“These are the realities”: insights from facilitating researcher-policymaker engagement in Nigeria's household energy sector

Globally, 1.1 billion lack electricity and 2.7 billion cook with harmful fuels. Sub-Saharan Africa faces significant challenges in improving energy access, aiming to move populations towards modern fuels. While improved technologies are crucial, robust policy frameworks are essential for lasting impact. Evidence-informed policymaking (EIPM) is vital, but translating scientific evidence into policy impact is complex, particularly in Nigeria where, despite numerous energy policies, energy access remains limited for most. This research hypothesizes that increased use of rigorous scientific evidence can improve policy effectiveness. The study aims to determine the current status quo and facilitate engagements with policymakers to increase evidence use in decision-making, ultimately aiming to institutionalize EIPM.

The value of EIPM is increasingly recognized, especially in achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Africa. However, EIPM remains underutilized due to various challenges. Studies highlight the need for robust institutional arrangements, but less attention is paid to how policy inputs are generated and the actors involved. Some argue that political factors, rather than technological ones, are the main obstacles to energy access improvements in Africa. Transdisciplinary research and knowledge co-production are proposed as ways to improve research-policy interactions, moving beyond a linear model to a dynamic exchange among all stakeholders. The authors argue that African contexts require contextually relevant co-production and EIPM processes, emphasizing the role of local researchers. The study aims to explore politically viable mechanisms for increasing the uptake of scientific evidence in constrained policy environments, drawing on prior research in the Nigerian health policy context which highlights the importance of tailoring EIPM strategies to specific contexts and utilizing local researchers' expertise in co-production and EIPM processes.

This study employed a year-long (May 2018-April 2019) action research approach using in-depth interviews (13 key informants) and participatory workshops (27 participants from government, academia, civil society, and the private sector). The initial research questions focused on policymakers' priorities for household energy options, their perceptions of different evidence types, and methods to bridge the gap between research and practice. A reflexive approach allowed the research questions to evolve based on interactions with stakeholders. An early shift occurred, focusing on enhancing policymakers' engagement with evidence in areas of current policy attention, rather than focusing solely on established evidence in specific energy issues (e.g., cooking energy access). This shift reflected an increased understanding of the policy landscape and the priority of establishing a culture of evidence use. The two workshops served different purposes; the first facilitated communication among stakeholders, while the second involved a smaller group of core policymakers to discuss methods for improving evidence use. The combined approach offered breadth and depth of data; however, challenges arose from limited access to high-level officials and the delegation of workshop attendance to junior officers. One-on-one interviews mitigated this limitation to some extent.

Nigeria's energy policy landscape is characterized by several iterations of policies (NEP 2003, NEMP 2014, NREEEP 2015) aimed at increasing energy access, primarily electricity. Despite investment, over one-third of Nigerians lack electricity access. Policymakers face resource constraints and must prioritize policies, leading to some sectors receiving greater attention than others (e.g., electricity over cooking energy). Additional context-specific constraints include weak governance, implementation failures, and ineffective inter-agency coordination. The Energy Commission of Nigeria (ECN), responsible for coordinating energy policies, has diminished influence. Private sector involvement is seen as a moderating influence on government inefficiency, emphasizing an "enabling environment" for investment. The process of policy development is sometimes opaque, as illustrated by the NREEEP, where the draft's development and evidence base remain unclear, prioritizing consensus-building over potential contention. Several factors influence decision-making on energy access: existing laws and policies; administrative priorities; international agreements; funding; ease of implementation; capacity; and geographical reach. While pragmatic concerns dominate, policymakers show some awareness of the usefulness of evidence from best practices, policy failures from other countries, and pilot project feedback. Quantitative, macro-level data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) is widely used, but often from a narrow range of fields, neglecting qualitative data. Sector-specific institutions, such as the Rural Electrification Agency (REA), primarily rely on quantitative data, often neglecting social and cultural aspects. The reliance on individual "champions" within institutions rather than institutional strategies highlights the lack of consistent evidence-policy engagement. Despite institutional shortcomings, latent demand for increased evidence use exists within government. Academic researchers, historically excluded from energy policy discussions, can play a crucial role in addressing these issues.

The study's findings highlight significant gaps in Nigeria's energy policymaking process where scientific evidence can be valuable. Two main opportunities for researcher-policymaker engagement emerge: (1) contributing to problem definition and (2) addressing the implementation gap between policy adoption and action. The influence of private sector actors and international development partners in agenda-setting presents an opening for academics to introduce evidence-informed insights early in the process, potentially broadening the scope of policy questions and solutions. The government's poor implementation record provides another opportunity; focusing on the implementation of beneficial but underutilized policies allows academics to make quick inroads while laying the groundwork for future engagement. This approach recognizes immediate policy needs while establishing a longer-term foundation for evidence-informed policymaking.

This research reveals how context-specific constraints in Nigeria's energy policy landscape lead to a diminished role for scientific evidence. The study identifies two key windows of opportunity for academics to engage: the problem-definition stage and the implementation gap. By proactively engaging policymakers, academics can broaden the evidence base, improve policy decisions, and contribute to a culture of evidence use. These findings offer valuable insights for similar contexts where the status of scientific evidence is low. Academics need proactive engagement strategies, potentially enhanced by policy engagement training and learning from NGOs' successful engagement methods. Incremental progress, recognizing the complexities of evidence-to-policy processes, is crucial for success.

The study's sample size, while adequate for a qualitative study, limits generalizability. Access to high-level government officials was challenging, potentially biasing the findings. The focus on household energy might not fully capture broader energy policy issues. The research's dependence on self-reported data from interviewees necessitates caution in interpreting the findings.