Throughout the world, impacts and extreme events stemming from climate change signifcantly affect climate-dependent activities such as those based on agriculture, fshing, and natural-resource-dependent livelihoods (Dodman et al., 2014). At the same time, climate change disproportionately affects rural and natural resourcedependent populations and the rural poor (Dasgupta et al., 2014). Many rural and natural resource-dependent communities face long-term factors such as land degradation and conversion, along with issues around access, governance and confict that predate or are unrelated to climate change (Ireland & McKinnon, 2013). Climate change serves to exacerbate these existing context-specifc factors and inequalities at the local level (Ayers, 2010), with climate change compounding other factors pertinent to rural areas, such as a lack of access (compared with urban areas) to services, infrastructure, investment, inputs into decision-making and information (Dodman et al., 2014).

For rural and natural resource-based populations in Java and Maluku, alongside rapid economic and population growth, Indonesia's disparity between rich and poor has grown faster than in any other country in Southeast Asia (Gibson et al., 2017) having the sixth-worst socioeconomic discrepancy of any nation globally (Gibson et al., 2017). Around 9.5% of the total population in Indonesia were living below the poverty line in 2019,3 which translates into around 26.42 million people out of Indonesia's 270.2 million population (World Bank, 2020). A majority of this fgure is the 15 million (or 53.45%) of Indonesia's poor living on the island of Java (BPS, 2016). While conversely, in the islands of Maluku with a signifcantly smaller population than Java, 22% of the area's population lives below the poverty line, making Maluku the region with the highest percentage of poverty per capita (BPS, 2016). The livelihood sources of the majority of people in both areas are small-scale farming, fshing, and trade work (BPS, 2020). Markedly, in each region, rural farmers and indigenous groups also disproportionately represent Indonesia's poor (BPS, 2020). Leveraging on these context-specifc factors, and exacerbating inequalities at the local level, climate change has had signifcant impacts in both case studies in Java and Maluku.

In both case studies, climate change has reportedly resulted in coastal inundation, increased storms and winds, foods and fash foods, increased heat and periods of heat (increasing labor requirements for watering and changes to watering timings), rain variability, as well as increased and new pest incidence, and accompanying crop and yield loss. Climate change has also affected the traditional

3 It should be distinguished that the poverty line defned by the Indonesian government is substantially lower than other measures (e.g., the World Bank poverty line uses US\$1.25 daily rate). In 2016, the Government of Indonesia defned the national poverty line as a monthly per capita income of IDR354, 386 (equivalent to US\$26). This is much lower than poverty lines applied globally. Using global indicators, the rate is much higher.

usage of agricultural and fshing calendars and the ecosystem signaling that communities have relied upon for generations to manage land and natural resources, as well as the livelihoods dependent on these. In Maluku, for example, climate change has signifcantly affected the ocean currents, infuencing fsh patterns and the timing of fsh cycles. Impacts from climate change have compounded in both cases with the ongoing conficts and environmental pressures faced by the local communities in each. Residents in both case studies have continuously responded by adapting to climate change among other pressures and change types through collective local resource governance mechanisms over years.

Combining with the rising impacts of climate change, issues over land governance continually emerge to keep local communities that are dependent on natural resources and land access subject to ongoing environmental pressure and change. Rural (and indigenous) communities in Indonesia dependent on natural resources and land access, hold access to these under varied, yet tentative rights. Accordingly, vulnerabilities exist alongside increasingly complex cross-scale relationships between communities and globalized forces culminating amidst other challenges and with socio-economic disparity playing out in the ways that populations have control over, or access to, natural resources and land use. How this translates into land access and governance is problematic as ferce competition over land as a commodity expands. Land confict, for example, is a prominent feature across Indonesia. Confict continues to arise alongside ongoing pressures on resources and access to land, with the demand for both surging. The number of active land conficts throughout Indonesia has continued steadily to increase, most frequently occurring in rural areas where livelihoods depend on managing land resources (Handoko et al., 2019).4

Rural (and indigenous) communities in Indonesia that are dependent on natural resources and land access often hold access under tentative rights because in practice, legal use is often diffcult for rural and indigenous populations to assert. The pressure for individual land titles and competing interests continues between the acquisition of land under corporate entities and increasing commercialization of land (McCarthy & Robinson, 2016) and alongside state land (re)acquisitions. Land conficts being widespread throughout Indonesia are also due in part to discrepancies between legal use and actual use, and the ability of the rural poor and indigenous people to access rights and legal justice. Immense divergences between formal land-use allocation and ownership within the state registration system and the actual land-use situation in practice (McCarthy, 2017) determine access to land and natural resources and with economic disparity playing out in the ways that populations have control over, or access to, natural resources and land use. These complexities force communities at local levels in rural areas toward collective action on knowledge, policy, and practice (Warren & McCarthy, 2009). Hence, rural communities' resilience also mediates rural areas' vulnerability to climate change, such as indigenous knowledge and networks of mutual support (Dodman et al., 2014).

4The Consortium for Agrarian Reform, for example, noted that for 2017, as many as 659 active agrarian conficts were disputing a total land size area as large as 520,491.87 acres and including at least 652,738 households (Handoko et al., 2019).

### **22.3 Climate Change Adaptive Capacity and Governance Responses to Pressure and Change**

Adaptive capacity is defned by the IPCC as "the ability of systems, institutions, humans, and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences" (IPCC, 2022). Adaptive capacity is often explicitly emphasized by the two sides to adaptation in either proactive or reactive responses to impacts (Adger et al., 2007; Ford et al., 2013; Gallopín, 2006; Hill & Engle, 2013; Hinkel, 2011; Nelson et al., 2007). Reactive responses are responses made rapidly to respond with prompt innovations or reactive transformations to minimize the damage from specifc events in the short term and long term, whereas proactive responses represent long-term strategized processes that integrate new information as it manifests (Hill & Engle, 2013). A fundamental part of proactive responses is considered to be the active involvement of the individual, community, or society involved in the process. Adaptive capacity is not static, nor is adaptive capacity evenly distributed within populations or communities themselves (Berkes et al., 2008; Walker et al., 2004). In turn, making climate change part of a complex array of social-environmental pressures to which rural (and Indigenous) communities seek to cope and adapt. The literature on climate change adaptation contends that the reciprocal and social relations commonly found in agrarian societies are critical for dealing with hardships like climate change impacts and disasters (Adger, 2003a, b; Pelling, 1999; Ribot et al., 1996). Thereby implying that not only do agrarian and natural-resource dependent communities tend to face greater impacts and disparate vulnerabilities to climate change, but they also hold the social qualities and adaptive capacity to respond to climate change. As key examples, communities in the two case studies employ their own local resource governance systems, based on traditional and collective models. Though there is variation between the approaches in the two regions, including in the formal governance and local-level institutions.

If complex governance systems provide a combination of purposeful collective action and emergent phenomena resulting from self-organization processes and agency among a range of actors (Grecksch & Klöck, 2020), then local and customary institutions in Indonesia are a good example of these. They often provide structure and foster trust and norms of reciprocity for cooperation and coordinated actions, which are deeply tied to local notions of identity and social norms of cooperation (Dahal & Adhikari, 2008). *Adat* describes customary systems and people, encompassing most angles of life. The term has come to refer to the collective identity of various indigenous practices under the umbrella of custom (van Engelenhoven, 2021). From legal, religious, moral, political, and cultural aspects through to governing individual behaviors, to how families relate and the interrelations and intrarelations of the community and community members (Davidson & Henley, 2007). *Adat* prescribes a system of relation between people and the environment, covering most aspects of resource management (social, economic, and environmental)

(Tyson, 2010). *Adat* conversely holds many meanings according to the context in which it sits. Used within and across communities to form collective management for local resources, *Adat* persists widely across Indonesia, determining local resource governance practices (Tyson, 2010).

Throughout Indonesia, alongside the customary institutions providing structure and fostering norms of reciprocity for cooperation and coordinated action, other examples of reciprocal and social relations can be found that are applicable to adaptative capacity. For example, G*otong royong,* or collective action (Anwar et al., 2017) forms three tiers of community obligations alongside *musyawarah* (consensus; technically the basis for legislative decision-making) and *koperasi* (cooperatives; constitutionally the basis of the economy). These three socio-cultural forms of local governance or mutual assistance at the village level are also vital to adaptive capacity, remaining widespread and deeply rooted culturally (Bowen, 1986). G*otong royong*, for example, has been widely associated in Indonesia's disaster risk reduction and socio-cultural identity literature, as a key form of social capital interchangeable with resilience and adaptive capacity in a number of studies (Bowen, 1986; Ha, 2010; Kusumawardhani, 2014; Lukiyanto & Wijayaningtyas, 2020; Mardiasmo & Barnes, 2015; Slikkerveer, 2019; Suwignyo, 2019). *Gotong royong* refers to the principle of neighbors helping each other without the promise of anything in return (reciprocity) (Anwar et al., 2017). *Gotong royong* is considered mutual assistance, although the applications are varied and involve ideas mixed between obligation and the practice of reciprocity (Bowen, 1986). Common examples of applications are environmental protection or collaboration of local residents working together, volunteering to help neighbors and reconstructing local roads or village infrastructure (Anwar et al., 2017; Kusumawardhani, 2014). These forms of mutual exchange are also key to enacting collective responses and engaging the social relations and reciprocity needed for dealing with hardships such as climate change alike. These elements also form the basis for formal governance institutions such as *Musrenbang,* which is an amalgamation of *Musyawarah Perencanaan Pembangunan*. *Musyawarah* means communities coming together to resolve conficts peacefully (rule by consensus), and *Perencanaan Pembangunan* means development planning (Sindre, 2012) to decide community priorities (Idajati et al., 2016). *Musrenbang* foundations, for example, are built on the tradition of community organizing in Indonesia that combines notions of traditional confict resolution mechanisms for development planning, with multistakeholder consultation forums meant to encourage and promote community participation (Sindre, 2012).

These local traditional governance systems and structures were incorporated during the post-Suharto revision of national and local institutions in Indonesia. Legislation was altered to provide more access to village communities by utilizing traditional local systems of governance, to play a role within the planning and development that concerns them. In *Adat* areas, such as Maluku, a local governance confguration imported from the structure in Java5 had previously forced village administrations to incorporate the government system established under the Javanese regional and village government style throughout Indonesia. During the Suharto period, this amalgamation of the local governance system effectively disconnected the various customs and converged the diverse systems and mechanisms of authority held over natural resources (Batiran & Salim, 2020). Following the collapse of the New Order, as attempts to make planning more participatory were made (Purba, 2011), the role and function of the administrative system shifted toward a community, bottom-up direction. Greater local participation in decision making was supposed to be achieved in order to re-democratize processes and guarantee rights to land and resources for Indonesian civilians (Warren & McCarthy, 2009). Institutions (e.g., *ronda*, the community-neighborhood security system, or *kerja bakti*, a form of neighborhood social service) that had been previously utlized under Suharto to mobilize communities, instead reinterpreted, reappropriated, and redirected toward community purposes (Wilhelm, 2011). These changes repivoted local governance toward traditional systems intended to promote decentralization. While at the same time, this decentralization sought to overturn the nation-state approach to applying a uniform local governance model across the Indonesian archipelago that had been taken during the New Order period, which had erased cultural and geographically specifc traditional governance institutions with varying success (Bebbington et al., 2006).

5 In rural village settings in Java, the responsibility for the community falls predominately to the RT, RW, *Dukuh*, and *Kelurahan* institutions. While farmers in the Java case study have formed their own clusters for governing local resources relating to farming between them, which overlaps between the RT and RW levels, as well as taking in the cooperative and alliances formed between coastal farmers. Formally, each cluster of 50–80 households is broken into the formal institution of *rukun tetengga* (RT) (Simarmata et al., 2013). *Rukun tetengga* roughly translates as "neighborhood association." Each *rukun tetengga*, or RT, holds a formal leader. The RT unit and its appointed head (elected via a process of voting, by each registered resident), then, sit under the larger grouping of *rukun warga* (RW). In areas where there is no longer the appointed RW grouping, the RT grouping sits directly under the *Dukuh* (the equivalent of a hamlet), and its (elected) appointed head. *Rukun warga* (RW) is a division of territory in Indonesia below the *Dusun* or *Lingkungan*. *Rukun warga* is not included as a division of government administration, and its formation is passed through a community meeting of citizens, in the same process for the RT grouping. This unit consists of several RT groupings and their heads. RT and RW institutions tend to be more engaged within community life and have an administrative function in forming the neighborhood (Yuliastuti et al., 2015). In general, however, the functions of RT and RW are not just related with the kinship of community. The RT and RW groupings coordinate community activities and bridge the relationship between village communities and the government (in this case is the *Kelurahan* or sub-district). In other words, structurally RT and RW are the lower administrative organizations dealing directly with the public. RT organizations have a strategic role in relation to community social activities, and in linking administrative affairs and social issues (Yuliastuti et al., 2015). The next unit grouping level up is the *Kelurahan*, which comprises of several *Dukuh* and RW groups. From *Kelurahan* sits the *Kabupaten*, the *Kecamatan* and then a mayor. With non-elected, government appointed heads, these then feed up to the provincial and national governments (Simarmata et al., 2013). The *Kelurahan* operate as the smaller instrument of *Kabupatens*, *Kotamadya*, or *Kota administrasi*, below the *Kecamatan* level. In terms of formal government administrations, the *Kelurahan* is the smallest organizational unit and the closest government administration institution to village community life (Yuliastuti et al., 2015).

Community level governance was released from various regulations (and supervisions) post-Suharto, enabling a return to the practice of local customs within customary institutions, as local village-level institutions across Indonesia moved to combine formal and informal institutions. At local levels, these integrate with traditional systems of governance. In Haruku, for example, a hybrid system operates that includes national formal institutions, and also the local institutions of *Negeri* (the name in Maluku for village country, lands, or customary territory) and *Sasi* customary governance among aspects of the national system. *Sasi* is the customary law found throughout *adat* areas in Maluku, which enforces terms of governance and protection of natural resources guarding ecosystems through regulations, boundary controls, allocations of sustainable use periods or protection time period controls (Mantjoro, 1996; Soselisa, 2019).

### **22.4 Local Governance: Driving Adaptive Capacity Through Collective Response to Environmental Pressures, Confict, and Change**

Complex pressures facing rural areas in accessing and managing natural resourcebased livelihoods force innovative collective action (Warren & McCarthy, 2009) mediating rural communities' vulnerability to climate change and resilience (Dodman et al., 2014). Hence, collective management of natural resources has been crucial to sustaining lives and livelihoods on an ongoing basis, and in resilience of ever-present environmental pressures and threats. At the same time, for these reasons, the collective handling of environmental risks, pressures, and local governance of natural resources are considered crucial in addressing climate change impacts (Adger, 2003b). Widely throughout Indonesia, local communities, such as in Haruku and Kulon Progo, have been responding and adapting to ongoing and rapid environmental change and pressures for decades, utilizing collective approaches to local resource governance that are adaptive. One key exemplar being the role that the indigenous and agrarian movements, found widely throughout Indonesia, have played in securing access to land, locally determining resource governance through advocacy and various campaigns (Peluso et al., 2008). As part of ensuring access to resources, the emergence of a legitimizing discourse that has recurrently stressed environmental stewardship, cultural identifcation and attachment to place, has often formed part of securing land and resource (and thereby livelihood) access (Hall et al., 2011). For instance, through the use of indigeneity in asserting rights toward and the capacity to govern forest areas (Hall et al., 2011).

Legitimization plays a central role in collective mobilizations (Hall et al., 2011), allowing people to position themselves to acquire rights or resources (Karlsson, 2003; Li, 1996, 1999). Claims to land rights were increasingly made in the form of appealing to collective *Adat* rights following the fall of the New Order, with the rapid rise of social movements recognizing indigenous community and *Adat* rights (Muur, 2018; Muur et al., 2019). *Masyarakat Hukum Adat* (customary community law) can be proven as a claim to territories by linage as well as by those actively living under customary institutions and traditions6 (Bedner, 2016). Hence a resurgence of *Adat* local customary institutions (Davidson & Henley, 2007) arose, both in proliferation and the strength of customary *Adat* groups, alongside (local) nongovernment organizations, and ad-hoc community groups (Warren & McCarthy, 2009) to overcome discrepancies in land access and ownership. Agrarian movements also became more frequent as a path for autonomy and access to local government (Lund & Rachman, 2016). In this way, communities such as in Haruku and Kulon Progo, have been countering land pressures and conficts, and exhibiting advocacy of their own resilience and agency by enhancing their access to resources (Li, 1996, 1999; Lund & Saito-Jensen, 2013; Platteau, 2004; Platteau & Abraham, 2002; Ribot, 2007).

This advocacy for legitimacy and rights of access to land (and marine) resources, has been routinely evident over decades in both case study contexts, as part of enabling and guarding community resilience in a number of ways. In Haruku, the *Kewang* as a customary institution have a long-running history of involvement and continue to be involved with government, non-government and civil organizations for advocacy on the role of customary governance and rights. In the lead up to the Maluku confict (often referred to as the Maluku wars7 ), Haruku faced environmental and resource access pressures. A large Indonesian mining company with foreign investment and backing from the central government (Batiran & Salim, 2020), secured state permits for gold mining exploration in the upper catchment areas of Learisa Kayeli River of *Negeri* Haruku. The exploration resulted in damage to parts of the upper river area of *Negeri* Haruku with fow-on consequences to the lower estuary. Traditional fsh breeding grounds were damaged, while mining operations on the mountain rendered the river and drinking water supplies unpotable, and customary *Adat* practices (*Sasi lompa*) were forced to cease with the loss of the ecological systems. "They dug it up, they drilled it ... the soil became white like coconut milk. When they dug on the riverbank, it [tailings] were carried into the river and drifted down. Without knowing, the people here and below who use the water and the *lompa* fsh were affected. *Sasi lompa* could not be held." The infringements on *Sasi* managed area, spurred collective action and a resilient response from Haruku residents under the stronghold of the *Kewang,* who together put up substantial resistance. By aligning themselves with broader indigenous and environmental rights advocates, residents were able to draw on networks of support and alignment, and the local community was able to advocate their own resilience and agency in retaining access to their customary lands and resources. Closely aligned with a tight support network, they succeeded in ceasing the operations and damage being done to the water catchment and estuary under the mining exploration (Batiran & Salim, 2020). By pooling resources, residents were able to draw on the support of networks from indigenous peoples movements, building and gaining support from a network of NGOs, academics and Indigenous rights-advocacy groups such as

6Controversially, the right to aval under *hakulayat* cannot be used against state interest under Article 3, or be registered.

7 In Maluku, confict erupted during the post-Suharto period from 1999 into 2004/2005, often referred to as the Maluku wars.

Baileo Foundation and the *Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara* (Alliance of Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago – AMAN) and the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples Rights (Batiran & Salim, 2020). Head *Kewang* commented, "I brought legal experts from Unpatti [the local university], and they provided legal counseling for the community … because if the mine had a future, it would have been bleak for us, and we would have had to leave this village."

Meanwhile, in Kulon Progo, the same strategies that have spurred resilience in cultivating productive agricultural systems and livelihoods in marginalised, or in unproductive conditions in a harsh coastal landscapes, have also ensured continued active engagement in adapting strategies for retaining land access. Confict over land use has been heated over the last decade due to sand mining proposals for coastal agricultural lands. Farmer access to farming lands remains insecure for the area, as under the special region status, land management and ownership remain subject to the Sultan of Yogyakarta, rather than the national Government of Indonesia for areas equivocal to government or "crown" lands. *Pakualaman* Ground (PAG) or *Tanah Pakualaman* is a term for land held under the *Duchy of Pakualaman*, or the Sultanate of Yogyakarta. With the status of *Pakualam Tanah Sultan,* legal ownership is diffcult for residents, who instead are granted only *Magersari*, or right of use. While residents own their houses on the land, maintaining access to land with this status is insecure. All nonprivate land areas formally held under crown land had been transferred to the Republic of Indonesia under the 1960 Basic Agrarian Law (BAL). These lands were allocated to be used for local communities and public land. However, in 2012, laws for the Yogyakarta District were changed, which altered the status of the Agrarian Law No.5/1960. In practice, this meant that vast tracts of lands used and occupied for generations by local communities prior to and since Indonesia's Independence, were suddenly subject to seizure under Law No. 13 of 2012 concerning the Privileges of DIY (UUK). Numerous conficts have been recorded throughout the Yogyakarta Province concerning evictions from land following this law change.8 The most contentious have included industry parks, mining operations, the international airport and other privateinvestment commercial operations (hotels, apartments). Coastal farmlands in Kulon

8For example, (1) construction of the International Airport in Kulonprogo; (2) mining of iron sands and construction of a steel factory in Kulonprogo; (3) eviction of residents' settlements in Parangkusumo; (4) eviction of shrimp ponds in Parangkusumo; (5) pegging of sultan ground (SG) on state land in Parangkusumo; (6) fxing SG's land on community-owned land in Mancingan Parangtritis; (7) confscation of land rights through changing the status of building use rights on Jalan Solo Kotabaru; (8) eviction of a group of residents in Suryowijayan; (9) threats of eviction of street vendors under the pretext of SG's land in Gondomanan; (10) revitalization of the Kepatihan Offce which resulted in eviction in Suryawijayan; (11) seizure of village land through reversing the name of village land certifcates throughout DIY; (12) racial/ethnic discrimination through the prohibition of land ownership rights throughout DIY; (13) refusal to extend building use rights in Jogoyudan, Jetis; (14) refusal to apply for land title certifcates in Blunyahgede; (15) construction of apartments in densely residential areas on Jalan Kaliurang km 5; (16) withdrawal of property rights certifcates under the pretext of renewing certifcates in Mantrijeron; (17) seizure of land rights through cancellation of land ownership rights in Pundungsari; (18) seizure of state and citizen land in the name of controlling SG land and tourism throughout Gunungkidul; (19) forced eviction and demolition of community stalls under the pretext of SG land (Saroh, 2016).

Progo are earmarked for large-scale commercial projects (e.g., iron sand mining). At the same time, the Kulon Progo district government is in an impasse as they cannot build infrastructure to support the activities of the residents on these sites because the area is under status as a contract area (Hernawan et al., 2021). Until now, farmers in the area have resisted eviction, partially due to legal rights remaining unclear, as well as ongoing viability issues and investor pull-outs on the proposed developments. Efforts have also been sustained within social networks and collective action, such as farmer forums and networks for knowledge sharing and support (farmer to farmer).

At the same time, precarious access has merged with ongoing pressures and confict to spur enduring strategies to adapt to harsh environmental conditions through the ongoing need to secure access to land and resources. Aside from active resistance and strategies deployed to retain access to farmlands, the coastal villages in Kulon Progo are widely known for the strategies employed in farming land unfavourable for agricultural due to harsh coastal conditions. The villages engaged in farming on the coastal area of Kulon Progo have a history of local innovations in responding to change and non-favourable agricultural conditions, including strategies for adaptation to climate change conditions and impacts. The coastal farming areas of Kulon Progo (Desa Garongan, Kulon Progo, Barangan, Pleret and Bugel) have sustainably farmed in harsh coastal conditions of sandy soils, salinity, high winds, and limited water access, after converting the area to a high yielding agricultural area. The cultivation of the upper sand dunes by farmers along this small section of coastline consistently boasts Indonesia's largest chili crop, while other crops are also cultivated. Chilli has been adapted to grow through the wet season, when other areas of Indonesia are unable to produce, in turn, gaining higher price values as a result of the produce. Studies on the area have shown highly innovative adaptive farming techniques employed (Dinarti et al., 2013; Supriyanto et al., 2012). In particular, innovative agricultural livelihood diversifcation is based around collective management systems (Raya, 2014). These systems were found to emphasize reciprocal social relations used to foster local resource governance conducive to the ongoing adaptation of land management, which is also applicable to climate change (Supriyanto et al., 2011, 2012). The latter study particularly highlights coastal farmers' in Kulon Progo's ability to control environmental, physical, economic, human, and political forms of capital to build up an active, innovative, and adaptive farming community in the coastal area. Notably, these systems have enabled an agricultural livelihood-based community to fourish in a sandy coastal environment utilized as highly productive agricultural land.

Since the early 1980s, the farmers expanded the land available to them by cultivating the coastline area, utilizing a mix of local indigenous knowledge informing land management practices and ingenuity driven by scarce available resources – in order to farm in sand on the wind-swept coastal area. Innovative strategies have been formulated in response to the harsh environmental conditions in which to generate livelihoods, collective action has formed as a way of sustaining livelihoods. These innovations have incorporated the use of watering technology, merging techniques to intensify cropping options (wells, pumps, drip enhanced effciency, piping); adaptation of techniques such as companion planting, permaculture, composting, on-site organic manure fertilisers); diversifcation and increased biodiversity of cropping (e.g. buffering from reliance and market dependence, windbreak cropping).

Social networks and collective action also form a large aspect to enabling this, from streamlining trial and error learning (neighbors replicating successes), farmer forums and networks were also developed for knowledge sharing and support (farmer to farmer). These have helped with strategic actions such as adapting seed varieties and cultivars, and the establishment of cooperatives to determine marketing and pricing collectively, as well as pooling transport logistics, and community systems for managing shared resources between farmers (e.g., windbreak vegetation and water resources). These actions extend to responses to market conditions (formulating cooperatives to ensure reliable market price for produce), as well as for ensuring climate change impact driven issues, such as growing incidence of pests, are controlled through group mechanism calendar that collectively governs periods for harvesting in order to eliminate fungus and pests from ruining all crops. Amongst other examples, farmers agree, regardless of whether they still have remaining produce to harvest, to pull out chili plants on the agreed dates so that the soil can be left 'to rest', and pests are unable to take a hold.

### **22.5 Innovating Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change: Collective Local Governance**

In both case studies, overcoming environmental pressures, confict and change through local governance approaches have been important to driving adaptive capacity, both generally, and to climate change for several reasons. The drive in securing access and sustainable use of resources through collective responses has been critical in also driving the factors that support climate change resilience and the adaptive capacity of residents in both cases. For *Masyarakat Adat* in Haruku, adaptive capacity and ways to respond to climate change have primarily centred on customary cultural and resource land management practices to guard local ecosystem integrity. These practices guard the sustainability of local ecosystem integrity and offer a diversity of options for livelihood security. Customary rules mean that resources are therefore used most effciently, usefully and are maintained within ecological bounds sustainably (e.g. young fruit in the forest should not be taken so that they have the opportunity to frst grow and produce seed). The customary practices guard *Negeri* ecosystem integrity, by ensuring the resilience of the environmental systems are more robust in facing climate change conditions, including the diversity of food systems.

*Sasi* is the traditional community-based resource governance system of Haruku. Present throughout Maluku, Sasi is found from the northern Islands of Halmahera, Ternate, Buru, Seram, Ambon and Haruku, to the south and southeast of Banda, Kei and Aru, as well as throughout areas of Papua. Although Haruku is one of the remaining villages in the Maluku islands that maintains and practices the tradition of *Sasi*. *Sasi* provides guidance and sanctions enforced by *Kewang*9 as the rules of the *Negeri*. *Sasi* stipulates the management of agroforestry and marine and fshery resources and is widely considered one of the few remaining long-enduring community-based resource management systems in Asia (Novaczek et al., 2001). *Sasi* is also the longest enduring traditional community-based coastal resource management system in Southeast Asia. It is dated to have been the system of use in the area since the sixteenth century – in providing guidance both for conservation practices and social issues and essentially maintaining natural food resources (Zerner, 1994). *Sasi* is endowed as providing the system of customary law governing social and environmental resources, both terrestrial and marine, throughout the Island of Haruku (Zerner, 1994). *Sasi* as customary law is set out in three areas – frstly, as regarding the governance of resources relating to conservation and protection of the environment and environmental resources. Secondly, in social customs, habits and values, and thirdly, in defning the implementation of the laws and their enforcement. Ultimately employing methods of timing and space in order to regulate access to resources and territories (Novaczek et al., 2001). In turn, these effectively maintain a sustainable ecological, livelihood, and conservation equilibrium (e.g., customary forest conservation, fsh stock sustainability practices).

Land in Haruku is allocated as customary land, and while the land is inherited within families, most of the land within the *Negeri* is allocated as customary land and therefore shared. *Kewang* serve as representatives of the customary law and traditions of *Sasi*, found throughout Central Maluku, responsible for controlling environmental management of all resources in the village domain, especially during the *Sasi* (control or protection time periods) (Soselisa, 2019). The *Kewang* designated through family linage are selected members from family clans to guard and enforce the terms of customary Law or *Sasi* – controlling governance and protecting natural resources, both land and marine. In particular, *Kewang* hold responsibility for periods in which resources are protected or guarded to ensure their sustainability. The *Kewang* are also elected to discuss village economy, the coordination of village economic and livelihood aspects, including infringements of *Sasi* regulations, and boundary controls with neighbouring villages, including the patrols of (common) natural resources, both marine and terrestrial (Mantjoro, 1996; Zerner, 2014). *Kewang* also monitor and manage confict, such as when someone is caught violating the *Sasi* in the *petuanan* area, the *Kewang* will hold a hearing and decide sanctions.

*Sasi* comprehensively guides everything (Zerner, 1994), to ensure that all-natural food systems are well-managed and sustained. For example, *Sasi* ensures that the forest is maintained sustainably, prohibiting the young fruits from being taken so that they can reproduce frst. *Sasi* also ensures that the lompa fsh are not taken until they have completed their breeding cycle and are of a certain size. *Sasi*, when closed,

9*Kewang* are the custodians of *Sasi* (customary law) in Haruku (and throughout some other islands of Maluku).

means that no harvest of that resource can take place whatsoever during the time. It is signalled by certain symbolic signs placed in front or on the resource (e.g. tree, fruit, bush, fsh type) being protected (Zerner, 1994). *Sasi* rules also form part of the vow of the ancestors (*ina ama*), which are maintained continuously to become the norms, values and practices among community life (Batiran & Salim, 2020). Although according to *Kewang, Sasi* is constantly being adapted and updated to remain relevant and appropriate and that the laws are not fxed.

Diversity and timing have been signifcant for maintaining livelihoods and has been built over generations in Haruku. Before climate change, variations affecting seasons and the predictability of rain and dry periods, along with impacts from increased heat and storms and inundation timing, were balanced carefully. For these reasons, the collective responses to environmental pressures, confict and change are therefore vital also in driving adaptive capacity to climate change, with maintaining access to resources and the sustainable use of those resources being vital to local communities' resilience to climate change. "We have [traditional] staples based on sago – bapeda, as well as kasbi [casava] and others. Kasbi isn't affected by pests, variable rains, storms or waves, or earthquakes. No one goes hungry also because we also all share. We have double livelihoods that we can swap between if the conditions are not right to go to the sea because of either climate change or earthquakes and the threat of a tsunami."

In Haruku, for example, although *Sasi* protects and maintains fsh stocks, the areas within the Haruku *Negeri* boundaries are regularly robbed, putting fsh numbers in jeopardy. Despite clear boundary demarcations, disputes exist over access and use, mainly over commonly held resources, such as marine resources. Fishing trawlers and illegal fshing are ongoing within the area. Whereas *Negeri* Haruku and Haruku village are bound by *Sasi* regulations on fsh catch numbers and methods, neighboring villages use fsh bombing or dynamite fshing methods. "Fish are diffcult to come by in the neighboring village because their habit is to use fsh bombing [dynamite fshing]. Whereas here, you can just be sitting on the seawall and catch fsh." To overcome issues such as illegal fshing and use of destructive techniques like dynamite fshing throughout the *Sasi* protected fsh grounds, the *Kewang* run intercountry cooperation, drawing on and pooling networks to collectively overcome environmental resource pressures and conficts. "We work together to protect the coast so that people can no longer come with fsh bombs to destroy the coral reefs."

Kulon Progo farmers, according to the generation, rely on the local customary indigenous system of *Pranata Mangsa. Pranata mangsa* is calendar system used in farming practices in Java that follow nature as a guide for farming and fshing, with a relationship focused on environmental cycles (Retnowati et al., 2014). The land cultivation utilizes knowledge informing land management practices (e.g., lunarsolar calendar in dictating farming practices, known as *pranata mangsa*), as well as the innovation from ingenuity in scarce resource access that have gradually allowed for sophisticated farming to develop in sand soil on a wind, swept coastline. The *pranata mangsa* calendar uses nature as a guide for farming and fshing, within a relationship focused on environmental cycles (Retnowati et al., 2014). *Pranata Mangsa* follows the circulation of the sun over the year using aspects of phenology

and signaling to guide farming activities, as well as preparation for disasters (such as drought, disease outbreaks, foods, pests) that may occur at certain times. The calendar system ascribes timings to the seasons – such as dry season, the transition season before the rainy season, the rainy season and the transition at the end of the rainy season, all with a certain number of days each between them. *Pranata Mangsa* is a system used widely throughout Java as a local calendar and planning method for agriculture and fshing but dramatically shifting under climate change. Part of which includes reading signs from nature, known as *titen*, and built into farmers' process of observing agro-meteorological changes by observing, recording, analyzing, and evaluating existing knowledge for adaptation. With each of these signals there are particular times for planting and harvesting of certain crops (Retnowati et al., 2014).

Interlinked with these systems and ongoing innovations, farmers say they are now continuously shifting around the climate although they have always planned their activities around the shifting of the seasons. "We were already adjusting to the climate from that of our ancestors. So, the pattern of the planting is already a season of certain months it is a type of plants. It means that the agriculture sector has also adjusted to climate change. If it was before there was already the pattern." However, the timescales for shifting have altered, and they are now left to shift dramatically as rainfall and season patterns vary. "Farmers here are already sensitive to anticipate climate change." For the increased heat periods, for example, farmers start earlier to water their crops so that the water can permeate, and then water again in the evenings. "It used to be in one day that we are watering it two-three hours may be enough. But if it is now at least every four hours to fve hours or even six hours." Farmers say they change the system so that they can retain moisture for more protracted timeframes, by using mulch, as well as continually planting windbreaks and trees to break up the sun, dry wind, and heat. Locals claim that the extreme weather variation has resulted in more crop disease, particularly fungus and that they have also lost produce regularly. So, the area collectively coordinates plantings and uses agreements on dates as to when certain crops will be harvested and pulled out in order to minimize the risk of disease for all. A period of "sanitation" is undergone, mutually, between all farmers collectively so that the chain of disease is broken. "To neutralize the PH of the soil, we use dolomite and rotate the crops. Using intercropping, for example, we will create a wedge there with long beans, then there with peanuts and vegetables. To break up the chance of pest incidence."

### **22.6 Conclusion**

Climate change is signifcantly impacting local communities throughout Indonesia dependent on access to ecosystems and weather-dependent resources. Nevertheless, local communities have been responding and adapting to ongoing and rapid environmental change and pressures for decades, utilizing collective approaches to local resource governance that are adaptive. Local resource governance innovates and engages strategies of adaptation to drive the ability to deal with environmental pressures, confict, and change. These methods of responding and adapting to change are also crucial in how climate change responses are formed.

This chapter has briefy shown through case studies how local communities govern, innovate, and engage strategies of adaptation to change to land-use pressures and environmental change. The case studies in this chapter provide examples of how local-level community customary institutions in Indonesia foster norms of reciprocity for cooperation and coordinated actions. These collective mechanisms are crucial in the reciprocal and social relations needed for dealing with an array of hardships arising from pressure, confict, and change and including climate change impacts. These examples provide insights into the collective handling of environmental risks and local governance of natural resources that correlate with the ways local communities can govern, innovate, and engage adaptation strategies to deal with environmental stresses and change including climate. By being active in their resilience and adaptation strategies to other (nonclimate) types of social and environmental pressures and change, these cases have shown the local agency, selfdetermination, and collective action that is prominent in driving adaptive capacity to environmental pressures and change within the local resource governance.

### **References**

**Skye Turner-Walker** has worked widely throughout the Asia-Pacifc on environment and development issues, focusing on climate change adaptation (CCA), and disaster risk reduction (DRR). Skye recently completed her doctorate with the Australian National University (ANU), hosted by the Centre for Asia-Pacifc Studies at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Skye's research focused on community level involvement and local governance responses to climate change adaptation development programming in Indonesia.

**Open Access** This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# **Part VI Social and Technological Interventions**

### **Chapter 23 Local Governance of Sustainability Transition in Community-Scale Solar Water Pumping Systems in Indonesia**

**Sita Rahmani, Takehiko Murayama, Shigeo Nishikizawa, and Muhammad Sani Roychansyah**

**Abstract** Sustainability transition emerges in various types of community-scale projects. Indonesia has been actively implementing solar water pumping systems (SWPS) since 1982. However, for almost four decades, SWPS, as a niche innovation, have not achieved signifcant adoption of solar technology in the water utility sector. This study aimed to assess local governance aspects of SWPS in the context of sustainability transition from two perspectives: internal niche management and local actors. We assessed nine SWPS projects in Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia, using structured interviews that were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis. The results showed that the discontinuation of support made SWPS unsustainable, operating only for an average of 4 years. Crucial operational factors included electrical damage, insuffcient training, and lack of funds for damage repair. The iterative process of learning, network building, and vision did not eventuate. SWPS have direct beneft on the water supply; however, technological performance feedback related to the karst environment was insuffciently addressed and the network of actors did not expand to higher levels of local government. SWPS were viewed as an unreliable technology; hence, there was no vision for applying SWPS as a water utility. Solar photovoltaic pumps need strong support to compete with diesel and electrical water utility pumps. To achieve sustainability transition, it is imperative to generate vision, promote policy change, and build committed networks within local government rather than simply replicate the number of project installations.

e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
M. S. Roychansyah

S. Rahmani (\*) · T. Murayama · S. Nishikizawa

Department of Transdisciplinary Science and Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan

Department of Architecture and Planning, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
A. Triyanti et al. (eds.), *Environmental Governance in Indonesia*, Environment & Policy 61, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15904-6\_23

**Keywords** Governance · Indonesia · Sustainability transition · SWPS

### **23.1 Introduction**

Efforts for sustainable transition often begin with niche innovations (Geels & Schot, 2007) carried out in local context and expected to scale up for broader societal changes in a regime selection environment (Schot & Geels, 2008). Many sustainability experiments have been implemented in a societal context with the expectation of substantial sustainability gains in not only environmental but also social and economic aspects (Sengers et al., 2019). Community-scale solar water pumping system (SWPS) is one example of an innovation to create a more sustainable water– energy system. The technology combines a pump that operates on electricity generated by photovoltaic (PV) cells. It is an ideal alternative to electricity- and diesel-based pumps that rely heavily on fossil fuel (Li et al., 2017).

In Indonesia, SWPS have been actively implemented since 1982 (UNESCAP, 1991). However, the total number of projects is unknown and the offcial evaluation documents are lacking. Data from Lorentz (Lorentz, n.d.), a German supplier of solar pumps, reported approximately 189 SWPS projects across Indonesia during 2005–2021. Figure 23.1 shows the distribution of SWPS projects per province on the bivariate thematic ratio map for electrifcation (Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Republic of Indonesia, 2019) and decent drinking water1 (BPS Indonesia, 2019). It is shown in the map that SWPS is applied in regions with low electricity and water access, such as Nusa Tenggara Timur (54 projects), as well as regions that have access to both, such as Java Island (19 projects). This provides insight that the SWPS has become an interesting option across rural Indonesia, promising an affordable water supply, energy security, and environmental protection.

To date, the practices of SWPS in Indonesia have not accumulated toward signifcant adoption of renewable energy (RE). The internal process of innovation to transition has been addressed through a framework of strategic niche management, that is, governance approach to create favorable environment to enhance further development of new technology (Kemp et al., 1998; Schot & Geels, 2008; Seyfang et al., 2014; Smith et al., 2016). Transformations of multiple projects at local level require aggregation, coordination, and adjustment to propel the technological trajectory of this emerging feld (Geels & Raven, 2006) as illustrated in Fig. 23.2. Transition from a niche innovation to a broader application needs support in the form of wider institutional changes and system innovations by a variety of participants and across governance levels, from national to regional and local (Dobravec

1Decent Drinking Water = Drinking water with a minimum distance of 10 m to a waste disposal site sourced from pipes, drilling wells/pumps, protected wells, protected springs, including rainwater; it does not include bottled water, water from street vendors, water sold through tanks, well water, or unprotected springs [8].

**Fig. 23.1** Distribution of SWPS projects in the bivariate map of electrifcation to decent drinking water ratio

**Fig. 23.2** Niche trajectory by local projects. (Adapted from Geels & Raven, 2006)

et al., 2021). Continuing support from an institution is one of the important factors to sustain community energy projects (Rahmani et al., 2020).

As a niche innovation, SWPS have hardly moved from experimentation to mainstream adoption in the water utility sector. In the Local Government Water Utility's (PDAM) energy effciency guidelines and strategic plan of 2018–2022 (Ministry of Public Work Republic of Indonesia, 2014, 2017), there is no specifc plan to adopt SWPS nor RE. Several PDAM had considered using solar power (PERPAMSI,

2016; Samudra, 2021); however, to the best of our knowledge, none is yet to be built. Energy aspect is crucial because PDAM has issues of unstable power supply from the national grid (Nurmalia et al., 2006). Energy is needed at every stage of the water service cycle (Plappally & Lienhard, 2012) and often accounts for the largest (approximately 55%) proportion of operating costs (IRENA, 2015). RE, specifcally solar PV in water utilities, offers opportunities to improve energy security. One example of this is the Valley Center Municipal Water District in California, where 1.1 MW solar PV was applied to supply 20% of the electricity required by the utility's largest pumping station (IRENA, 2015). However, in Indonesia, throughout almost four decades of experience implementing SWPS, adoption of this technology in water utility operations has not emerged.

Various aspects of SWPS in Indonesia have been studied in the last few years. Most papers explored design analysis, technical challenges, and economic feasibilities, such as in Gunungkidul and Banten (Arifn et al., 2018; Setiawan et al., 2014a, b; Simamora, 2020). Development processes have been evaluated regarding implementation (Primawan & Iswanjono, 2019; Riyanto et al., 2021; Setiawan et al., 2014a, b) and the participation of diverse stakeholders (Wahyuni et al., 2015), which comes from Gunungkidul and Ponorogo. Recently, a paper investigated some socioeconomic impacts of SWPS projects in Gunungkidul (Rahmani et al., 2021). Despite the growing body of studies on SWPS in Indonesia, examination of local governance aspects has not been suffciently reported. Initiative from government is crucial for growth and development of SWPS, as reported in India, where largescale implementation took place across country, targeting 1 million SWPS by 2021 (Rathore et al., 2018). In Indonesia, there is a gap in literature about SWPS in the context of governance aspect and sustainability transition into a broader water utility application.

This study aimed to assess local governance aspects in SWPS in the context of sustainability transition. We defne local governance at two levels: internal niche management and local actors, including local government and the implementing organization. We argue that the lack of a supportive environment from local actors contributes to the unsustainability of SWPS in the water utility sector. To show this, we test our hypothesis in a case study. We selected Gunungkidul Regency in Yogyakarta Province, because several institutions there have actively implemented SWPS during 1986–2017. The district comprises a rural region (94%) (BPS Kabupaten Gunungkidul, 2019) and has a karst landscape, which is formed by the dissolution of carbonate rocks, and prolonged water issues. High rock solubility results in caves and extensive underground aquifers (Bakalowicz, 2005). Water is sourced from caves, deep wells, or springs that are often off-grid and far from settlements. SWPS project was expected to solve the water problem. The projects were replicated in many villages, but some local articles reported that systems became fully nonfunctional after several years of operation (Kusuma, 2008; WKM, 2009). Offcial documents concerning the evaluation and performance status were lacking. We investigated nine SWPS projects and interviewed community-based organizations (CBOs), the implementing organizations, village and subdistrict leaders, and local governments, and conducted a qualitative analysis of their responses.

The novelty of this paper is based on two key points. First, it flls the gap in the current literature dedicated to community-scale SWPS regarding the major issue of support systems that enable sustainability transition. Second, the research is innovative in taking the perspective and analysis of institutional arrangements from each actor in the local stakeholder cohort. As a study case, SWPS in Gunungkidul represents the typology of small-scale (<1 MW) solar PV for productive use, specifcally for rural community water supply. Worldwide, India has been the major implementer of SWPS for agricultural farms (Chandel et al., 2015), while in developed countries, the applications are commonly for ranchland, livestock, and vacation homes (Meah et al., 2008a, b). As an RE technology, SWPS produces the direct beneft of water, not electricity. Therefore, the technology performance is strongly associated with an underground aquifer and challenging environmental conditions such as the karst landscape of Gunungkidul.

### **23.2 Analytical Framework**

To the best of our knowledge, scholars have not assessed SWPS in Indonesia through a niche management framework and the institutional arrangements of local actors; hence, we decided to add these considerations in the research as shown in Fig. 23.3. We hypothesized that the lack of a supportive environment, from local actors to internal niche, leads to SWPS malfunction and eventually diffculty in adopting the technology. The frst level of analysis is the internal niche. The defnitions of niche management process are as follows: (a) *Learning process* includes the articulation of needs, problems, and possibilities at multiple dimensions. (b) *Network building* contributes to niche development when it has diverse actors providing multiple views and can mobilize commitment and resources. (c) *Visions and*

**Fig. 23.3** Analytical framework

*expectations* are crucial to drive the nurturing process and it should be shared among actors (Kemp et al., 1998; Schot & Geels, 2008; Seyfang et al., 2014).

The second step of analysis is the connection of niche with the institutional arrangements of local actors. In our analysis, local actors consist of local government and the implementing organizations. Since the democratizations process in 1998, central government has decentralized many of its function to local government, which is divided into autonomous provinces, districts (or regencies, *kabupaten*), and municipalities (*kota*) (Usman, 2001). In districts comprising rural areas, there are smaller government administrative units called subdistricts (*kecamatan*) and villages (*desa*). To fully understand the context, we added an important actor in the SWPS process: the implementing organizations that drive SWPS development, such as universities, nonproft organizations (NPOs), the national agency, and international donors. We analyzed the actors' governance aspect based on three indicators: policy, structure, and management. The defnitions are as follows: (1) *Policy and institutional mandate* is how government follows a certain method to achieve the desired result; (2) *Structure* means allocation of responsibility and budgeting; and (3) *Management* focuses on the government's relationship with society, particularly in regard to engaging in SWPS issues (Boesveldt et al., 2018; Smits et al., 2011). Our fndings are intended to encourage decision-makers to create favorable local governance arrangements and policies that continuously support SWPS to achieve sustainable transition.

### **23.3 Methodology**

This study employed a qualitative analysis using deductive and inductive approaches. Primary data were collected through face-to-face interview and distributed questionnaire to a total of 18 people. We visited nine projects from GK1 to GK9 (see Table 23.1) and interviewed face to face with one representative from each

**Table 23.1** List of projects and their status

CBO. CBO is a group composed of community members who managed the SWPS. They bear the responsibility of doing daily operational, maintenance, water distribution, and coordination. We also collected data from local actors that were province agency, district department, subdistrict government, village government, and implementing organization. Data from several actors were gathered using a survey questionnaire comprising open-ended response questions, which was distributed by email in consideration of respondents' convenience. The list of informants is presented in Appendix 23.1. When used as sources in Results and Discussion, the interview coded numbers are stated in the text inside the square brackets, for example, [10] refers to the interview with province agency.

Interviews with the CBO representatives were held from March 2–7, 2021, and those with the external institutions from July 22 to September 2, 2021. The list of questions was constructed beforehand, which consisted of open questions about issues relating to the research questions and the challenges of energy generation transition, for example, development process, operations and maintenance, system malfunctions, support from external stakeholders, policies, institutional arrangement, and overall impression of the project. Face-to-face interviews were recorded and transcribed for the analysis. All quotations attributed to the interview are anonymized and masculine personal pronouns are used throughout.

Data analysis contained two major steps. First, the co-occurrence analysis of niche management used the transcribed interviews from each CBO representative. Codes were defned according to insight derived from interview and then aggregated into the theoretical concept of niche management. Qualitative data analysis software, ATLAS.ti, was used to generate code co-occurrence coeffcients. The c-coeffcient indicates the strength of the relation between two codes from 0 to 1, where 1 means the codes cooccur wherever they are used (ATLAS.ti, n.d.) and is calculated as follows:

$$c = n12 \left( \left( n1 + n2 - n12 \right), \right.$$

where *n*12 = number of co-occurrences for codes *n*1 and *n*2. Then, the coeffcient is divided into three intervals, namely, strong, intermediate, and weak relationship.

Second, in the analysis of institutional arrangements, we carried out qualitative analysis from the transcribed interviews and open-ended questionnaires from local actors. Data from the questionnaire were labeled and categorized according to the three indicators: policy, structure, and management. We present the results in three categories: (1) *strong* means the variable is fully present in relation to SWPS; (2) *intermediate* is when the variable is present but not aligned with SWPS; and (3) *weak* means the variable does not present at all. The result was triangulated with regulations, laws, and other secondary data to ensure accuracy in observation. Figure 23.4 shows the method fowchart.

**Fig. 23.4** Method fowchart

**Fig. 23.5** Project overview

### **23.4 Results and Discussion**

This section is presented as follows. First is the analysis of niche management followed by the institutional arrangements of local actors. At the end, challenges to sustainability transition are presented by combining both analyses. Results are shown in the early paragraphs, followed by discussions and references from literature.

### *23.4.1 Niche Management Analysis of Solar Water Pumping Systems*

Figure 23.5 captures the survey results regarding the overview of the project, functionality, and the supporting environment of SWPS, such as the service fee, reserve funds, spare parts, and support from the implementing organization.

All projects were implemented through the involvement of the external institutions and donors. In the majority, the community participated in public meetings and physical construction. The project was later handed over from the implementing organization to the local community, giving them full responsibility for operations and maintenance. Local government, from province to village level, never built any SWPS (Fig. 23.6). Problems emerged with the project performance. The majority of SWPS (8 of 9 or 89%) are currently not functioning. From Table 23.1, it is shown

**Fig. 23.6** Relationships among actors during SWPS project development

that the average SWPS lifetime was 4 years. An accumulation of many factors caused the projects to be stopped. From the interviews, we classifed the code, subcode, and abstract into niche management factors (Table 23.2) and the coeffcients of co-occurrence in Fig. 23.7. Damage to the electrical components was frequently associated with the need for repair support (0.27) and a lack of reserve funds for repairs (0.19). Moreover, the community needs the support because of the insuffcient training they had received (0.20). Throughout the experience on managing the SWPS, they felt the system failed to deliver the expected performance, which was associated with their preference for an electric utility (0.21).

This section explains the niche management through the indicators of system malfunction, learning process, network building, and vision.

System malfunction. SWPS has multiple parts that are exposed to inclement conditions such as bad weather, changes in water level, and human manipulation; therefore, mechanical wear and tear is inevitable. While the design system of each project is different, in general, the pump and controller are the most prone elements of the system. Six projects mentioned problem in the pump (GK1, GK2, GK4, GK6, GK7, GK8) and three projects mentioned problems in the controller/inverter (GK3, GK5, GK 9). Malfunction resulting from theft happened at GK 1 and GK4. In the case of Gunungkidul, most of the SWPS locations are near to the water source, caves, and forest, far from the community settlement. Theft caused electrical burnouts, which exacerbated the malfunction. Longevity of the SWPS requires efforts in the repair and replacement of elements when malfunctions occur.

The controller contains sophisticated electronics that must withstand various environmental conditions while isolating the solar PV array from the pump for safety and providing the pump with optimum voltage (Meah et al., 2008a, b). A controller that incorporates an inverter is needed if an AC pump is used. Ideally,

**Table 23.2** Code, subcode, and abstract

the controller/inverter is scheduled to be replaced after 8–12 years (Welsien & Hosier, 2015); however, the average lifetime of the SWPS in Gunungkidul was only 4 years, far below other reported cases that had been in operation for 10 years in Mexico (Foster et al., 1998) and 15 years in Wyoming, USA (Meah et al., 2008a, b). In other words, the system deteriorated faster than the expected replacement time. Routine operational maintenance faces a huge barrier when there is no support system in the region; hence, the SWPS quickly become fully nonfunctional.

*Learning Process* The SWPS project was developed with strong collaboration between external actors and the community. During the project preparation stage, most of the CBOs (89% or 8 of 9 cases) received training in operations and maintenance. The most common training involved wiping the solar panels and checking the pipe [2], [5], [7], [8], [9]. Some CBOs received more advanced training such as GK9. All CBOs said they had insuffcient skills for conducting higher level maintenance, such as repairing the pump. Our data show insuffcient training to be strongly associated with the need for assistance when malfunctions occur (c-coeffcient = 0.20).

**Fig. 23.7** Co-occurrence coeffcients between codes

Continuous learning is needed in order to improve niche growth. This process aspect was glaringly absent at the SWPS Gunungkidul. For most installations, technical damage was not investigated further, as there was no skilled technician to assist the community. Several CBOs mentioned the limestone sedimentation that caused damage in the pump [6], [8]. Another CBO mentioned pump failure at low water level [2] and experienced rapid corrosion of the solar PV array situated near the coast [9]. Such problems and their solutions need to be included as part of the learning process in order to improve the SWPS' performance.

The hydrological cycle in karst aquifers has high heterogeneity and is organized by groundwater fow, which needs to be monitored continuously (Bakalowicz, 2005). Learning from several limitations in the feld, adjustment in the design technology might be needed to achieve optimum performance and the standardization of best practices (Geels & Deuten, 2006). Diffculties fnding skilled human capital within Gunungkidul amplify the urgency to bring technical support and on-going professional advice from outside. Gunungkidul has the lowest Human Development Index among other regions in the province (69.98 of 100) (BPS Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 2020). The fndings in our case studies align with those reported by UNESCAP (UNESCAP, 1991). It is feasible to operate SWPS by unskilled personnel; however, skilled engineers are needed for regular technical maintenance. SWPS require monthly maintenance checks and annual high-level back-up and support.

*Network Building* The existing SWPS network is operated among the CBO, the implementing organization, and village government. As the driver of development, the implementing organization is expected to deliver assistance. Our research indicates that 89% (8 of 9 cases) do not have direct access to spare parts, meaning they depend on the implementing organization to facilitate the contacts. The majority of CBO representatives said that the spare parts were from outside the province, for example, Surabaya or Semarang, or from the capital city of Jakarta. The pump has been imported from overseas, for example, Lorentz from Germany and Franklin from the United States.

According to those interviewed, almost half of the cases (44%) received support at least once in postconstruction phase. When the institution was willing to facilitate the repairs, the community decision was constrained by limited funds. The collection of user fees became necessary in order to cover the cost of repair. Even though most of the projects (67% or 6 of 9 cases) had collected a service fee, all cases (100%) reported that the reserve fund was insuffcient to cover the repair and replacement of components. The fund was only adequate for minor problems, such as fxing broken pipes or to buy battery water. The cost of a replacement unit is far above the community fund. The socio-economic background of the communities, where many are farmers and day-laborers, makes it diffcult to collect additional money. Therefore, component failures were not fxed and SWPS operations were not restored.

These fndings highlight three consequences. First, the network is not developed between CBOs and higher local government or broader actors. The CBOs heavily rely on the implementing organization for assistance, such as searching for replacement spare parts. Second, the unavailability of spare parts at a local level means that repair times will be signifcantly extended because the components have to be shipped from outside the country. Third, although operational cost is very low, if any maintenance costs do happen, then SWPS require relatively expensive items such as a replacement pump or controller/inverter (Hjalmarsdottir, 2012); this causes the repair costs to be higher than other water supply systems (UNICEF, 2016). To date, credit from fnancial institutions or government is not available.

*Vision and Expectation* The SWPS, as a new technology in the Gunungkidul Regency, was built with an expectation of cheaper water service and minimum operational cost compared with diesel-powered pumps. A lack of commitment was evident in some projects where assistance from the implementing organization was not available at all (56%: GK1, GK2, GK3, GK5, GK8). The diffculties of project management affect the community's perception about the RE system and preference for an electrical or diesel-powered water utility. The CBOs have a strong interest in electrical utilities (c-coeffcient = 0.21) because they are easier to maintain [5], [6], [7], [9] and they believe they are able to manage these units with their minimum skill (0.09) and without external support (0.16).

The promise of technological performance is an essential part of niche development (Kemp et al., 1998). However, having an accumulation of the above problems, the SWPS became unreliable and did not meet the users' expectations. Electric utilities, as an incumbent technology, have the benefts of far longer time in development and offer convenience of use, lower cost, infrastructure, maintenance network, and regulation (Smith, 2007; Smith et al., 2016); hence, conventional electrical utilities have higher reliability and greater longevity.

### *23.4.2 Analysis of Institutional Arrangements of Local Actors*

The institutional arrangements vary for each stakeholder in the context of SWPS management and its transition (Table 23.3). The following discussions refer to the contents of table by row number and column, respectively, in brackets; for example, (1, 2) refers to the province agency's roles and responsibility.

*Province Agency* Institutional mandates play an important part in government roles and function to conduct certain programs with a particular approach. In Yogyakarta Province, responsibility for the energy sector is on the province level (1, 1). The province does not have SWPS assets and they never built the system. The province government perceives that solar PV for the water sector is currently not effective due to its high initial investment cost and the electricity produced is intermittent. Hence, the province level focuses on solar PV utilization for electricity generation and not water pumping.

Yogyakarta Province has produced a "Regional Energy Plan 2020–2050" (Government of Yogyakarta Province, 2020) that consists of a vision, mission, goals, targets, and strategies for regional energy management. The plan plays a major role as a guideline for local government, municipalities (*kota*), and districts (*kabupaten*) to develop a strategic plan, coordinate across sectors, and for the public to participate in energy sector decisions. From the perspective of RE, the plan mentions installation of solar PVs on building rooftops in government offces, commercial buildings, industry, and public facilities. Because the SWPS is not stated in the program, the province government's involvement, budget allocation, and initiative in the issue are limited (1, 2; 1, 3; and 1, 4, respectively).

*District Department* There is no department that manages energy sectors at the district level (2, 1). District departments are responsible for water services that use an electric utility or diesel, and do not consider RE as an electricity source. There is no clear mandate to implement RE in the water sector and RE development is outside the district's scope of responsibility; therefore, local departments only focus on water supplies (2, 2). There is no allotted arrangement in APBD (Regional Fund) for RE projects (2, 3). In the DAK (Special Allocation Fund), which the national government transfers to municipalities and is earmarked for national priorities, the allotted arrangement is for the water network and not RE or solar PV. Initiatives for collaborative works in SWPS are absent (2, 4).

**Table 23.3** Institutional arrangements in the context of SWPS implementation and transition

```
Notes: ●: strong, : intermediate, ○: weak
```
District government focuses on two programs of the water sector in the Gunungkidul: PDAM in urban areas and the "Water Supply and Sanitation Program for Low-income Communities" (Pamsimas) for rural areas. PDAM has a small part of its systems that uses RE technology but this was a pilot project implemented by external actors (BPPT, 2016; Nestmann et al., 2013).

Pamsimas, a national program initiated by the World Bank and government of Indonesia in 1993, is developed in collaboration between community demand and government institutions (The World Bank, 2014). Arguably, there is a possibility to use solar PV in the Pamsimas program. However, budget allocation per project, which is approximately IDR 240 million (17,000 USD), is inadequate. Additional funding opportunities from the district budget are also limited.

*Sub-district Government* Sub-district level has the role of "guidance (*pembinaan*) and supervision (*pengawasan*) of village activities" according to Law Number 23/2014 about Local Government. Their work facilitates development planning meetings and oversees village activity. The sub-district's policies, roles, and initiatives in SWPS activities are minimum (3, 1; 3, 2; and 3, 4, respectively). They also do not have an allotted budget for direct activities such as SWPS management (3, 3).

Prior research stated that there are challenges due to the lack of capacity in the staff, who commonly carry out purely administrative roles (Syukri, 2016). The research mentioned one of the causes is the absence of detailed regulation about the function and authority of sub-district staff in assisting village governments.

*Village Government* Village government has the strongest roles and responsibility to manage SWPS compared with other government levels (4, 2). When an SWPS project is built in their territory, the village government is expected to manage the system [10], [11], [17], [18]. Because the Law Number 6/2014 about "Village" is in force, the village has greater roles and authority to govern autonomously (4, 1). In terms of funding, the national government provides a Village Fund (*Dana Desa*) and district government allocates some budget as well (4, 3). The village does not put SWPS on the priority for an allotted budget due to several considerations. The frst derives from the "Vision" section: the SWPS has failed to meet expectations and seems to not be a reliable system; therefore, the village prefers to build a water supply system based on an electric utility or diesel rather than repairing the SWPS. Second, the SWPS has been nonfunctional for a relatively long time; hence, the deteriorated systems require more funds than budgeted.

Regarding engagement among actors in SWPS management, we found that village government, which is the lowest government unit, is the only level that directly collaborates with the CBOs that manage SWPS and with the implementing organization (4, 4); however, village governments have yet to actively seek broader opportunities to sustain the SWPS. The upper government levels, that is, the province agency, district department, and subdistrict government, are relatively passive and do not initiate collaborative work although they said they are willing to facilitate and coordinate a proposal if any [10], [11], [12], [13].

*Implementing Organization* The implementing organization has technical expertise, resources, and networks to engage with many actors (5, 4). While each institution has different specifc policies, in general, they want to materialize the potential of RE as a low-carbon technology in rural areas through pilot project experimentation or community service (5, 2). However, such programs often periodically change and do not possess the grand vision and design, making the outcomes of the allotted budget uncertain (5, 3). In all the case studies, when the SWPS construction is fnished and the CBO established, the mandate to sustain the SWPS is handed over to the CBO and village government (5, 1), leaving the villagers to struggle with technical malfunctions. A clearly defned and written contractual arrangement is needed to clarify each party's responsibility (Smits et al., 2011).

### *23.4.3 Challenges of SWPS Sustainability Transition*

Over almost the last four decades, Indonesia has been unable to successfully implement SWPS in the water utility sector. Using an empirical case set of SWPS at Gunungkidul Regency, our analysis focused on local governance, starting with the dynamics of internal niche management and then the connection to the institutional arrangements of local actors.

The drivers of SWPS development in Gunungkidul are the external implementing organizations that come from diverse backgrounds: the national agency, international donors, universities, and NPOs. The initial cost of SWPS is beyond the affordability of the rural community, province and district governments' budgets; hence, none of the projects in Gunungkidul were initiated or developed locally. After construction fnished, the SWPS was handed over to the CBOs, bearing them with the responsibilities of management, operations, and maintenance. Communitylevel organization has been a common approach for rural water supply system in Indonesia through Pamsimas program, which has achieved several success cases of improved water, sanitation, and behavior change (The World Bank, 2014). Rural communities in Indonesia, especially in area having higher scarcity or resources and geographic isolation, commonly have strong cooperation and social ties (Subejo, 2009).

During the preparation stages, eight of the nine CBOs (89%) received training. However, to assume that training would equip the CBOs with enough skill independently is over-simplistic, moreover SWPS uses advance technology, not a conventional pump. System malfunctions cannot be handled by the CBOs; as a result, the average project lifetime was only 4 years. Through co-occurrence analysis, we found that the technical damage is related to CBOs' need for repairs support (c-coeffcient = 0.27) and lack of reserve funds for repairs (0.19). They also need the support due to the lack of training they had received (0.20).

During the management of SWPS, steps for nurturing the niche into sustainability transition were not taken. The ideal situation is when the institutions involved in project preparation commit and support the sustainability of the niche. However, from an analysis of institutional arrangements, it is apparent that their policy mandate, level of responsibility, and fnancing are not aligned to continuously support SWPS. Hence, their assistance was discontinued. The Yogyakarta province agency and Gunungkidul district department were never drivers of the SWPS development; therefore, they perceived the installations to be outside their scope of responsibility. At the local government level, networks only exist within the village government as the closest government unit to the CBO.

Without a supportive environment, SWPS, as a niche innovation, was unstable and unsustainable. The barrier of niche adoption in relation to the karst case-specifc problem also needs to be properly addressed. The study area of Gunungkidul Regency is challenging for the exploration of and lifting of water to the surface, as said by district departments and implementing organization. Refecting on the rapid deterioration of electrical components, the karst environment is arguably one of the contributing factors to SWPS not meeting expectations in terms of longevity. Interviewees mentioned the problems associated with limestone sedimentation and low water level, which are typical in a karst environment. Karst formations develop a distinct hydrological system that needs specifc exploration techniques and approaches (Hartmann et al., 2014). Future design confgurations should consider such issues to improve SWPS durability.

The local government has acknowledged the beneft of RE and shown interest in applying the technology, as shown in the "Regional Energy Plan 2020–2050" of Yogyakarta Province. However, they are yet to involve in water-energy sector and SWPS feld. From the interview, several barriers existed, such as huge initial investments, perceived uncertainties of technological performance, and limited public funding [10], [11], [12]. Unavailability of a supportive environment has made it diffcult for SWPS to compete with incumbent technology, in this case, diesel, and electric utility pumps. Circling back to the vision in project planning, this raises a question regarding how long the SWPS is expected to last and whether it is regarded as an interim condition prior to grid electrifcation (Kumar et al., 2019). Small-scale SWPS in Gunungkidul are unable to fulfll the vision of a reliable water supply. Consequently, visions to apply solar PV in regional water utilities have not yet emerged.

These above fndings refect three points. First, supportive policy environment that promotes SWPS is unavailable in the municipality; as a result, any initiative to build community-scale SWPS project could not be integrated into a certain grand plan, and eventually received little support from the municipalities. Further, when a project successfully implemented, there is a deeper structural problem regarding the tendency to deliver early quantitative, measurable results instead of performance and empirical impacts feedback (Derks & Romijn, 2019). Second, as initiator, the implementing organizations have been focused on replicating SWPS installations rather than on building networks with local government and bridging policy change. Political harmonization and support is extremely crucial, including stakeholders' engagement, creating forums gathering the actors, routine meeting and consultation, that induce progress in policy framework (Sovacool, 2018). Third, province and district governments have not demonstrated an adaptive governance approach toward SWPS installations as an opportunity to initiate more action or strategic intervention in low-carbon development. Study conducted by Morita et al. (2020) mentioned that local government level of Indonesia has several challenges to achieve sustainable development goals, that are the lack of a coordinated system involving multiple stakeholders, inadequate capacity, experience, resources, and data for implementing and reporting. Shortcoming in local level is arguably related to the perception that national authorities is seen as driving forces of renewables (such as Ministry for Energy and Mineral Resources and state electricity company, or PLN), however the lack of coordination between national and subnational decision makers also exist (Marquardt, 2014).

Delegation from national mandate, such as declaring in national plan the obligation to adopt SWPS in water utility, will not necessarily achieve success in the implementation of sustainability transition. For a local innovation to be successfully

adopted in a broader environment, signifcant changes are required in the institutional and governance aspect. Transition management is an iterative process (Loorbach & Rotmans, 2006), in the process of learning, systematic monitoring, and evaluation. The intention to scale should be in stakeholder's mindset and part of the design to assess the scalability of innovation. Then, the decision to scale is based on the evidence, whether the desirable result is achieved and has potential to expand (Holcombe, 2012). This is not exclusive in our case about the transition of SWPS technology into water utility, but also in general local RE project that dreamed to pioneer regional energy transition. A dedicated institution has to be in place to facilitate the transition process. RE in general has a barrier to high upfront cost, perceived technology performance uncertainty, and risk (Vallecha et al., 2021). Hence, a strong leadership and committed institution who willing to take risk and advocating change is very crucial (Sovacool, 2018). Due to limited public fnance, private sector investment will be very important. In essence, the effcacy of transition needs capacity building, stakeholder participation, policy alignment, technological learning, and continuous support commitment.

### **23.5 Conclusion**

SWPS in Indonesia has been developed as a community-scale project since 1982; however, the technology is yet to be adopted in the water utility sector. Through the lens of governance, we addressed this problem through an analysis of internal niche management and local actors' arrangements using a case study in Gunungkidul Regency. Our data on SWPS projects between 1986 and 2017 show that the average lifetime of the nine SWPS projects was 4 years. The discontinuation of support by implementing organizations meant CBOs struggled to overcome system malfunctions. The interviewees repeatedly mentioned that damage to the electrical components was frequently associated with the need for support in order to repair equipment and a lack of reserve funds. The community needs this support due to the insuffcient training they received. The iterative process of learning, network building, and articulation of vision was not pursued. Challenges to the adoption of SWPS in a karst environment were insuffciently addressed. The network of actors did not extend to higher local government levels (province and district), whereas at the same time, their initiative to engage was also limited. Responsibility rested on village government as the closest government unit to the CBO; however, there was reluctance at this level to prioritize village funding for SWPS, because it had failed to meet their vision. As an internal niche, SWPS is seen as unstable and unsustainable by CBOs and local government; accordingly, there is no vision to apply the technology to the larger water utility.

Solar PV pump technology needs stronger support to compete with diesel and electric utility pumps in the water utility sector. To achieve sustainability transition, supportive policy promoting RE-water sectors should be in place, and more efforts on building vision and committed networks in local actors rather than replicating the number of installations. Transition management is an iterative learning cycle; hence, the involved stakeholders need to be dedicated to facilitating and assisting the process. Using insight from our analytical framework and the Gunungkidul case, it could be helpful for parties to identify similar cases of community-scale RE projects in rural settings.

We consider the following limitations in our research. First, we did not explore diverse aspects such as the market, industry, science, culture, and infrastructure. Second, we did not delve into the national and local linkage of water–energy policy. Future research in this area will strengthen the argument about the SWPS development trajectory from a multilevel perspective. Sustainability transition is a continuous and long-term effort that needs a combination of strength and commitment from different level of government structures, from national to local level.

**Acknowledgment** We deeply thank all interviewees who shared their experiences, views, and time with us. We are also very grateful to Ameylia Puspita Rosa, Naufal Fattah Tastian, Freegita Istihadi, and Septia Latifah for their assistance in the feldwork. We thank Kultip Suwanteep for her feedback.

### **Appendices**

### *Appendix 23.1: List of Informants*

#### **Notes:**

(a) Initials of CBO correspond to each project locations (i.e., 1 from GK1)

	- [13] correspond to GK6, GK7, and GK9, [14] to GK8
	- [15] correspond to GK6 and GK7, [16] to GK9
	- [17] correspond to GK8, [18] to GK

### *Appendix 23.2: List of Abbreviations*

### **References**

**Sita Rahmani** studied master and doctoral degree in environmental planning and policy science at the School of Environment and Society, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan. She has worked as a research assistant in various projects of urban and regional planning, including projects funded by foreign university, ministry, and various government agencies in Indonesia. Her main research interests include regional development, environmental management, and local renewable energy.

**Takehiko Murayama** is a professor of environmental planning and policy science at Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan. He received a PhD in social engineering, then served academic and professional appointments at Waseda University and Fukushima University (Japan), and visiting professor at University of British Columbia (Canada) and Rutgers University (USA). His research felds include risk management and communication, environmental impact assessment for renewable energy facilities and international cooperation.

**Shigeo Nishikizawa** is an associate professor of environmental planning and policy of the School of Environment and Society, Tokyo Institute of Technology (Tokyo Tech). He received a PhD in social engineering from Tokyo Tech, and then served as a research associate. He was also appointed as a lecturer at University of Shiga Prefecture, Japan. His research interests cover environmental impact assessment, consensus building, and social acceptance of renewable energies.

**Muhammad Sani Roychansyah** is an associate professor of urban planning, design, and development at Department of Architecture and Planning, Universitas Gadjah Mada. He graduated from Architecture UGM, and continued his master and doctorate at Tohoku University, Japan. He collaborated with researches at ETH Zurich, Politecnico di Torino, University of Warsaw, and several Japanese institutions. His research interests are related to sustainable urban development and contemporary studies of built environment.

**Open Access** This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

### **Chapter 24 Building a Sustainable Photovoltaic Innovation System in Indonesia Through Network Governance Perspective**

**Anugerah Yuka Asmara, AR. Rohman Taufq Hidayat, Badrudin Kurniawan, Hideaki Ohgaki, Toshio Mitsufuji, and Jordi Cravioto**

**Abstract** Photovoltaic (PV) is one of primary renewable energy sources aimed to achieve national electrifcation ratio in Indonesia. There are two PV electricity generators in Indonesia, centralized PV generators (PLTS) and dispersed PV generators (SHS). Both PLTS and SHS are installed in remote and rural areas by which there are no electricity grids provided by state-owned electricity (PLN). The numbers of 15 PLTS/SHS projects are main cases of this study. All of them are categorized based on the type of project and thus analyzed by qualitative research method. This research attempts to investigate PV projects' current progress and formulate a solution to solve the emerging problems. This research found that PLTS/ SHS projects face unresolved classical problems over the years, unsustaining PV projects (e.g., short-life infrastructure due to maintenance capability issue). This study proposes regional innovation system (RIS) and sectoral innovation system (SIS) as the Indonesian comprehensive policy strategy to sustain national PV projects. Network Governance (NG) perspective is a lens to capture how actors of academician, business, government, and community (ABGC) interact and collaborate mutually. The conclusion is that RIS and SIS can create a PV market in Indonesia, possibly being implemented through different NG forms.

A. R. T. Hidayat Universitas Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. Kurniawan State University of Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia

H. Ohgaki · J. Cravioto Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
T. Mitsufuji OIC Research Organization of Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan

© The Author(s) 2023 A. Triyanti et al. (eds.), *Environmental Governance in Indonesia*, Environment & Policy 61, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15904-6\_24

A. Y. Asmara (\*)

National Research and Innovation Agency, Jakarta, Indonesia

**Keywords** Innovation · System · Photovoltaic · Network · Governance

### **24.1 Introduction**

Ministry of Energy and Mineral (Ministry of ESDM) (2018, 2019) reported, Indonesia has potential solar generation energy up to 207,898 MW (~4.80 kWh/m2 / day) and considers photovoltaic (PV) to achieve 100% national electrifcation in 2022 that currently only utilized less than 0.05%. Government prioritizes new PV infrastructures in uncovered service areas of the state-owned electricity company (PLN), such as remote villages. Establishing PV energy is the nationally strategic renewable energy program that aims at 23% of total energy production from renewable sources in 2025 and will increase to 31% in 2050 (Peraturan Pemerintah No 79 Tahun 2014). It is also part of the Indonesian government's commitment to climate change through the Ministry of Finance (Ministry of Finance, 2021).

The Government of Indonesia and PLN established a centralized PV generation system (PLTS) and a dispersed PV generation system (solar home system/SHS) (Asmara & Mitsufuji, 2017; Boedoyo, 2013). Both systems are benefcial for achieving the national electrifcation ratio (Boedoyo, 2013) and allowing the communities to extend their activities until night, especially education, social, and economic activities (Retnanestri et al., 2003; Setiawan et al., 2014).

In the last decades, PLTS/SHS projects have been facing continuity issues (see studies of Asmara & Mitsufuji, 2018; Retnanestri, 2007; Retnanestri et al., 2003; Setiawan et al., 2014). There is electricity generation degradation of PV power plants annually (Halimatussadiah et al., 2020), but there are no maintenance mechanism that considers the business model, policy, and community empowerment aspects of PLTS/SHS (Asmara & Mitsufuji, 2018; Hamdi, 2019; Retnanestri, 2007; Setiawan et al., 2014).

PV is a part of sophisticated technologies for solar energy generation (Adityawan, 2010; Durganjali et al., 2020; Halimatussadiah et al., 2020; Retnanestri et al., 2003) and has been studied by scholars from innovation and technology transition perspectives (Asmara, 2018; Kebede & Mitsufuji, 2017; Lo et al., 2013). Development of innovation involves academician, business, government, and community (ABGC) (Carayannis et al., 2012; Ivanova & Leydesdorff, 2014; Kuhlmann et al., 2010). As part of innovation, PV utilization in every country involves diverse stakeholders, including PV technology providers, PV technology users, government, and academicians. Those actors interact with each other in the particular innovation system (see Asmara, 2018; Geels et al., 2004; Kebede & Mitsufuji, 2017; Lo et al., 2013; Strupeit, 2017).

Currently, the continuity of PLTS/ SHS projects in Indonesia emerges as a massive issue in renewable energy discussion. Those projects involve government policy and technology providers, PV technology disseminators, and communities as PV users whose actors stay in a particular innovation system. Kieft et al. (2017) state that an innovation system (IS) is a mutual interaction resulting from multiactors closely tied by the existing infrastructures and institutions inside as well as strongly infuencing the pace and direction of innovation.

PLTS/SHS projects should consider local condition variation such as geographical properties of the location, demography, social, and culture of the community. It needs a regional innovation system (RIS) to ensure the PLTS/SHS continuity projects. Isaksen (2001) and Parto& Doloreux (2004) defne RIS as an industrial agglomeration that adopts geographical aspects in the actors' interaction (providers, users, intermediary unit/technology diffusion, and government) in the same region to stimulate economic growth. RIS is like an innovation platform with actual space.

PV industry development requires not solely extensive support from RIS to obtain a market-ready product, because each region has a diverse ability to provide the latest technology. Updated technologies can be provided from other regions. In this sense, a network and interaction among actors from different regions within or beyond the national border are required (Hipp & Binz, 2020). The notion of network and interaction among actors will focus on a specifc sector. Sectoral innovation system (SIS) is required to provide a solution to spur PV industry development and to serve as a solid foundation for the region's economic growth (Strupeit, 2017). Like an innovation platform with networks, SIS focuses on a particular industrial sector development by which actors are mutually interlinked, getting through borders of regions/countries (Malerba & Mani, 2009).

RIS and SIS have identical actors that possibly build a connection and trust. In this sense, both systems are virtually connected. RIS has limitations because economic activities and innovation learning resulting from actors' interactions beyond the region border are different in nature(Chung, 2002). Therefore, this study aims to construct a new approach by combining RIS and SIS in developing an IS for PLTS/ SHS projects continuity in Indonesia.

ABGC actors are interlinked with each other to create an IS (Casadella, 2018; Geels et al., 2004; Nordfors, 2004). ABGC actors exist at the Indonesian PV development projects, they are Ministry of ESDM, Ministry of Village, local government agencies (government), the state-owned electricity enterprise (PLN), PT INTI, PT LEN, and other electricity state enterprises (business), universities and public research & development (R&D) institutes (academician), as well as nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and local communities (society) (Asmara, 2018; Asmara & Mitsufuji, 2017; Setiawan et al., 2014).

Government and business are dominant actors to build public-funded projects of PLTS/SHS in Indonesia (Asmara & Mitsufuji, 2018). Due to limited governmental resources, involvement of nongovernment actors is required to provide public service optimally, such as society and academician (Rhodes, 2017; Valkama et al., 2013). Electrifcation service to rural inhabitants through PLTS/SHS projects could not be delivered by Government of Indonesia and business effciently. Retnanestri et al. (2003) and Retnanestri (2007) revealed that academicians and local communities should be intensely involved to sustain PLTS/SHS projects in Indonesia.

The existence of government and industry to develop PLTS/SHS projects need to be connected to local communities and academician through RIS and SIS to achieve the goal of sustainable PLTS/SHS projects in Indonesia. Geels et al. (2004) reveal that governance of various actors is a key aspect to IS leading to sustainable aspect. Sørensen & Torfng (2007); Torfng (2007) provide network governance (NG) perspective as an appropriate lens to capture how government and nongovernment actors are involved in addressing public issues coherently. Those actors are mutually interlinked to solve public problems; they are still autonomous and independent actors, not infuenced by other actors.

Studies of utilization, sustainability, and transition of PV technologies in many countries are mostly on IS as a whole (see (Hipp & Binz, 2020), singly SIS approach (see (Strupeit, 2017), and technological innovation system (TIS) (see (Esmailzadeh et al., 2020; Hanson, 2018; Kebede & Mitsufuji, 2017; Shubbak, 2019). There are no studies on using SIS and RIS concepts combined with the NG perspective on PV innovation development. Therefore, this study flls the conceptual and practical gap of previously existing PV innovation studies. This study aims to answer two main questions: 1) What are the current issues of PLTS/SHS development projects in Indonesia? How is an innovation system of PLTS/SHS projects built through NG perspective in Indonesia?

### **24.2 Literature Review**

### *24.2.1 Sustainable Issue and Renewable Energy*

Energy is an integral part of human activities, such as electricity. It held an important role during the industrialization revolution and still prevails to date (Ahuja & Tatsutani, 2009). Electricity generation is increasing due to increasing demand and fossil fuel as the primary source of electricity in the last 46 years (IEA, 2021). Unfortunately, fossil fuel is limited available in nature. Regardless, the remaining deposit is adequate for the next 120 years (Kakaras et al., 2012), sustainable development and climate change issues urge reducing fossil fuel use and utilizing renewable energy (RE) instead (Owusu & Asumadu-Sarkodie, 2016; Welsby et al., 2021).

 Therefore, the government eagerly regulates from production to waste management stages, even dependence on fossil fuel (Aien & Mahdavi, 2020). RE sources like wind, water, and solar are promising to combat climate change and ensure energy sustainability (Kumar & Majid, 2020; Moriarty & Honnery, 2016). They are considerably cleaner than fossil fuels (Jain, 2019). IEA has recorded that RE utilization in electricity generation has increased by 10% in the last 46 years (IEA, 2021).

### *24.2.2 Photovoltaic Energy*

The isolated and remote communities are often facing energy defciency, mainly electricity (Zomers, 2003). PV technology is advancing (Durganjali et al., 2020; Goetzberger et al., 2002) and empirically resolve unelectrifed communities and provide quality of life improvement (Cravioto et al., 2020). The type of off-grid PV can be installed anywhere. Installed PV is increasing steadily (IEA, 2021) and is predicted to be the largest installed power capacity (IRENA, 2019). PV has the potential to meet electricity demand in Indonesia (Silalahi et al., 2021). In 2019, the installed PV capacity reached 135 MW (Dewan Energi Nasional, 2020). Individual power producers (IPPs) produce more power than state- and private-owned electricity companies combined (Center for Data and Information Technology on Energy Mineral Resources, 2021).

Despite the bright future, adopting and installing PV have numerous challenges and obstacles spanning from the individual level to global level. Policy emerges as the main obstacle in introducing PV to the community (Lazdins et al., 2021). From the community perspective as users, solar PV is considered a high-technology energy generation and maintenance complexity (Alrashoud & Tokimatsu, 2019). Another increasing issue, scholars emphasized PV panels waste (Chowdhury et al., 2020).

### *24.2.3 Innovation*

Innovation is a newness that results from research and development (R&D) activities conducted by universities and/or R&D institutes that can be commercialized to market (see Balachandra et al. (2010); Nelson in Casadella (2018)). Innovation also results from engineering reverse or development of existing invention as developing countries do (Aminullah et al., 2018; Mani, 2002). Innovation is also a newness in a new place, though it is the old one in previous places (Rogers, 1995). Innovation has four types: product innovation, process innovation, organization innovation, and marketing innovation (OECD-Eurostat, 2005). All innovation types are possibly applied in business and public organizations (Gault, 2018; Yip & McKern, 2016). It is possible to have one or more of those innovation types.

### *24.2.4 Regional and Sectoral Innovation System*

A system consists of complex actors with various motives and networks, tied by an institution pattern (Gault, 2018). An innovation system (IS) is a mechanism to analyze and understand the innovation process by which surrounding actors interact with and learn from each other to develop economic growth strategy at the regional or national level or particular sector (Lundvall et al., 2009). There are four main characteristics of IS: (1) co-evolutionary practice of technology supply and demand side, (2) change of structure elements on socio-technical system, (3) historical events in a change process, (4) involvement of multiactors and their networks (Geels et al., 2004). Multiactors are academicians, businesses, governments, and communities (ABGC) (Carayannis et al., 2012; de Oliveira et al., 2017; Ivanova & Leydesdorff, 2014). Those characteristics develop conceptually into national innovation system (NIS), regional innovation system (RIS), sectoral innovation system (SIS), and technological innovation system (TIS) (Lundvall et al., 2009; Malerba & Mani, 2009; Schrempf et al., 2013).

RIS is localized-economy development through knowledge transfer and innovation learning in a region (Isaksen, 2001; Lim, 2006; OECD, 2010; Parto & Doloreux, 2004). It is defned as a network and its linkage of multilayer and complex ABGC actors in doing innovation activities such as generation of innovation, learning of science-technology, knowledge transfer, business activities, diffusion, and utilization of innovation (Chung, 2002). While SIS focuses on foundation, structure, organization, and innovation-production dynamics in particular sectors. The sector is a set of activities interlinked with emerging demand on specifc product(s) and its knowledge. SIS consists of elements: (1) enterprises actors (focal point actor), (2) nonenterprises actors, (3) networks, (4) demand, (5) institutions, (6) knowledge base, (7) Main process and coevolution, (8) transboundary of local, national, and global level (Malerba & Mani, 2009).

RIS and SIS have intersection elements; Isaksen (2001) states that RIS comprises interaction among actors (frms, universities, R&D institutes, fnance agencies, intermediary agencies, business associations, training houses, etc.). Firms in industrial clusters are focal points to generate and diffuse knowledge. Malerba and Mani (2009) assert that SIS pays attention to innovation processes at particular sectors trespassing jurisdictions across regions and countries' boundaries, while jurisdictions bound NIS and RIS at the national and regional levels. Strupeit (2017) reveals that SIS evolves swiftly in dynamic landscape of market, policy, and technology. According to Chung (2002), RIS can promote to create SIS effectively. Moreover, the SIS helps create RIS that focuses on specifc industry development.

### *24.2.5 Network Governance*

The concept of network governance (NG) is often interchanged with governance networks. Both have something in common: they emphasize the interdependence of autonomous actors in realizing public goals (Marsh, 1998; Sørensen & Torfng, 2007; Torfng, 2007). Although there is an interdependent relationship, the position of each actor is equal. Even actor participation in the network is voluntary and free to leave the network (Sørensen & Torfng, 2007). Their interaction is carried out through negotiation and is relatively institutionalized (Torfng, 2007).

NG is considered an approach to understand political and administrative relationships of some actors, which in many cases are not determined by formal rule (Bogason & Zølner, 2007). However, actors try to develop both formal and informal regulations to create a more stable interaction (Sørensen & Torfng, 2007). Furthermore, Provan and Kenis (2007) formulated three forms of NG as mentioned in Table 24.1.

NG has a vital role in an innovation process (Khan, 2013; Zhang et al., 2019). This type of governance can bridge the interaction between disciplines (Guo et al., 2017; Laranja, 2012), by which each actor has a wide opportunity to enter the network. They can share information as well as do an interactive learning process leading to innovation (Bauknecht et al., 2020). The domain of innovation is not only in science and technology policies but also in other sector domains such as education, agriculture, health, etc. (Guo et al., 2017; Laranja, 2012). Interdisciplinary interactions also encourage sustainable innovation implementation (Rossignoli & Lionzo, 2018).

NG pays greater attention to the importance of community involvement in formulating and implementing an innovation (Laranja, 2012). The role of communities can enrich perception to formulate an innovation, provide suffcient resources to implement an innovation, and foster public trust among involved actors (Guo et al., 2017). An IS is run by ABGC actors by which they have respective interests and motives. Thus, the most appropriate form of NG will depend on the addressed issue and how ABGC actors interact.

### *24.2.6 Conceptual Framework*

ABGC actors should be closely interlinked through cooperation or even competition in creating IS (Granstrand & Holgersson, 2020; Marshall & Parra, 2019). Therein, IS governance is required due to the complexity of involved actors (de Oliveira et al., 2017; Geels et al., 2004). NG is a ftted form by which actors are mutually interlinked, but each cannot directly infuence other actors (Sørensen & Torfng, 2007). The institution exists to respond to actors' interlinkage, or it results

**Table 24.1** Main predictors of the effectiveness of forms of network governance

Source: Provan and Kenis (2007)

**Fig. 24.1** NG on Development of RIS and SIS. (Source: Adopted from Schrempf et al., 2013; Ivanova & Leydesdorff, 2014; Strupeit, 2017)

from the socioeconomic change (Altenburg, 2009). This study focuses on NG perspective on RIS and SIS development with national jurisdiction as the boundary (Fig. 24.1).

### **24.3 Research Method**

The study is qualitative research using multiple case studies. Creswell (2014) argues that qualitative study aims to reveal real phenomena, including scrutinizing an interrelation of involved actors in multiple cases. This study focuses on the actors and their relations to develop PLTS/SHS projects in Indonesia, including identifying sustainability issues of those projects. There are 14 PLTS projects and 1 SHS hamlet project as case studies dispersedly located in 8 regency governments within fve province governments. The period of research was in 2014 year and 2018–2020 years sequentially (Table 24.2).

Collecting data was conducted through in-depth interviews with 51 key informants consisting of 24 villagers, including head villagers, 12 local government offcers at the regency level, one local government offcer at the province level, two Ministry of ESDM offcers, three PV enterprises employees, three PLN employees, four academicians at universities and R&D institutes, one former PLN employee, and one former local government offcer at regency level. The researchers observed the operation and maintenance of PLTS/SHS project in sites. Also, we collected relevant documents such as regulations, region planning agendas, PLN's electricity report, and Indonesian PV project inventory.

**Table 24.2** List of visited PLTS/SHS project sites

Data analysis was also carried out to produce a narrative about the relationship among actors to identify sustainability issues of PLTS/SHS projects and to propose IS design for PV development conceptually in Indonesia. According to Creswell (2014), qualitative method is helpful for researchers in capturing the complexity of the issue and in providing a contextual understanding. Those benefts will assist researchers in identifying the NG forms in the IS development of PLTS/SHS projects.

### **24.4 Result and Discussion**

### *24.4.1 The Current Issues of PLTS/SHS Projects in Indonesia*

PLTS/SHS projects are installed in rural areas, small and isolated islands without PLN's electricity grid PLN. This study explores 15 PLTS/SHS project sites categorized as following: electricity capacity, funding, PV builder, beneft for users, involved actors, and existing issues. The electricity capacity of PLTS units ranges from 10 KWp to 5 MW, only has the SHS unit has the capacity of 20 Watt. The 12 of 15 PV projects are funded by Ministry of ESDM, Ministry of village (one project), and PLN (two projects). Most of them are off-grid PLTS type, and the rests are on-grid PLTS connected to PLN's electricity grid. The SHS is automatically is offgrid type. Type of electricity grid and PV funding source are two main factors infuencing PV project builders, involved actor roles, beneft for villagers/users, and issue to be addressed (see Asmara & Mitsufuji, 2018). Though, beneft for PLTS/ SHS users is relatively similar on several sites (See on the appendix) (Fig. 24.2).

All PLTS/SHS projects (type I, II, III, IV) face similar problems: high cost of PV components and limited PV experts in Indonesia. Type I by which the very simplistic problems (see No.3 in the appendix). Type II is the simplistic problem (see No. 10 in the appendix). Type III is a complex problem (see No 2 in the appendix). Type

**Fig. 24.2** Typology of sustainable PV problems in Indonesia

IV is the highly complex problem (see No 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 in the appendix). The most complex problems are faced by Type IV such as limited electrical capacity to illuminate activities throughout the day, high technology, no maintenance due to low skill of local community, broken PV components after guarantee time over, high cost of transportation to site, high cost of PV components. Moreover, each region of PV projects has unique added issues as exemplifed like (1) thievery of PV components, (2) reaving excessive electricity access surreptitiously occurred in and (3) the increasing households, the decreasing capacity of electricity.

In linear with global PV problems supposed to (Alrashoud & Tokimatsu, 2019), the main problems of PLTS/SHS projects are affordable PV technology availability and its experts in Indonesia. Secondly, each region where PLTS/SHS projects depend on socio-economy, local culture, geography, and demographycal attributes. Sectoral and regional domains are like "it takes two to tango" by which both are a fused concept used to address problems of PLTS/SHS projects in Indonesia. While PV is the sophisticated and highly updated technology requiring IS involving ABGC actors to develop it. Fusing SIS and RIS concepts to sustainable PLTS/SHS projects is feasibly proposed in Indonesia.

### *24.4.2 Discussion*

Although both are feasible in the adjacent starting point, RIS and SIS can be created in different pathways because they have intersection parts (Chung, 2002). Co-evolutionary practice and historical events proposed by Geels et al. (2004) are two of the main elements of IS that underlay rationality of nearly time as a starting point in creating RIS and SIS adjacently and closely. RIS and SIS are interaction networks generated by ABGC actors (Malerba & Mani, 2009; Parto & Doloreux, 2004). Each of them is autonomous and independent, but they cooperatively address public problems according to their interests (Sørensen & Torfng, 2016).

Context of Indonesian ABGC actors can be defned as follows: (1) Academicians (A) are those who work as lecturers at universities and as researchers at R&D institutes, either public or private ownership. (2) Business (B) actors (state-owned/private) are main enterprises like PV-manufacturing frms and supporting enterprises like electricity frms, PLN, ingot/steel/aluminum frms, PV assembly, distributor, and installer frms, fnance agencies, etc. The main goal of this actor is proft oriented. (3) Government agencies (G) are all agencies at the central and local Government of Indonesia. The central government like Ministry of ESDM, Ministry of Village, Ministry of Finance, etc. The local government like local agency of planning at province/municipality/regency level, local agency of energy at province level, etc. (4) Communities (C) are nongovernment organization(s) (NGOs), villagers/people, local partners, PV association(s), mass media, education institutes, and socio-culture-politics groups. Communities are commonly nonproft organizations, but they also get external funding and nonfunding support to operate their daily activities (Fig. 24.3).

**Fig. 24.3** Two-Sided RIS and SIS Frame in Developing Sustainable PV Projects in Indonesia. (Source: Analyzed research result with modifcation from Schrempf et al., 2013; Ivanova & Leydesdorff, 2014; Strupeit 2017)

**: Interlinkage of RIS on PLTS/SHS projects and SIS on PV industry development**

**: Interrelation among ABGC actors both in RIS and SIS on PLTS/SHS projects**

### *24.4.3 Building RIS on PV Industry Cluster*

Emergency of industrial cluster created by a nest of frms is not guaranteed to be an innovation cluster. The role of government is to initiate and facilitate creation of innovation cluster, because the government functions to provide terrain for industry cluster formally (see World Bank, 2010). Role of government is pivotal to transform from industry agglomeration to innovation cluster in a region, for instance, in building Hsinchu Science Industrial Park (HSIP) in Taiwan (Yang et al., 2009), and in the Suzhou Dushu Lake Science and Education Innovation District (SEID) in China (Sun et al., 2019). RIS also focuses on developing regionally knowledge-based economy (KBE). Therefore, PV industries are parts of a region's technology-based industries (TBIs).

**Government** Economic affairs excluding fscal and monetary are decentralized to local government. Building KBE-like PV innovation cluster in a region is the duty of province and regency/municipality government. Province government agency responds and directs municipality/regency government agencies to make specifc policies such as local regulations, middle-long term programs, multiyear budget allocation, incentives or levy allowance, and establishing public infrastructures to promote PV R&D activities and commercializing PV innovation to society/users. Besides providing terrain to build PV innovation cluster, another main task of local government agency is to address current issues of PLTS/SHS projects of users and business players. Really, local government agencies have limited capacity to do it because they do not have equal information and resources.

**Academician** Universities and R&D institutes are main institutes to generate new PV ideas, PV publications, PV technologies/prototypes, bring up PV R&D results to frms, and disseminate it to end users. In Indonesia, each region has localstandardized universities, most of them do not have the capacity to conduct nationalglobal PV R&D activities. Even most of the region does not have PV R&D institutes. Academicians will fnd it easier to play their roles if government facilitates PV R&D activities.

**Business** Firms are motors of IS. Since government facilitates academicians and communities to do many PV activities, frms can beneft from this opportunity to absorb much information and knowledge and to upgrade PV technologies from supply-side (academician) and demand-side (communities). Besides, fnance agencies are business actors playing roles to support PV fnance schemes. The scheme can be soft loans with or without guarantee, equipment procurements, PV maintenance, or other fnance agreement types. Academicians are feasible to get funding grants for doing PV R&D activities, but it is not directly delivered by fnance agencies but by PV frms. Unfortunately, completed frms and fnancial institutions mentioned above are very rare in many regions.

**Table 24.3** Interrelation of ABGC actors in building PV industry cluster

**Community** In collaboration with academicians and the government, communities are involved as mentors in empowering villagers/PV users, as PV disseminators to many regions, and as silencer/reliever amidst PV confict in communities. The government's facilitation to academicians, business, and communities will infuence community activities in supporting PLTS/SHS projects. Unfortunately, very few local communities like NGOs and youth villagers have knowledge about PV technology and its maintenance (Table 24.3).

In the RIS frame, government facilitates PV activities for ABC actors. ABGC actors mutually collaborate to build multiyear PLTS/SHS projects according to their respective duty and responsibility, and each of them is proftable with these networks. Notwithstanding, each actor has limited capacity and resources, partial information/knowledge, and minimal public facilities to realize RIS on PV. Widening PV networks, cooperations, and collaborations with other ABGC actors at local and national level or even across countries is required. Building PV innovation cluster is not only the domain of regional ABGC actors, but intersection with national and global ABGC actors. Accordingly, building RIS on PV is accompanied by building SIS on PV.

### *24.4.4 Building SIS on PV Industry Development*