ENERGY POVERTY IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA: ADVOCATING FOR ENERGY ADEQUACY AND AUTONOMY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across global divides and territories, the realities of global warming and climate change have stirred up discussions, resolutions and actions (‘strategies’) that are aimed at significantly reducing the emission of greenhouse gases and promoting sustainable development. One strategy is to transit from the use of emission-laden sources of energy to low-carbon and renewable sources of energy, a process known as energy transition. While the drive towards energy transition appears to be gaining significant ground in the Global North, the South appears to be grappling with series of issues that slow down their pace, one being energy poverty. In some quarters, Africa is regarded as the world’s most energy-poor continent, a description that bespeaks extremely low levels of primary energy demand, consumption, access and security. While this is a generalised description of the continent, the epicentre of energy poverty within the continent is Sub-Saharan Africa, a region where most people contend with lack of access to power and reliance on traditional biomass for cooking. While the region grapples with energy poverty, there is the increasing push for the continent as a whole to upscale its energy transition process. Relying on doctrinal research methodology, this paper considers the energy poverty situation in the region, analyses the energy transition movement, and argues that Sub-Saharan Africa needs to firmly focus on working towards the achievement of energy adequacy that can in turn lead to energy autonomy in the region.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".