked become “electrified” with distributed energy sources (such as community-scale micro-hydro or wind power). In these cases the electricity infrastructure was built by the community, and among other intended and unintended consequences, there seems to be an effect of tightening the social structures because community members now jointly manage the system. I am curious, however, how the social effects of becoming electrified vary between communities that are connected to the national grid and those that have electricity through their own sources but are still “off the grid” in a larger sense. What social effects from electrification are caused by the simple access to electricity (change in daily patterns, access to information, communication, television, and so on) and which effects are related to the source and ownership of that electricity?

Tanja Winther

Interesting questions! I have had the opportunity to compare systems that are centralized (such as in Zanzibar) and decentralized (as in Sunderbans, India). Although contextual factors obviously count, I have found some marked social and political differences based on the physical organization of the infrastructure structure itself. In a centralized system or grid, which is usually managed by a utility owned by a strong, centralized (or even authoritarian) government, the standardized technology, regulations, and routines tend to be forced on customers who desire electrical service twenty-four hours per day. But these electricity customers may for the first time find themselves in a precarious relationship with the state. They accumulate debt to the state-owned company, do not understand the bills (issued in English rather than more widely spoken languages such as KiSwahili), and find themselves in a relation of dependency vis-à-vis the state-owned utility company. By providing electricity, the state has entered people’s living rooms, and people who oppose the government politically become particularly exposed to increased control and sanctions. For example, meter readers are known to report any antigovernment activity that they observe to state authorities. The relationship between utility and customers becomes deeply antagonistic; people who have the courage to engage in illegal connections to the electrical grid will do so, fostering a black market for electrical services and supply, fostering a climate of further suspicion and duplicity. Importantly, however, in villages where culturally valued authorities such as spirit mediums were involved in the changing energy framework, the process of electrification went smoothly after a period of negotiation and moral consideration. In cases where the electricity structure was forced on people within a short time, frame protests erupted, and in one place the project was even stopped. I think it is crucial to consider how actors on the interfaces between technical system and local context meet and interact.Decentralized electrical systems in Zanzibar are run at least partly by people themselves, including control of consumption in a system without electrical meters but with fixed tariffs according to the agreed number of light points. This system of providing electricity in Zanzibar used to run well, and the level of trust in the technology itself and among the participants in the energy system was high. But because of the lack of technical capacity to expand the system as demand kept growing, supply became limited and those who had access to electricity tended to overconsume, as if wanting to ensure a stock of energy for their households. In this case, the technical system was socially embedded from an early stage, but the lack of financing mechanisms for expansion started the problems. Another limitation was that electricity was supplied for only four hours in the evening, while people gradually wanted access to more machines and more energy demanding technologies. The crux of the issue was how to make existing customers start thinking about expansion of services.Structurally, I would highlight that in both cases there are excluded groups, whose position became further marginalized with the arrival of electricity. I am referring in particular to women’s degree of involvement and benefits, which were limited because of existing structures of discrimination (male ownership of land and houses, inheritance rules, and a high divorce rate in Zanzibar, with a divorcée forced to leave her former husband’s household). Electricity becomes extensions of houses, and groups who control houses also decide on matters related to electricity. Short-term benefits (immediate consumption) tend to overshadow the more long-term structural effects (less financial security). I have also seen that elders’ power becomes reduced as new criteria for success (such as television and other prestige appliances) replace older ones (such several wives and numerous children).

Tom Love

For alternative energy technologies to be effective, their circuitry must not only be technically reliable but also mesh with social circuitry. In Alto Perú, Anna and I found that micro-grids worked well with households that were not only already clustered but also inhabited by people related to each other. While the idea has appeal, tying in as it does with traditional anthropological concerns with kinship and social space, and seems to me more than just a nice metaphor, do people find this idea of “social circuitry” useful?

Tanja Winther

The idea of “social circuitry” appeals to me, and even more if you consider the “circuit” aspect as the momentary, rather than permanent, structures and dynamics in which a given technology becomes enmeshed. However, in thinking of social circuitry as something enduring, one risks creating an image of a static social reality. Second, I would prefer thinking of circuits in sociotechnical terms, thus how technology and the social context together produce a particular system, a circuit. No doubt the more attuned a technology and its organization is toward existing social realities (socially embedded technology), the more likely its implementation is to be effective. Many factors may account for why you found mini-grids successfully implemented when people were related to each other than when they were. For example, power relations and who has decision-making power in the process is just one such possible factor.

A third reflection concerns the notion of effective technologies, which relates to the developers’ perspective and reflects a given image of social change (technology has some direct effects, and success is measured according to the degree that outcomes become as prescribed). In my work I have also tried to look at unintended consequences and also what more profound transformations that new technology may trigger. In turn, more multifaceted goals could be attached to renewable energy interventions, such as achieving social justice, gender equality, and so on.

Mike Degani

I think I can sign on to Tanja’s concern that “social circuitry” has something a little soldered about it, a too-rigid sense of social relationships. On the other hand, that is an empirical question, isn’t it? In any given time and place the rights and obligations between actors are more or less clearly defined. In Alto Perú the consequences of wronging a mother or uncle or cousin might be obvious enough to make the relationships necessary for using a micro-grid seem as functional and integrated as the technology itself. (Maybe Durkheim got it wrong and it is mechanical solidarity that is the really complex form of organization!)

A negative illustration that possibly supports your point, Tom: I’ve spent the last few months in Dar es Salaam riding around with the state power disconnection team. In certain older and poorer neighborhoods, there is “Swahili”-style housing, which consists of multiple individuals or families renting out a single room and sharing cooking space, bathrooms—and a single meter for the compound. This arrangement is a recipe for disconnection. One of the tenants is inevitably late on contributing to the bill payment, accusations proliferate about who is using more power than they should, and the conflicts roll on. Now, the big problem is simply that tenants aren’t generating enough income to cover all their bills each month. And conflicts with landlords and the utility play a role too. But, pertinent to our discussion, tenants are often strangers—or, at best, friends—and do not feel particularly beholden to each other over the long term. The provisional, short-term, and often deferred nature of money and relationships in Swahili housing is incongruous with a power monopoly that is oriented to long-term continuous service.

Often the result is a kind of alternative shadow system based on theft, debt, and negotiations with particular utility workers. And personally I’m always tempted to see a metaphorical link between a dust-choked, tampered meter and erratic power supply on one hand and this jury-rigged system of payments and provisional trust on the other. Not exactly social circuitry, but the parallels are there. I only have brief impressions about renewable energy but maybe they are worth mentioning. The market for household solar power is just beginning to get going in Dar es Salaam. Solar energy is for wealthier private homeowners as it requires a lot of expensive upfront investment, and at the moment the technology isn’t efficient enough to power many electrical objects. But I think conceptually it’s sort of slotted next to the gas-powered generator. In true privatized neoliberal fashion it gives one autonomy from all the hassle of the state grid, but there is a bewildering array of makes and models and unless you really shell out for quality you can easily end up with a lemon.

Anna Garwood

I wanted to follow up on Mike’s comment about the household solar market. Household solar (and especially solar micro-credit schemes) are the big buzz in the world of international development these days. The organization I work for (Green Empowerment) and most of our NGO partners have been working on community-scale renewable energy projects—often integrating these into the state plan for rural electrification—instead of selling solar to relatively wealthier private homeowners. It has been interesting to watch the boom in small solar home systems (and solar lanterns) over the last ten years. Instead of conceptualizing electricity as a public good or state utility, the supporters of the big solar markets emphasize electricity as a consumer good. Of course the development banks endorse this privatizing strategy. Yes, in many of the places where we work in Latin America there is still an idea that the government should have a role in providing electricity, and thus a resistance to the neoliberal notion that electricity should be distributed through a private market of suppliers and consumers. One could trace the political trends in general from the left to the right by the history of the provision of electrification.