Grid extension vs. off-grid systems in rural Areas: Methodologies, tools, and criteria for decision-making

IF 4.4 3区 经济学 Q3 ENERGY & FUELS
Utilities Policy Pub Date : 2026-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-21 DOI:10.1016/j.jup.2025.102028
César Y. Acevedo-Arenas , Julian E. Guerrero-Macias , Yecid A. Muñoz-Maldonado , Johan S. Amado-Alvarado , Johann F. Petit-Suárez
{"title":"Grid extension vs. off-grid systems in rural Areas: Methodologies, tools, and criteria for decision-making","authors":"César Y. Acevedo-Arenas ,&nbsp;Julian E. Guerrero-Macias ,&nbsp;Yecid A. Muñoz-Maldonado ,&nbsp;Johan S. Amado-Alvarado ,&nbsp;Johann F. Petit-Suárez","doi":"10.1016/j.jup.2025.102028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Achieving universal electricity access in rural areas remains a complex challenge in many developing countries, particularly for communities located within reach of existing distribution infrastructure but not yet connected. In such contexts, decision-makers must often choose between extending the main grid and deploying off-grid systems. This study presents a structured scoping review based on bibliographic sources, aimed at identifying how decision-making processes are supported in selection of rural electrificationstrategies, when both options are technically and economically viable.</div><div>Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a multi-phase filtering strategy was applied to the Scopus database, covering literature published between 2013 and 2024. A total of 3780 documents were initially retrieved, from which 136 were selected for in-depth analysis. Data extraction, co-citation mapping, keyword clustering, and thematic coding were used to classify the literature into five decision-related domains: technology selection, network configuration, system optimisation, policy frameworks, and multi-criteria methodologies. The review identifies recurring methodological patterns and systematises the decision-making criteria most frequently applied in rural electrification planning. It highlights that current approaches often treat grid extension and off-grid alternatives within isolated frameworks, despite their coexistence in practical planning scenarios. The analysis reveals significant gaps in the integration of technical, economic, social, environmental and institutional dimensions, as well as in the use of unified indicators that enable meaningful comparisons. These findings emphasise the need for more comprehensive frameworks that reflect the complexity of electrification choices in grid-adjacent rural areas and support more consistent, evidence-based planning processes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23554,"journal":{"name":"Utilities Policy","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 102028"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utilities Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957178725001432","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Achieving universal electricity access in rural areas remains a complex challenge in many developing countries, particularly for communities located within reach of existing distribution infrastructure but not yet connected. In such contexts, decision-makers must often choose between extending the main grid and deploying off-grid systems. This study presents a structured scoping review based on bibliographic sources, aimed at identifying how decision-making processes are supported in selection of rural electrificationstrategies, when both options are technically and economically viable.
Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a multi-phase filtering strategy was applied to the Scopus database, covering literature published between 2013 and 2024. A total of 3780 documents were initially retrieved, from which 136 were selected for in-depth analysis. Data extraction, co-citation mapping, keyword clustering, and thematic coding were used to classify the literature into five decision-related domains: technology selection, network configuration, system optimisation, policy frameworks, and multi-criteria methodologies. The review identifies recurring methodological patterns and systematises the decision-making criteria most frequently applied in rural electrification planning. It highlights that current approaches often treat grid extension and off-grid alternatives within isolated frameworks, despite their coexistence in practical planning scenarios. The analysis reveals significant gaps in the integration of technical, economic, social, environmental and institutional dimensions, as well as in the use of unified indicators that enable meaningful comparisons. These findings emphasise the need for more comprehensive frameworks that reflect the complexity of electrification choices in grid-adjacent rural areas and support more consistent, evidence-based planning processes.
农村地区的电网扩展与离网系统:决策的方法、工具和标准
在许多发展中国家,实现农村地区普遍通电仍然是一项复杂的挑战,特别是对于那些位于现有配电基础设施可及范围内但尚未联网的社区。在这种情况下,决策者通常必须在扩展主电网和部署离网系统之间做出选择。本研究提出了一个基于文献来源的结构化范围审查,旨在确定当两种选择在技术和经济上都可行时,如何支持农村电气化战略选择的决策过程。根据PRISMA-ScR指南,对Scopus数据库应用了多阶段过滤策略,涵盖了2013年至2024年间发表的文献。最初总共检索了3780个文档,从中选择136个进行深入分析。通过数据提取、共被引映射、关键词聚类和主题编码,将文献划分为5个与决策相关的领域:技术选择、网络配置、系统优化、政策框架和多标准方法。该审查确定了经常出现的方法模式,并将最常用于农村电气化规划的决策标准系统化。报告强调指出,目前的方法经常在孤立的框架内处理电网扩展和离网替代方案,尽管它们在实际规划情景中共存。分析显示,在综合技术、经济、社会、环境和体制方面,以及在使用统一的指标以便进行有意义的比较方面,存在重大差距。这些发现强调需要建立更全面的框架,以反映电网邻近农村地区电气化选择的复杂性,并支持更一致的、基于证据的规划过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Utilities Policy
Utilities Policy ENERGY & FUELS-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: Utilities Policy is deliberately international, interdisciplinary, and intersectoral. Articles address utility trends and issues in both developed and developing economies. Authors and reviewers come from various disciplines, including economics, political science, sociology, law, finance, accounting, management, and engineering. Areas of focus include the utility and network industries providing essential electricity, natural gas, water and wastewater, solid waste, communications, broadband, postal, and public transportation services. Utilities Policy invites submissions that apply various quantitative and qualitative methods. Contributions are welcome from both established and emerging scholars as well as accomplished practitioners. Interdisciplinary, comparative, and applied works are encouraged. Submissions to the journal should have a clear focus on governance, performance, and/or analysis of public utilities with an aim toward informing the policymaking process and providing recommendations as appropriate. Relevant topics and issues include but are not limited to industry structures and ownership, market design and dynamics, economic development, resource planning, system modeling, accounting and finance, infrastructure investment, supply and demand efficiency, strategic management and productivity, network operations and integration, supply chains, adaptation and flexibility, service-quality standards, benchmarking and metrics, benefit-cost analysis, behavior and incentives, pricing and demand response, economic and environmental regulation, regulatory performance and impact, restructuring and deregulation, and policy institutions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书