Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy Policy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

Informing international UNFCCC technology mechanisms from the ground

up: Using biogas technology in South Africa as a case study to evaluate
the usefulness of potential elements of an international technology
agreement in the UNFCCC negotiations process
Anya Boyd n
Energy Research Centre, University of Cape Town, Cape Town 7701, South Africa

H I G H L I G H T S
c
c
c
c
c

The UNFCCC technology mechanism aims to increase low carbon technology deployment.
The interface of global technology frameworks and national implementation is unclear.
Biogas is a widely used technology yet its uptake in South Africa (SA) is minimal.
Empirical data is gathered from biogas sites in SA, UK, Germany and Sweden.
Findings show biogas uptake in SA requires national and international support

a r t i c l e i n f o

abstract

Article history:
Received 29 March 2012
Accepted 7 August 2012
Available online 9 October 2012

Transfer of low carbon technologies to developing countries is 1 approach for tackling rising global
emissions. An international technology transfer mechanism has been proposed under the UNFCCC;
however, it remains unclear how this international mechanism would translate into local level
technology implementation. This study uses biogas technology in South Africa to obtain empirical
data inductively related to technology transfer. Observations and activities specic to the biogas sector
in South Africa are put forward based on site visits and stakeholder discussions in South Africa, the UK,
Germany and Sweden. This paper presents empirical ndings on technology transfer in the biogas
sector in South Africa and analyses the role of an international technology mechanism in supporting the
uptake of biogas. Many of the barriers to biogas technology in South Africa are national level constraints
such as lack of supportive policy environment, nancial incentives and information sharing. This case
study supports the argument that it will be unrealistic for international technology mechanisms
to capture the necessary specicities of individual technologies at a country level. Therefore, as
demonstrated through the example of biogas technology in South Africa, there is a need for both
effective national and international engagement to support technology implementation.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Technology transfer
UNFCCC
Biogas in South Africa

1. Introduction
Global experience shows that biogas technology is a simple and
readily usable technology that does not require particularly sophisticated capacity to construct and manage. It has also been recognised
as a simple, adaptable and locally acceptable technology for Africa
(Amigun, 2008). Biogas technology has many social and environmental benets such as improving human well-being through better
sanitation, reduced indoor smoke, and employment generation as

Corresponding author. Tel.: 27 21 650 3230; fax: 27 21 650 2830.

E-mail address: a.boyd@uct.ac.za

0301-4215/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.020

well as conservation of resources particularly trees and reduced

greenhouse gas emissions (Amigun, 2008). Biogas technologies offer
the potential to contribute towards South Africas sustainable development agenda, but beyond minor activity, project implementation
has been limited.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has estimated that the
global share of CO2 emissions of Asia (including China), Africa and
Latin America has risen from 13.3% in 1973 to about 37.6%
in 2007 (IEA, 2009). Transferring appropriate environmentally
sound technologies and ensuring their effective implementation
can help arrest the sharp growth in greenhouse gas emissions from
developing countries as their economies grow (Ramanathan, 2002).
The reality of the global impacts of climate change has led the

302

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

international community to explore practical solutions to increase

mitigation levels in order to stabilise greenhouse gas emissions
at 450 ppm.1 This requires, amongst other things, innovative
approaches to the large-scale deployment and diffusion and transfer
of low carbon technologies. In 2008, the former UNFCCC Executive
Secretary Yvo de Boer (2008) said: There is an urgent need to
discover what effective language a Copenhagen agreement needs to
entail in order to unleash the full potential of technology. During
COP16 in Cancun, the parties agreed to a Technology Mechanism
consisting of a Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and Clean
Technology Centre & Networks (CTC&N). Recently in Durban at the
COP17, the operational structure of the TEC and CTC&N has been
further dened. However as the UNFCCC technology mechanism
gains substance, it is still not clear how this will translate into local
level technology implementation.
The literature recognises that there is a gap between the high
level international discussions around technology transfer and the
local implementation of low carbon technologies. Ockwell et al.
(2008) argue that a key contributor to disagreements [on technology
transfer] in international negotiations is the current lack of empirical
evidence on how low carbon technology transfer might effectively
be achieved and that empirical evidence on which to base policy
design is lacking on many other aspects of technology transfer. This
research attempts to contribute to the empirical literature on the
uptake of biogas technology in South Africa.
Findings from discussions with biogas stakeholders across
academia, the private sector and the public sector in South Africa
have demonstrated that there is no evident association between
work programmes from international technology interventions
(both inside and outside of the UNFCCC process) and their own
work on implementation of biogas technology. Large-scale technology transfer will however rely on strengthening these linkages
between international and national initiativesa combination of
top down and bottom up approaches.
1.1. Research approach
This paper considers technology transfer from the ground up,
to provide empirical data on biogas technology in South Africa.
The research methodology involved literature reviews, site visits
to 4 industrial biogas plants (South Africa, UK and Sweden),
3 Agricultural plants (South Africa and Germany) and 2 domestic
applications (see Appendix for full list) as well as semi-structured
interviews with carbon developers, farmers and representatives
from the agricultural sector. The paper rst introduces aspects
related to Biogas technology in South Africa and then introduces
technology transfer from an international perspective. The application of 4 technology transfer issues enabling environment,
technical and absorptive capacity, innovation and IPRs are used
to explore the linkages between local implementation of biogas
and international technology mechanisms. The ndings provide
local context and can be used to evaluate the usefulness of
potential elements of an international technology agreement in
the UNFCCC negotiations process towards increasing the uptake
of biogas in South Africa.

2. Biogas technology: setting the scene

Biogas is generated from the decomposition of organic waste
and consists of primarily methane (  5070%), CO2 and water.
The methane in the biogas is a useful energy sourceeither as a

heating gas or converted into electricity. From a climate change

perspective, the primary benet of using Biogas as an energy
source is that methane has a Global Warming Potential (GWP) of
25 (Table 2.14, Forster et al., 2007), therefore capturing and using
it as useful energy prevents it escaping into the atmosphere.
There is much research, literature, design and demonstration of
successful biogas projects internationally. In South Africa the level
of activity in biogas technology is relatively low therefore it is
useful to look to international examples. In China, India and
Nepal, biogas has been used widely since the 1950s as a source
of energy and waste treatment, and as liquid fertiliser for soil
enhancement (Agama Energy Pty, 2008).

2.1. Incentivising biogas technology: international examples

Examples from India, Nepal, Kenya, Germany, Poland and the
USA provide useful insight into the different national approaches
to increasing biogas programmes at a national level. The success
of biogas projects in India is due to the support from domestic
policy, which provides nancial incentives and capacity building
opportunities. For some larger projects, hardware continues to
be imported from Europea conventional NorthSouth transfer
of technology. The Nepalese Government was also signicant in
collaborating with foreign funding bodies to provide nancial
subsidies on the capital cost of the units as part of the Biogas
Sector Partnership (BSP). As well as nancial incentives offered
by the BSP programme the construction of the units required
participation from the end users (households), which provides
stronger ownership once the unit is operational. Good workmanship coupled with effective quality control practices have also
contributed to the Nepalese biogas sector partnership winning
international recognition for its success.2 The uptake of biogas in
Kenya was not as successful, primarily for the lack of those
interventions present in Nepal. Rather it suffered from bad construction techniques, poor engagement from the project developers
and lack of government support.
Looking at the developed country examples, much of the
support for biogas comes from policy decisions and in particular
effective renewable energy feed-in tariffs.
Germany aligned its policy framework to allow both electricity
and gas to be fed into their respective national grids. The rening
of already advanced technology to increase the quality of the
biogas is incentivised by such feed-in tariffs. Polands interest in
biogas is also stimulated by the national renewable energy target,
and the necessary legislation in the planning sector has also been
tailored to accommodate a faster paced construction programme
of biogas units. In Poland there are also efforts being made to
allow gains from biogas as electricity or gas to be made, either
with feed-in tariffs or renewable energy certicates. The USA case
study in Texas also relies on feeding biogas into the natural gas
grid, whereas in Austria although the electricity feed-in tariff has
had a positive effect on the uptake of biogas technology, it does
not include the feed-in of gas therefore the efciency of the end
use biogas is not maximised.
As part of this research site visits to Sweden, Germany and the
UK were undertaken which provided further insight. The use of
biogas in Sweden is motivated through high CO2 tax and lack of
natural fossil fuels. In Germany the feed in tariff has allowed
farmers to generate revenue from biogas. In the UK landll
tipping fees and the ROCs3 have made onsite energy generation
2

The BSP programme won an Ashden Award in 2006.

Renewable Energy Obligation certicatea green certicate issued to an
accredited generator for eligible renewable electricity generated within and
sole in the UK. One ROC is issued for each megawatt hour (MWh) generated.
3

1
450 ppm of CO2 equivalent gases which is required for keeping temperature
rise below a 2 1C. The IPCCs Fourth Assessment Report (2007).

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

303

Table 1
Installed anaerobic digester biogas units South Africa (courtesy of Agama Biogas 2010 and own data in 2010).
Scale

Location

Digester size (unless

otherwise stated)

Substrate

End use

Year

Household

eThekweni

10 m3

Toilet sewage, manure

from 3 cows
Toilet sewage, organic
household waste and
institute waste
Toilet sewage from
2 homes and manure from
3 horses
Toilet connections from 30
people, restaurant waste,
manure
Sewage and food wastes

Cooking for family of 8

2000

Cooking in 1 home

2004

Cooking in home and

potentially electricity

2007

Cooking in restaurant

2006

Household sewage and

food waste
Cooking gas
Cooking gas for 12
households, a church and a
school

2007

Wastewater and
sanitation

Lynedoch Ecovillage Stellenbosch

11 m

De Goode Hoop Estate, Nordhoek,

8 m3 and 6 m3

Stanford Valley Farm Conference

Centre,

11 m3

Stanford Household

6 m3

Stanford Bodhi Khavi

Giyani, Limpopo

8 m3
In use: (1  )4, 6, 8 m3,
commissioned: (1  ) 8,
15 m3, under construction:
6, 8, 8, 15 m3, total 68 m3
20 m3

Goedgedacht Farm, Riebeck

Valley
Cape Nature conservation:
sewerage upgrade at Groot
Winterhoek
Cape Nature conservation:
sewerage upgrade at Vrolikheid
nature reserve
JoJo Senior Secondary school

Small to medium
agricultural

Pre Fab 6 m3

Dundee Research Farm

Sewage
Cow manure

Cooking in restaurant and

lighting

2007

Cooking in communal
kitchen

2005

8 m3

Sewage and food waste

Cooking in communal
kitchen

2007

Sanitation digester; 15 m3,

energy digester 30 m3

Sewage from toilet block,

food waste, cattle manure
from community
2400 l water from washing
11 dairy cows
Manure from 25 cows in a
kraal and additional
organic waste

Cooking gas in kitchen/

bakery

11 m3

16 m3
3

20 m

Backsberg Wine Estate, Paarl

Pateni residents (  10 HHs)

20 m3
6 m3

Chicken manure
Cow manure

Zakhe Agricultural College

Winford Farm

6m
6 m3

Sewage
Sewage and food waste

Goedgedacht Estate

6 m3

Sewage and food waste

Sewage and food waste

Sewage and food waste

Renery process waste

Somerset West
PetroSA (CDM)

SA Brewery Alrode

2008
2009

Toilet connections 100

people, restaurant and
food waste
Sewage from 56 people,
food waste from houses

Ecabazini, KZN

Stellenbosch

Industrial

6m

6m
4.2 MWe capacity
(approximately
25,700 MWh/year)
9200 m3 produced each
day

SA Brewery Rosslyn (CDM)

Cato Manor

280 m3

Humphries Pig Farm, Limpopo

Small amount of onsite

electrical generation
Total

from biogas a viable option. These international case studies

provide some useful lessons to consider when developing the
transfer and uptake of biogas technology in South Africa.

(footnote continued)
http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Sustainability/Environment/RenewablObl/Pages/Renew
ablObl.aspx.

Process wastewater and

organic waste
Onsite wastewater
digester
Sewage, OFMSW, chicken
litter
Waste from piggery

Cooking gas in kitchen

2004

Replaces LPG for fridge and

cooking and supplement
the driving of the diesel
powered pump
Potentially vehicle fuel
Gas: cooking, slurry: food
production
Gas cooking
Gas: cooking, water: food
production
Gas: cooking, water: food
production
Gas: cooking, water: food
production
Gas: cooking, water: food
Electricity

2006

2009
2009
2009
2009
2009
2009
2007

Used to power large onsite

boilers
Substitute part of the coal
consumption at the boiler
room
Not yet commissioned

2009

Partly operational and

under CDM registration
process

2009

Approximately 35
installed units

3. Setting the scene in South Africa

In South Africa only 21.8% of households receive solid waste
collection from the municipalities (Statistics South Africa, 2008).
Energy access (particularly in rural areas) also remains a challenge.
For these households biogas technology offers a suitable closed
loop solution to act as both a waste management system and a
source of energy. Biogas technology would also contribute to

304

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

reducing South Africas increasing CO2 emissions as it offsets

emissions from electricity generated from coal as well as reducing
methane emissions generated from the decomposition of organic
waste. Biogas offers an option to support energy independence and
reduce annual fuel costs in household, agricultural and industrial
applications. Furthermore there are job creation opportunities
through for example the upfront construction and installation of
digesters as well as through the selling of fertiliser (a by-product of
the biogas process). It is estimated that in South Africa there are
approximately 300,000 households with 2 or more cows and no
electricity that could make use of biogas digesters (Agama, 2007).
Furthermore it is estimated that 45% of schools in South Africa
have no electricity, 66% have poor sanitation facilities, 27% have no
clean water, and 12% have no sanitation at all. Biogas installations
could help mitigate all of these problems (Brown, 2006).

4. Crosscutting policy issues

The process of generating energy from organic waste cuts across
legislative and policy competencies of different government divisions including solid waste, energy, agriculture and wastewater
management. Policy drivers vary in different countriesin the UK
the landll tipping fees are very high (waste policy), in Germany
the feed-in tariff is well established for electricity and gas (energy
policy) whereas in South Africa the main motivation for installing
anaerobic digesters which produce biogas is to treat sewage sludge
and water to a suitable discharge level. An understanding of the
importance of policy integration is key to the effective application of
biogas technologies.
Currently a national policy target specically for biogas in
South Africa does not exist. Some of the policies, primarily from
the waste and energy sectors, which could allow space for biogas
initiatives to evolve, include the following:
Energy policies: White Paper on Renewable Energy (DME, 2003),
The South African National Energy Act 2008, Free Basic Alternative
Energy (DME, 2004).
Waste policies: National Waste Management Strategy (DEAT,
1999), Integrated Pollution and Waste Management Policy for
South Africa (DEAT, 2000).
Water policies: National Water Act (DWAF, 1998) and Water
Services Act (RSA(c), 1997) would have to be taken into consideration.
Climate change policies: the recently released National Climate
Change Response White Paper (DEA, 2011), which addresses
renewable energy and mitigation options for South Africa.
Perhaps the most promising intervention for incentivising the
uptake of renewable energy was South Africas Renewable Energy
Feed-in Tariff (REFIT). In November NERSA (2009) conrmed that
Biogas had been included in Phase 2 of the REFIT where the agreed
tariff was R0.96 kWh  1. The REFIT process has however been superseded by the Department of Energys renewable energy procurement
programme (IPPPP) which requires a competitive price bidding
process. Under the IPPPP programme, biogas has been allocated
12,5 MW.
A more detailed review of national and provincial and municipal by-laws supporting or hindering the implementation of
biogas was undertaken in a report by Agama Biogas in 2009,
which makes recommendations to policy makers around policy
integration, improving waste collection data, demonstration projects and making use of carbon revenue. Furthermore a standard
implementation agency is recommended as well as revising
cumbersome regulatory issues such as the Municipal Finance
Management Act, which imposes constraints on publicprivate
partnership.
Biogas technology relates to policy decisions in the energy, waste
and water sector and is relevant to national climate change efforts.

Although current policies include waste reduction targets and

renewable energy targets, it is still apparent that, for example,
energy prices and landll tipping fees remain too low to incentivise
efcient use of waste for energy. With the increase in pressure to
reduce global greenhouse gasses along with the electricity crisis in
South Africa, integrating policy alignment to improve the enabling
environment for the uptake of biogas technology would be a useful
contribution.

5. Estimates of South Africas biogas potential

Estimates for the potential of biogas in South Africa have been
drawn from existing reports. Those analysed in this study were
Energy from WastewaterA feasibility study (Burton et al., 2009);
Biofuels in the City of Cape Town (Agama Energy Pty, 2008);
Sustainable Cities: Biogas Energy from Waste: Guidelines Report
(Agama Biogas, July 2009). Further interesting studies were
prepared by the CSIR (2008) Unlocking the resource potential of
organic waste: a South African perspective and the feasibility study
prepared for the Biogas for Better Life initiative.
Austin et al. (2006, in Greben and Oelofse, 2009) suggest that
as biogas is a renewable energy, it can contribute to the South
African governments 10-year goal of 10,000 GWh of cumulative
renewable energy contribution to nal energy consumption by
2013. The White Paper on Renewable Energy (DME, 2003) also
states that the energy content of the total domestic and industrial
refuse disposed of in 1990 amounted to 40.5 PJ per annum.
Furthermore the net realisable energy available from sewagederived methane in South Africa would be in the order of 36 MWh
(1.13 PJ) per annum for electricity generation and 96 MWh
(3.0 PJ) for heating purposes (DME, DANCED, 2001). The potential
energy from biogas that is quoted in available literature is
summarised in the appendix.

6. Biogas implementation in South Africa

There is some activity in the South African biogas sector, yet
to date the level of implementation has been relatively low.
Data from a local level was based on discussions with relevant
stakeholders and site visits. Understanding the national status of
biogas in South Africa also required an assessment of existing
policies, feasibility reports, key players in the biogas sector and an
overview of the installed biogas portfolio in South Africa.
6.1. Installed capacity
It is difcult to obtain accurate data on the number of installed
biogas units in South Africa given the number of small private
installations that may not be recorded, the lack of regulation
and the lack of centralised data on the number of operational
biogas units. However, based on data provided by Agama Biogas,
personal site visits and other publicly available data, the table
below gives an overview of installed units to date (2010)
(Table 1).
6.2. Findings from site visits and stakeholder engagement in
South Africa
Through site visits and stakeholder engagement in South
Africa it became evident that the motivations amongst the
stakeholders for implementing biogas projects varied. As a renewable energy source with the potential to increase energy access
and reduce deforestation (caused by fuel wood use), biogas
technology has many social, environmental and economic

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

benets. Therefore many NGOs and research centres have been

interested in increasing its uptake. Carbon developers were
however more interested in larger mitigating biogas projects as
this generates larger carbon revenue from the sale of carbon
credits. The private sector is involved in promoting both large and
small projects, but will ultimately be concerned with protecting
its commercial interests. These factors are important when considering the facilitation of increasing the transfer and uptake of
biogas technology into South Africa.
Carbon revenue through the CDM mechanism has been a
strong motivation for biogas projects in countries such as Mexico
where biogas is the most popular project type for CDM projects
(Dechezlepetre et al., 2008). Many international and South African
based carbon developers have been interested in using the carbon
market to instigate biogas projects in South Africa. But discussions with them suggest that the costs of registration and
monitoring equipment along with a lack of feed in tariff continue
to make CDM projects unviable. This is further complicated by
open-kraal farming techniques not being conducive to collecting
manure at scale, which is currently limiting the potential for
biogas projects from commercial agriculture.
There are some registered CDM biogas projects in South Africa
(PetroSA, Rosslyn Brewery) yet to date the CDM mechanism has
not signicantly leveraged biogas projects in South Africa.
The summary in Table 2 presents an overview of the ndings
from site visits and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders
involved in the biogas sector in South Africa. It highlights the
different motivations and perceived barriers towards a successful
biogas programme in South Africa.
These on the ground insights can help to formulate appropriate
and diverse interventions to support a biogas programme and helps
to demonstrate the varying requirements that exist alone within 1

305

technology group, in 1 country, amongst a very small sample of

stakeholders. In further research, valuable insights could also be
learned from representatives in the agricultural, water or industrial
sectors as well as research institutions such as the Technology
Innovation Agency or SANERI.
6.3. Main barriers for different biogas applications in South Africa
Biogas technology has many different applications from
domestic scale units used for generating cooking gas, to largescale industrial units at sewage works. Table 2 highlights the
different needs of national and international stakeholders across
academia, government and private sector. From the stakeholder
observations summarised in Table 3, it is possible to identify
some of the barriers specic to whether the biogas application is
in the agricultural, industrial or domestic sector.
A general observation across all sectors was the lack of information sharing. This is something that could be addressed through
knowledge sharing platforms. Also not having an operational feed-in
tariff in South Africa is particularly limiting to the agricultural and
industrial sectors that could use this as income revenue. For all
applications policies that increase demand for biogas technology, and
therefore technology suppliers, would be benecial. An observation
specic to the agricultural sector is that in South Africa the open kraal
farming techniques are not efcient for manure collection.

7. Technology transfer in the context of climate change

The rst part of this paper focused on issues relating to the
uptake of biogas in South Africa. The following section introduces
some of the discourse around technology transfer in the context

Table 2
Findings from interviews with South African biogas stakeholders (compiled by author).
Stakeholder

Motivation for biogas technology in

South Africa

Barrier to biogas technology in

South Africa (perceived)

Recommendations for interventions

to support uptake of biogas in South
Africa

Farmer/landowner

Energy security energy independence,

reduce electricity cost, manure
management, water re-use, improved
soil quality
Energy poverty, energy provision, waste
and water management, MDGs job
creation
Great CDM potential (methane GWP 25),
proven CDM methodology, international
success

Capital cost, lack of knowledge,

insufcient demonstration projects, no
turnkey provider/point of contact/dont
know where to start
Lack of technical knowledge, access to
nancial needs, insufcient construction
skills
High transaction costs, complex CDM
methodology, expensive monitoring
equipment SA, farming practices (load
too low and hard to collect), lack of PPAs
and operational feed-in tariff for farmers
Lack of implementing agency, lack of
technical capacity, lack of knowledge,
other priorities high risk and low return,
lack of demonstration

Assistance with capital cost,

guaranteed mentor partner, training,
information provision, technical
assistance
Technology partnerships, funding for
demonstration projects, training
programme for NGO
Assist with CDM costsespecially
transaction and monitoring, accept
smaller methodologies/bundled etc.,
support PPAs, support enabling
environment
Offer soft loans or lease equipment
(either international technology
mechanism to government or
government to farmers), train staff to
facilitate implementation, i.e. technical
training and procurement contracts,
allow collaboration with private
partnerships with expertise
Assist change in enabling environment
to allow private investors, large scale
programme funding

NGO

Carbon developer

Government
(regional)

Diversies farming practices, meets

climate change agenda, job creation,
regional development, farmer upliftment

Private consultancy

Lots of opportunity for biogas in SA, have

the technical capacity, part of their core
business, could be market leaders, sell
credits
Large opportunities in SA, assisting
global climate change agenda, pioneer in
SA, knowledge sharing, growing business
internationally

Foreign partner

Lack of policy incentives for clients,

therefore lack of demand, low energy
costs in SA, lack of funding
Policy environment not conducive/
consistent for foreign investment, Need
SA partners to part fundnot always
easy, lack thorough understanding of SA
enabling environment, cheap electricity
in SA makes alternative less competitive,
not condent in consistency of policies
yeti.e. feed-in tariff and PPAs

Bring international experts in on

training SA stakeholders, use
international expertise to advise a
Biogas Taskforce, assist in building
technology partnerships, i.e. in this
case Germany/India/Holland/New
Zealand with SA for Biogas

306

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

Table 3
Barriers in the South African biogas sector (compiled by author).
Application of biogas

Implementation barriers

Incentive options

Agricultural

No operational feed-in tariff

No turnkey provider or one-stop-shop for supportelectricity prices still cheap
Current farming techniques not appropriate for CDM, CDM
methodology too stringent and transaction costs too high
to make CDM viable
Access to nance

Operationalise Rebid
Provide international subsidy for CDM registration and
transaction cost
Improve enabling environment to increase demand of
biogas units and appropriate nancial incentives to
increase suppliers
Encourage international technology collaborations

Industrial

High capital cost

No incentives: Low tipping fees and no CO2 tax
Motivation for biogas digesters are for waste management
not energy generation
Municipal by law limits private sector involvement
Lack of knowledge and awareness
Lack of feed-in tariff

Implement environmental policies which increase tipping

fees and CO2 tax
Adapt municipal bylaws to encourage publicprivate
partnerships
Operationalise Rebid Build on international expertise

Domestic

Lack of social awareness

High capital cost lack of technology suppliers cheap
electricity price
Lack of knowledge and awareness

Develop innovative nancing packages for end users

Educational and information platforms for end users

of climate change inside and outside of the UNFCCC framework.

The transfer of low carbon technologies to developing countries
can have many developmental benets such as contributing
towards economic growth and job creation. Meeting the climate
and developmental challenges simultaneously will require a
signicant shift in the technological trajectory of developing
countries (Sagar, 2009). There have been various approaches to
dening technology transfer (see IEA, 2001; IPCC, 2000; Karani,
2001; IIASA, 2006). For the purposes of exploring the link
between national level implementation of biogas and the international technology transfer literature, 4 concepts that reoccur
across the literature on international low carbon technology
transfer: enabling environment, technical and absorptive capacity,
innovation and intellectual property (IP), are used to structure the
analysis.
7.1. Enabling environment
There are different interpretations in literature for enabling
environment. This paper adopts the UNFCCC approach where the
term generally refers to the appropriate conditions for the uptake
and deployment of low carbon technologies such as policy,
market and regulatory conditions as well as people and institutions (UNFCCC(c), 2010). For example national government level
actions which create an environment conducive to private and
public sector technology transfer (UNFCCC(c), 2010); such as
national institutions for innovation and IPR, national legal institutions that introduce best practice standards and codes, and
nancial incentives such as a feed-in tariff. Bazilian argues that
a successful enabling environment works together with technical
and human capacity (Bazilian et al., 2008).
7.2. Technical and absorptive capacity
The importance of technical and absorptive capacity in the
technology transfer process will vary for different applications of
technology. For example Neuhoff (2009) suggests that as biogas
does not require particularly complex technology, relative to
other renewable technologies, its successful uptake relies primarily on strong absorptive capacity. Mallett (2007) identies social
acceptance and technology cooperation as key to the successful

adoption and integration of a technology at a local level. In

addition developing human capacity is also essential. Demonstration projects, educating relevant stakeholders and training would
contribute to this. Suitable technical and nancial training are
also important for a transferred technology to be sustained in
terms of operation, maintenance and nancial sustainability.
7.3. Innovation
Innovation is no longer simply a linear process but rather
a complex and unpredictable 1 (Bazilian et al., 2008), which
varies along the technology lifecycle. It may require technological
innovation for new cutting edge technologies, innovative support
mechanisms for the diffusion of existing technologies or innovative
approaches to nancing technology deployment programmes. This
also calls on institutional innovation either within existing institutions or the formation of new institutions specically focusing on
low carbon technology innovation. Sagar (2009) calls for cooperative
innovation programmes that are informed and driven by technology
needs of developing countries rather than the technology agenda of
industrialised countries. In order to design appropriate incentives for
deploying technologies it is critical to understand the different
stages of the innovation cycle for specic countries and technologies. To accommodate this variability, new innovative technology
cooperation mechanisms will be required to both deploy existing
technologies in emerging economies and develop and share new
low carbon technologies (Bazilian et al., 2008).
7.4. Intellectual property rights (IPRs)
IPRs have become a main discussion point in the climate
change technology debate. There appears to be a split in opinions
as to whether IPR is a barrier or an opportunityif either. There
was no evidence in empirical data or published literature of
examples of technology projects that were prevented due to
constraints related to IPRs and its associated issues. This is not
to say that it has not been an issue however there is not enough
literature to conclude that IPR currently poses a signicant barrier
to the transfer of climate change technologies (Bazilian et al.,
2008). The evidence related to IPR does not seem to match the
prominence this issue has received in the negotiations (Gerstetter

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

and Marcellino, 2009). The latest UNFCCC text is also not

conclusive about how to tackle the IPR issue, and experts are
not clear on whether it is actually the role of the CTCN or TEC to
address issues related to IPR (UNFCCC, 2011a,b).

7.5. Technology under the UNFCCC

Under the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol, the responsibility to
speed up the technology transfer processparticularly in developing countries-has been put on Annex 1 Parties,4 and was re-iterated
in 2007 in the Bali Action Plan. From 2008 to 2010 countries made
proposals to the UNFCCC on potential elements of a technology
mechanism. In 2010 Cancun established a Technology Mechanism
(draft decision CP16) to facilitate the implementation of technology
transfer activities. The Technology Mechanism would comprise of a
Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and a Clean Technology
Centre & Networks (CTCN).
The purpose of the CTCNs (outlined in paragraph 123 in CP16)
is to facilitate a network of national, regional, sectoral and
international technology networks, organisations and initiatives.
This would be achieved through providing advice and support, as
well as information and training at the requires of developing
country parties. Furthermore the CTC&N will facilitate international partnerships between public and private sector institutions
and coordinate across relevant national, regional and international institutions. Details on the Terms of Reference of the CTCN
& the criteria for selecting the host of the CTCN have also been
included. Following the Bonn SB36 meeting (May 2012) it appears
the most likely consortium to host the CTCN is led by UNEPthe
host of the CTC is to be decided at COP18 (end of 2012).
A TEC was established following COP16 in Cancun consisting of 20
members with regional representation who were tasked with ensuring the Technology Mechanism would be operational by 2012. In
Durban further substance was given to the modalities and procedures
of the TEC (Appendices VII and VIII to draft decision -/CP.17). The
Technology Executive Committee will have a much higher level role,
and will be tasked with facilitating expert working groups, ensuring
technical reports on specic technologies or policy recommendations.
They will be the main link to other institutional arrangements within
the UNFCCCimportantly the nance mechanism; however during
SBSTA 36 Parties were still asking for clarity on how the technology
and nance mechanism under the UNFCCC will be linked. The TEC
will also be responsible for ensuring that the relevant international
and national level stakeholders are engaged with to provide the
expert knowledge that is required.

7.6. Technology interventions outside of the UNFCCC

The discussions around technology transfer have intensied
under the UNFCCC negotiations, yet to date the activities are
limited. However, international technology initiatives outside the
UNFCCC framework already exist. Technology collaborations are
being encouraged through for example the International Energy
Agency (IEA) and the Asia Pacic Partnership (APP). Sharing of
biogas technology is being promoted through the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) and Methane to Markets (M2M). As
countries put forward their own technology proposals to the
UNFCCCsome referred specically to some of these existing
international initiatives outside the UNFCCC including the IEA and
4
Annex 1 Parties those industrialised countries who have accepted emissions targets under the UNFCCC which includes the 24 original OECD members,
the European Union, and 14 countries with economies in transition (unfccc.int).

307

the APP.5 In the design of the proposed UNFCCC technology

transfer mechanism, lessons from best practice collaborations
such as the Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research (CGIAR) and the Montreal Protocol6 have also been
drawn on. Representatives from some of these initiatives have
been involved in technical expert meetings relating to the form
and function of the TEC and CTCN in order to disseminate lessons
and experiences from managing large international networks.
Many of these partnerships result from a top down approach
as outcomes of high level meetings and conferences. It is still not
clear how, for the smaller scale technologies, end user needs will
actually be incorporated, and to what level of detail such international networks or frameworks are able to be sensitive towards
end user requirements.

8. Linking national biogas implementation with international

technology mechanisms
In order to structure the linkages between on the ground
implementation of biogas and the international technology transfer discourse, 4 of the technology transfer concepts outlined in
Chapter 4 (enabling environment, technical and absorptive capacity, innovation and IPR) are applied to the empirical ndings
from South African biogas.
8.1. Practical observations from site visits
The site visits to existing and potential biogas sites in both
Europe and South Africa provided practical insights into the role
of these 4 aspects of technology transfer. At the European sites
it was apparent that the national enabling environments were
providing incentives for biogas technology through policy and
nancial support, this was not evident when visiting South Africa
sites. In fact project implementers were often not aware of any
available support structures.
To ensure technical capacity the larger biogas plants at
European sites had project managers on site specically responsible for the biogas digesters. On agricultural sites, the farmers
were trained in the use of the biogas digester, which also
increases absorptive capacity. In the South African example the
site managers at sewage works were interested but not necessarily trained in the eld of biogas technology. At the smaller
projects, the skill requirements could be met with local labour
and the attitude in terms of social acceptance remained sit back
and see until projects were successfully operating.
The innovation observed at the international case studies
varied from innovative research and private sector collaborations
in Germany to new technology innovations such as at sewage
works visited in the UK. In the South African examples there was
also innovation occurringthe nancing models in the rural
project in Limpopo, and the new pre-fabricated BiogasPro digesters.7 When querying the issue of intellectual property with South
African project implementers, this did not prove a signicant
barrier. In terms of the enabling environment, current policies
and incentives in South Africa are not contributing to an appropriate enabling environment needed to support biogas in South
Africa, unlike in the international examples where feed-in tariffs
5
See the reference list for country submissions reviewed as part of this
research.
6
The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer is an
international treaty that came into force in 1989. It is often used as an example of
a protocol, which demonstrated successful technology transfer mechanisms under
its Multilateral Fund (MLF).
7
Developed by Agama Energy.

308

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

and CO2 taxes encourage the uptake of biogas. The landll tipping
fee and energy costs are still relatively lowalthough this is due
to change soon.
The considerations in regard to technical and absorptive capacity
depend on the scale and application of the biogas technology.
Technical complexity increases for larger projects whereas smaller
projects are possible using low skilled construction workers and
applying basic technical knowledge. The complexity of operating a
biogas plant will also affect the absorptive capacity as end users or
plant operators need to be able to ensure the digesters are appropriately fed with substrate. Social acceptance also varies depending
on the country and application, but is generally higher when
benets such as energy access or reduced energy costs are realised.
What became clear is that innovation varies across the case
studies and also differs from that stipulated in literature. The
success of biogas technology in South Africa is not so much about
technology innovation but rather systems innovation and innovative approaches towards an existing technology.
The ndings pointed to IPR not being such a signicant issue in
the biogas domain. Literature has suggested that patenting and
IPR issues can be a barrier to implementation however none of
the visited projects or the consulted stakeholders suggested that
IPR in the form of patenting had been a barrier. IPR issues around
protecting tacit knowledge and commercial design information
were more of a problem. This is due to the different motivations
and commercial interests of stakeholders.
Beyond these issues it was particularly evident that although
there are competent biogas stakeholders in the biogas sector in
South Africa, there is a lack of information and knowledge sharing
within the broader South African biogas community. Those
stakeholders already involved in some capacity in the biogas
sector were often not familiar with other current projects,
organisations or initiatives. Also stakeholders interested in installing biogas units were in most cases not aware of where to nd
advice or information on nancing or installing a unit. Furthermore there is an apparent disjuncture between international
technology interventions and knowledge amongst biogas project
developers in South Africa of how to access or benet from them.
Finally it was important to realise that different barriers exist
for different biogas applications and different stakeholders across
the agricultural, industrial and domestic sector, which highlights
the intricacies within 1 technology within 1 country.

networks and domestic institutions; its consortium include members active in the area of climate technologies in over 150 countries
with a strong sub-regional coverage and the aim is to engage with
research, NGO and private sector organisations at national level
(UNEP, 2012). However how these aspirations will be implemented
effectively is yet to be seen.

8.2. The need for national and international technology support

8.4. Which aspects of a UNFCCC technology framework would

support biogas in South Africa?

This research process has demonstrated that a diversity of

implementation support is needed at different national and
international levels to increase the uptake of biogas in South
Africa. The interventions required will vary depending on which
stakeholders are driving the project public, private sector or
NGO, the biogas application industrial, commercial or domestic,
the waste streams manure or wastewater and the end use gas
or treated water. Going to this level of detail at a national and
individual technology level is not realistic for an international
mechanism. To that end it begs the question of whether international technology mechanisms are in a position to dig down to
such a level of involvement or whether such country level
technology specics need to be undertaken at a national level in
order to identify proposed appropriate interventions. Similarly
national interventions will benet and depend on support from
international resources. The ndings from this research demonstrate that relying purely on international or national support may
not be effective. Therefore it is necessary to rely on a combination of
international and national commitment. The UNEP CTCN proposal
recognises the importance of engagement between international

8.3. The role of national level engagement

To address the weaknesses in information sharing platforms
within the South African biogas sector, the dissemination of
information on national biogas activities would benet from a
facilitation network providing a transparent database of whos
done what, as well as linking up suppliers, funders and project
developers. Providing a one-stop-shop to establish Biogas partnerships within South Africa would enable the end user to create
their own knowledge networks and potential supplier and partnership information. A central biogas body and implementing
agent or a national level technology network could compile and
disseminate information on national biogas activities and stimulate domestic collaborations and capacity. National level technology action plans and national technology task forces would also
be a useful tool to obtain a more detailed overview of what is
happening within 1 technology sector in 1 country and enable
project developers and end users to plan ahead.
A South African national technology transfer ofce specically
focusing on low carbon technologies with an understanding of
the UNFCCC process, could assist biogas implementers to access
funding or international technical support, as well as provide
advice on IPR related issues. This would address the disjuncture
between international and local initiatives.
To increase social awareness of and demand for biogas,
demonstration projects and appropriate incentives need to be
implemented. For example placing demonstration units within
regional agricultural departments or educational facilities would
signicantly raise the prole of the technology. Incentives such as
higher gate fees at landll sites for instance should be considered
in order for it to become attractive to install biogas units. In
addition to these incentives, ensuring appropriate feed in tariff
structures that support biogas uptake would contribute to an
appropriate enabling environment.

Beyond these national interventions, an international mechanism could provide essential resources and support. Certain elements of the Technology Mechanism through the TEC and CTC&N
could be particularly useful to promote the uptake of biogas
technology. For example the CTC&Ns focus on the deployment of
existing technologies and that the TEC will be involved in
identifying relevant stakeholders for each technology areas well
as engaging with national level stakeholders.
A review of UNFCCC documentation (listed in the Reference
list) and interventions outside of the UN process provided several
activities that could potentially support biogas implementation in
South Africa. Particularly the UNFCCC draft addendum -/CP16 text
(UNFCCC, 2010) and draft decision -/CP.17 (UNFCCC, 2011c),
which outline the activities of the proposed Technology Executive
Committee and Clean Technology Centre & Networks.
Firstly with regard to the lack of information sharing, both the
CTCN and TEC aim to increase access to publicly available information on existing and emerging technologies and support for increasing information sharing platforms. This could be strengthened by

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

existing platforms such as the CGIAR and the IEA Bioenergy networks. Collaborative action through NorthSouth, South -South, and
triangular technology partnerships and establishing cooperative
partnership across public, private, regional and international technology centres will also assist to build up information sharing and
capacity within the South African and across the international
biogas sector. The lack of appropriate policy to support the uptake
of biogas could improve from the TECs intention to establish
specic technology working groups that will provide policy guidance. The CTCN will also focus on developing analytical tools and
policy planning for national planning purposes. An international
mechanism which would incorporate strengthening of enabling
environments through supporting policy and institutional interventions at a national level could be very benecial; for example
international support for developing appropriate domestic policies
and assistance in ensuring the operationalisation of the feed in tariff
or for setting biogas policy targets.
International technology collaborations such as IEA Bioenergy
and M2M would also assist in allowing South Africa to build
on R&D and demonstration projects, which have already been
undertaken internationally. Facilitating international partnerships
where technical assistance, on-the-job training and workforce
development programmes are provided in-country, a function that

309

is proposed by the CTCN, would support all scales of biogas

applications in South Africa.
The table below rstly lists a summary of the perceived and
observed barriers to the uptake of biogas technology in South
Africa, followed by recommendations on how these issues could
be supported by national and international interventions and
nally outlines some of the elements of the recently proposed
international Technology Mechanism as proposed by the UNFCCC.
Table 4 highlights that appropriate interventions to increase
the uptake of biogas technology in South Africa will benet from
both national level engagement, as well as the support from
international technology frameworks within and outside of the
UNFCCC. The proposed UNFCCC technology mechanism has components, which could provide useful elements, however this will
depend on how these will translate into support for national level
implementation.

8.5. Conclusion: the interface between national level engagement

and international support
This research has generated some empirical ndings specic to
the biogas sector in South Africa. This provides useful national and

Table 4
How to address barriers to implementation of biogas in South Africa at a national and international level.
Barrier to
implementation

Address at a national level

International involvement

Relevant elements in the UNFCCC technology

mechanism

Information Sharing,
Lack of knowledge and
awareness

Facilitation of biogas network,

information for end users i.e. onestop-shop

Support information sharing e.g.

available funding opportunities,
capacity building, education

Incorrect policy
incentives

Integration of policies i.e. tipping

fee, electricity price, municipal
nance act

International support for

developing appropriate domestic
policies

Technical Skills

On the job training, national level

technology task forces

Appropriate nancial
incentives

E.g. operationalise feed in tariff.

Increase tipping fee at landll

CDM

Identify interventions required

depending on agricultural/
domestic/industrial
Shift innovation focus towards
innovative systems for deploying
existing technologies, Strengthen
national technology innovation
centres (e.g. TIA)
National low carbon technology
transfer ofce to facilitate
collaborations nationally and
internationally
Place at a regional level or near
education centres

In-country training support,

facilitate partnership/task forces
with technical experts
Fund national technology
initiatives i.e. working for energy,
clarity on access to available
nance
Fund registration and transaction
costs/programmatic CDM

Facilitate the provision of information, training and

Support for programmes (CTCN, para 123, a (ii),
(-/CP16), The TEC will also focus on strengthening
information and knowledge sharing e.g. through
the TT; Clear (-/CP17, TEC modalities, G)
The TEC will establish technology specic working
groups and provide guidance and policy
recommendations which support technology
development and transfer (-/CP17. TEC modalities, C).
CTCN: assistance with developing analytical tools,
policies and best practices for country-driven planning
(-/CP16, para 123, c (v))
The CTCN on request by a developing country Party,
aims to provide in country technical assistance
(-CP/16, para 123, c(iii))
The TEC will act as the link to the UNFCCC nancial
mechanism. A component of the CTCN focuses on
helping to facilitate the nancing of the activities
(-CP17/LCA/VII/para 135 (f))

Innovation

Technology
Collaborations

Demonstration projects

IPR

Sharing of tacit knowledge

Disjuncture between
local knowledge of
accessing
international

National low carbon technology

transfer ofce to educate

Technology innovation centres and

support for deploying existing
technologies

Facilitating regional/international
tech partnerships, Disseminate R&D
experiences
Provide funding for demonstration
projects in South Africa

Flexible position on IPRdepends

on technology and country
Technology networks

Facilitating the preparation of project proposals for

the deployment, utilisation and nancing of
existing technologies for mitigation and adaptation
and to facilitate deployment of technology for local
circumstances
Facilitating international partnerships among
public and private stakeholders
(CTCN, para 123, b (ii), -/CP16)
Facilitating research, development and
demonstration of new climate-friendly
technologies for mitigation and adaptation
(-/CP17/LCA/para 135 (d))
There is still no clear position on this issue in either
the TEC or CTCN
Clean technology centres and networks will focus
on facilitating a network of national, regional,
sectoral and international technology centres, The
CTCN also aims to enhancing national and regional
human and institutional capacity to manage the
technology cycle

310

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

technology specic context to an international decision making

process and demonstrates how an international technology
mechanism could be translated into national level implementation.
It is still unclear what the expected interface between
national and international engagement may be in the context of
technology transfer. At a national level there may be enough
capacity to initiate some of those activities suggested in
Table 4; however, international support in terms of nancial
resources or forming international collaborations will still be
essential in ensuring successful implementation and operation.
It has become apparent during the course of this research, that
this specic aspect of the national and international interface
how international mechanisms would play out at a national level
is an area with warrants further enquiry. Nationally Appropriate
Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) have not been discussed in this
research; however, they may also offer a valuable vehicle for
exploring the relationship between national implementation and
international frameworks and will often entail a technology
component.
It can be seen that in order to increase the transfer of biogas
technology into, and within, South Africa, different levels of
intervention and support will be required. This will amongst
other things depend on the application of the biogas (rural,
industrial, domestic or agricultural), the end user needs (electricity, cooking gas, waste management), the waste stream (manure,
food waste, sewage waste, and industrial waste processes) and

the scale of the technology. These issues will vary across technologies and within countries depending on the maturity of the
technology in that country as well as the domestic technical,
human and institutional capacity.
For an international technology mechanism to capture such
levels of detail is complex and unrealistic, therefore bottom up
country-driven studies would offer a more suitable approach to
identify where support is required and inform on the most
effective way for national and international level engagement
for increasing technology transfer. At an international level it
would be valuable to carry out country level technology studies
and also try and establish how this national and international
interface will play out in the context of the TECs and CTCNs
under the UNFCCC Technology Mechanism.

Appendix A
The data in Tables 5 and 6 are extracted from literature. It can
be seen that there is a range in the estimatesparticularly in the
agricultural sector. The review of feasibility studies and proposed
gures for energy from biogas has highlighted that there is
signicant potential for biogas in South Africa; however, much
further assessment will need to be done to verify these estimates
to accurately assess the actual potential.

Table 5
Site visits conducted as part of the research.
Application

Location

Comments

Country

Date

Industrial

Bran Sands Sewage works

Cape Flats Sewage Works

Biogas used to generate onsite electricity

Anaerobic digester used for treating the sludge,
some biogas used to heat the digester
Anaerobic digester used for treating the sludge,
biogas vented
Biogas used for transport
Biogas used for electricity generation onsite and
feed into national electricity grid
Potential site with interested client
Potential site for biogas from community
sewage works and dairy farm
Private home using horse manure and food
waste
Community scale biogas projects being
constructed

United Kingdom
South Africa

July 2009
May 2009

South Africa

2008

Sweden
Germany

December 2009
June 2009

South Africa
South Africa

September 2009
Oct 2009

South Africa

May 2009

South Africa

October 2009

Athlone Sewage Works

Agricultural

Domestic

Bromma Sewage Works

Triesdorf Research Centre
and Agrikomp site
George, Private Farm
Elim (Stanford)
Nordhoek Private home
Giyani, Limpopo

Table 6
Quoted potential for biogas capacity in South Africa.
Feed stock

Quoted potential capacity

Reference

Notes

Wastewater to WWTP

850 MWth

Essence report

Households (rural)

310,000 households
n Estimate: Approximately
680 GWh/year of thermal
energy

Biogas for a better life

Agricultural
Cattle in feedlots
Piggeries
Poultry farm

3906 MWth
79215
18715
9402976

Municipal WWTP load

consists of captured
domestic backwater,
domestic greywater and
industrial wastewaters
I.e. rural cattle
n Assume 6 m3 digesters,
produce 1 m3 biogas/day,
1 m3 biogas 6 kWh
thermal energy
Excluding rural cattle
Use high range

A. Boyd / Energy Policy 51 (2012) 301311

References
Agama Energy Pty., 2008. Biofuels in the City of Cape Town: Energy from Waste,
11 July 2008. Prepared for UNDP/CCT/SI.
Agama Energy Pty., 2007. v2 (2008) Agama Energy (Pty), Integrated biogas Solutions:
Compiled to Assist the Developer, Planner, Homeowner, and Other Interested
Parties in Assessing the Role That Anaerobic Digestion can Play in Addressing
Waste Management, Energy Needs and Sanitation Through. Cape Town.
Agama Biogas, July 2009. Sustainable Cities: Biogas Energy From Waste, A
Feasibility Study and Guidelines for Implementing Biogas From Waste Projects
in Municipalities. Cape Town.
Amigun, B., August 2008. Processing Cost Analysis of the African Biofuels Industry
With Special Reference to Capital Cost Estimation Techniques. Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Cape Town, Department of Chemical Engineering (Austin et al.
(2006) in Greben, 2009)).
Bazilian, M., DeConinck, H., Radkac, M., Nakhooda, S., Boyd, W., MacGill, I., et al.
(November 2008). Considering Technology Within the UN Climate Change
Negotiations. Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands.
Brown, J., 2006. Biogas: A bright idea for Africa. Environmental Health Perspectives
114 (5), A300A303.
Burton, S., Cohen, B., Harrison, S., Pather-Elias, S., von Blottnitz, H., 2009. Energy
From WastewaterA Feasibility Study, Technical Report, for Water Research
Commission. University of Cape Town, Department of Chemical Engineering.
Dechezlepetre, A., Glachant, M., Meniere, Y., 29 November 2008. Technology
Transfer by CDM projects: A comparison of Brazil, China, India and Mexico.
Mines ParisTech, Cerna, Paris, France.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), 1999. National Waste
Management Strategies and Action Plans South Africa, 15 October 1999.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), 2000. Integrated
Pollution and Waste Management Policy for South Africa.
Department of Minerals and Energy, 2003. White Paper on Renewable Energy.
Republic of South Africa.
De Boer, Y., 2008. Address at: Forum on climate change and science and
technology and innovation Beijing. Forum on climate change and science
and technology and innovation Beijing, PR China, Executive Secretary, UNFCCC.
Available from: /http://unfccc.int/les/press/news_room/statements/application/
pdf/080424_speech_bejing.pdfS.
Department of Environmental Affairs, 2011. National Climate Change Response
White Paper. Available from: /http://www.environment.gov.za/PolLeg/White
Papers/national_climatechange_response_whitepaper.pdfS.
Department of Minerals and Energy, 2004. Free Basic Alternative Energy Policy,
Households Energy Support Programme. Government Gazette, 2 April 2007.
Available from: /http://www.cityenergy.org.za/les/resources/energy%20pov
erty/DME%202007%20Free%20Basic%20Alternative%20Energy%20Policy%202007%
20(DME).pdfS.
Department of Minerals and Energy, DANCED, 2001. Bulk Renewable Energy
Independent Power Producers in South Africa, January 2001.
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF), 1998. National Water Act, Act
no. 36, 1998, 20 August 1998.
Forster, P.V., et al., 2007. Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative
forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Table 2.14.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom, New York, NY, USA. /http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/
assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter2.pdfS.
Gerstetter, C., Marcellino, D., 16 November 2009. The Current Proposals on the Transfer
of Climate Technology in the International Climate Negotiations, An Assessment.
Ecologic Institute, Washington, DC, /http://www.ecologic.eu/washingtonS.

311

Greben, H.A., Oelofse, S.H., 2009. Unlocking the resource potential of organic
waste: a South African perspective. Pretoria, South Africa: CSIRNatural
Resources and the Environment. Waste Management Research, published on
May 26, 2009 as http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734242X09103817.
IIASA, June 2006. What is Technology? Retrieved November 2009, from IIASA
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. /http://www.iiasa.ac.at/
Research/TNT/WEB/Page10120/page10120.htmlS.
International Energy Agency, 2001. Technology without borders; case studies of
successful technology transfer. Available from: /http://www.iea.org/papers/
2001/ctifull.pdfS.
International Energy Agency (IEA),2009. Key World Energy Statistics. IEA, Paris,
France, /http://www.iea.orgS.
IPCC, 2000. Special Report Methodological and Technical Issues in Technology
Transfer, Working Group III. Available from: /http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special
reports/spm/srtt-en.pdfS.
Karani, P., 2001. Constraints for activities implemented jointly (AIJ) technology
transfer in Africa. Renewable Energy 22 (13), 229234.
Mallett, A., 2007. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovations: the role of
technology cooperation in urban Mexico. Energy Policy 35 (5), 27902798.
NERSA, November 2, 2009. Media Statement, NERSA Decision on Renewable Energy
Feed-In Tariffs (REFITS) Phase II. Available from: /http://www.nersa.org.za/
UploadedFiles/News/Media%20statement%20NERSA%20Decision%20on%20REFIT
%20Phase%202%20-021109.pdfS.
Neuhoff, K., 2009. International Support for Domestic Climate Policy, Climate
Strategies and University of Cambridge, Presentation given at the University of
Cape Town.
Ockwell, D.(a), Watson, J., MacKerron, G., Pal, P., Yamin, F., 2008. Key policy
considerations for facilitating low carbon technology transfer to developing
countries. Energy Policy 36, 41044115.
Ramanathan, R., 2002. Successful transfer of environmentally sound technologies
for greenhouse gas mitigation: a framework for matching the needs of
developing countries. Ecological Economics 42, 117129.
Republic of South Africa (RSA(c)), 1997. Water Services Act.
Sagar, A., 2009. Beyond Technology Transfer: Innovation Cooperation for Meeting
Climate Challenges, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Delhi High-Level
Conference on Climate Change: Technology Development and Transfer. New
Delhi, October 23, 2009.
Statistics South Africa, 2008. Non-nancial census of municipalities for the year
ended 30 June 2008. The review of the technology related activities under the
UNFCCC are based on: UNEP, Proposal to host the Climate Technology Centre,
16 March 2012, prepared by DTIE.
UNEP, 2012. Climate Technology Centre and Network; Proposal to host the Climate
Technology Centre, Prepared by DTIE for UNEP, 16 March 2012.
UNFCCC(c), 2010. TT Clear: Enabling Environments. Available from: /http://www.
unfccc.intS.
UNFCCC, 2010. Decision 1/CP.16 The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the work of
the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the
Convention, FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1.
UNFCCC, 2011a. Expert Workshop on Technology Mechanism in conjunction with
the fourtieenth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention, FCCC/AWGLCA/2011/INF2.
UNFCCC, 2011b. Draft Decision -/CP 17, Technology Executive Committee
modalities and procedures.
UNFCCC, 2011c. Advance unedited version, Draft decision [-/CP.17] Outcome of
the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action
under the Convention (Appendix VII, VIII).