Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Review of barriers to the dissemination of decentralized renewable

energy systems
Mohammed Yaqoot a,n, Parag Diwan a, Tara C. Kandpal b
a
University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Bidholi, Dehradun 248007, India
b
Centre for Energy Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper reviews the available literature dealing with the barriers to the dissemination of decentralized
Received 19 May 2015 renewable energy systems. Decentralized renewable energy systems may face a range of technical,
Received in revised form economic, institutional, socio-cultural and environmental barrier to their dissemination. In the paper,
21 October 2015
barriers impeding the dissemination of decentralized renewable energy systems have been identified
Accepted 21 December 2015
and assessed. In addition, appropriate remedial measures and corresponding responsibility centers as
reported in the literature have also been discussed.
Keywords: Inappropriateness of technology, unavailability of skilled manpower for maintenance, unavailability of
Barrier spare parts, high cost, lack of access to credit, poor purchasing power and other spending priorities, unfair
Dissemination
energy pricing, lack of information or awareness, and lack of adequate training on operation and main-
Decentralized renewable energy system
tenance of decentralized renewable energy systems are found to be the most critical barriers. Long-term
conducive policies, appropriate regulatory framework, financial incentives (capital subsidies and soft loans)
to users, technology and skill development, internalization of externalities in the cost of energy, with-
drawal of subsidies presently being given to fossil fuels, development of specialized institutions, coop-
eration with international agencies, participation of local community and awareness generation have been
recommended for increased dissemination of decentralized renewable energy systems.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
2. Identification and classification of barriers to the dissemination of DRESs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
2.1. Technical barriers and remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
2.1.1. Resource availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
2.1.2. Technology – design, installation and performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
2.1.3. Skill requirement for design and development, manufacturing, installation, operation and maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479
2.1.4. Potential remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479
2.2. Economic barriers and remedial measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479
2.2.1. Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
2.2.2. Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
2.2.3. Potential remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482
2.3. Institutional barriers and remedial measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482
2.3.1. Policy and regulatory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
2.3.2. Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
2.3.3. Administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
2.3.4. Potential remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
2.4. Socio-cultural barriers and remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484
2.4.1. Societal structure, norms and value system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484
2.4.2. Awareness and risk perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485

n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 91 963 441 3977; fax: þ 91 135 277 6090.
E-mail address: myaqoot@gmail.com (M. Yaqoot).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.224
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
478 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490

2.4.3. Behavioral or lifestyle issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485

2.4.4. Potential remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485
2.5. Environmental barriers and remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486
2.5.1. Potential remedial measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486
3. Mapping of critical barriers for individual DRES and trend assessment of evolution of barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486
4. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488

1. Introduction
In view of energy security and climate change concerns, govern-
ments and policymakers are promoting increased dissemination1 of
renewable energy technologies. Increased share of renewable energy
in the overall energy mix of countries would help the cause of sus-
tainable development. Renewable energy systems are broadly classi-
fied into two categories: i) centralized renewable energy system; ii)
decentralized renewable energy system (DRES). DRESs such as solar
lantern, solar home system, family-type biogas plants, improved bio-
mass cookstoves, etc. have been disseminated worldwide for imp-
roving access to energy of the rural households [2]. DRES is also an
appropriate option for electrification of remote households located in
difficult terrains (islands and hills) that may not be technically and
financially feasible through grid extension [3]. Large-scale diffusion
and utilization of relatively newer technologies such as DRESs face
barriers. These barriers may put DRESs at a technical, economic, reg-
ulatory or institutional disadvantage in comparison to conventional
energy systems [4]. Sometimes, the barriers may have inter-linkages
that can have cascading impact on the diffusion of DRESs [4]. Hence, to
accelerate the diffusion of DRESs, it is vital to understand the barriers
and their inter-linkages. This would enable the policymakers and the
implementing agencies to formulate plans and implement them in a
more effective manner.
Based on a review of published literature on barriers and rele-
vant aspects, this paper identifies the barriers to the dissemination
of DRESs and classifies them based on their characteristics. It also
suggests remedial measures to overcome them for enhanced dif-
fusion of DRESs.
2. Identification and classification of barriers to the dis-
semination of DRESs
A barrier to the dissemination of a DRES may be defined as a
factor that negatively affects its adoption and subsequent utiliza-
tion which hampers its widespread diffusion [5]. Barriers to the
dissemination of DRESs may often include technical, economic,
institutional, socio-cultural or environmental aspects. In this study,
barriers pertinent to the diffusion of DRESs have been identified. In
addition, relevant research papers have been cited to highlight the
impact of barriers on the diffusion of various DRESs across dif-
ferent regions of the world (Appendix). The identified barriers
have been classified under five broad categories depending on the
characteristics of the barrier: technical, economic, institutional,
socio-cultural and environmental (Table 1). The following sections
present a discussion on the categories and subcategories of bar-
riers. For each barrier, all the sub-barriers that have reportedly
affected the dissemination of one or more DRESs at different
1
Some authors restrict the term ‘diffusion’ to the spontaneous unplanned
spread of ideas or innovation and use the concept of ‘dissemination’ for diffusion
that is directed and managed. However, several studies have used them inter-
changeably [1]. In this study, these terms have been used interchangeably.
regions of the world have been discussed along with few examples
to present a panoramic view of the barrier. In subsequent sub-
sections, the impact of sub-barriers on the dissemination of var-
ious DRESs in different regions of the world have been discussed
with several examples to support the narrative. In addition, for
each barrier and its sub-barriers, the remedial measures recom-
mended to overcome them have been discussed that may help the
policymakers to frame policies for accelerated diffusion of DRESs
in various parts of the world.
2.1. Technical barriers and remedial measures
Technical or technological barriers to DRESs generally include
barriers associated with resource, technology and skill attributes
of the system that prevent the utilization from reaching its theo-
retical potential [6]. Technical barrier has been widely reported as
a critical barrier affecting the diffusion of DRESs [5,7–48]. Tech-
nical barriers include sub-barriers pertaining to the following: (a)
resource availability; (b) technology – design, installation and
performance; (c) skill requirement for design and development,
manufacturing, installation, operation and maintenance. A brief
summary of the published literature reporting different aspects of
technical barriers affecting the adoption of DRESs is presented in
the following paragraphs.
2.1.1. Resource availability
Renewable energy resources (particularly solar and wind) are
intermittent and/or variable in nature. Other renewable energy
sources such as biomass and hydro may be inadequate at times to
support capacity utilization of respective technologies at eco-
nomical levels. Because of this intermittency and/or inadequacy,
resource availability has been cited widely as an important barrier
[12,17,20,24,28,34,35,43–45,49–54]. For example, a study has
concluded that lack of resource availability is an important barrier
to the diffusion of DRESs such as family-type biogas plant, box-
type solar cooker, domestic solar water-heater, and solar photo-
voltaic lantern in India [49]. In Turkey, uncertainty with respect to
solar resource availability is reported to be hampering the adop-
tion of solar water heaters [34]. Similarly, resource availability
issues such as seasonal fluctuation of wind have been reported as
barriers to diffusion of wind installations in the Dodecanese
islands (Greece) [35]. Thus, it can be inferred that inadequacy and
intermittency associated with renewable energy make resource
availability an important factor to be considered for the dis-
semination of DRESs.
2.1.2. Technology – design, installation and performance
Generally, solar, wind and biomass powered renewable energy
technologies suffer from lower energy flux (energy output per unit
floor area) as compared to fossil fuel fired technologies [34].
Additionally, the intermittent nature of renewable energy sources
necessitates usage of energy storage devices to improve the energy
dispatch ability of concerned renewable energy technologies
(RETs) which further puts them at a disadvantage [34,35,41,43,50].
 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490
Table 1
Classification of barriers to the diffusion of DRES.
Barrier Sub-barriers
Technical Resource availability; technology (design, installation and
performance); skill requirement for design and development,
manufacturing, installation, operation and maintenance
Economic Cost; market structure; energy pricing; incentives; purchasing
power and spending priorities; financial issues; awareness
and risk perception
Institutional Policy and regulatory; infrastructure (institutions for research,
design and after sales services); administrative
Socio-cultural Societal structure; norms and value system; awareness and
risk perception; behavioral or lifestyle issues
Environmental Resources (land and water); pollution; esthetics
Several studies have cited inappropriateness of technology or
poor design as a significant technical barrier to the adoption of
DRESs [7,24,47,49,53,55–59]. For example, it has been reported
that failures due to application of too complex designs in early
projects, lack of standardization and poor reliability are significant
barriers to wind energy development in Tamil Nadu and Andhra
Pradesh, India [13]. Likewise, with poor design as a technical
barrier, wind turbines have had limited success in Tanzania [60]. In
addition to its primary function of cooking, traditional biomass
cookstoves may also satisfy other perceived needs of the users
such as lighting, space heating, pest control, etc. [7]. However, the
diffusion of improved biomass cookstoves that has higher thermal
efficiency than traditional biomass cookstoves, face the following
barriers: inadequate satisfaction of perceived needs; inflexibility of
the stove with respect to number and size of pots; and need for
careful maintenance [10]. Also, faulty design and improper
installation of residential solar water heaters have been cited as
barriers to their diffusion in USA [9].
Installation and maintenance issues with respect to DRESs have
also been highlighted as barriers in several studies [5,22,61]. For
example, frequent need for repair and maintenance of biogas
plants and variation of biogas production, with factors such as
ambient temperature, have reportedly been detrimental to its
adoption in Nepal [8]. Likewise, the need for regular cleaning of
photovoltaic panels has been cited as a barrier to the performance
of solar pumps located at arid zone in India [62].
Reliability of DRES has also been an issue of concern for its
potential adopters. Lack of standards [14,18,29,33,47,55,63–66],
codes [18,66], certification [18,29,67,68] for DRESs, and conse-
quently poor quality/reliability [18,29,33,55,64,65] of these sys-
tems are important technical barriers to its diffusion. As per a
study, absence of quality control, non-functionality and low-
capacity utilization are the barriers affecting improved cook
stoves, family type biogas plants and small hydropower plants in
India respectively [38]. Also, low efficiency or quality of some
renewable energy technologies and its insignificant utilization has
been detrimental to its diffusion [69]. For example, solar dryers are
reportedly facing the problem of low capacity utilization in India
[70]. Low reliability of solar buildings in Kenya and the depen-
dence of building designers on foreign designs have also been
cited as barriers to diffusion of solar buildings in the country [71].
On similar lines, a study has mentioned poor reliability and shorter
expected life as the barriers to market development of solar water
heating and space heating systems in USA [72]. Also, past failures
and poor reliability of DRESs such as solar thermal systems are
reportedly discouraging its adoption among masses [28]. Thus, it
can be inferred that technology (design, installation and perfor-
mance) related barriers have significant impact on the dis-
semination of DRESs.
479
2.1.3. Skill requirement for design and development, manufacturing,
installation, operation and maintenance
Availability of skilled workers is critical to the successful dis-
semination of renewable energy technologies [51]. Lack of avail-
ability of skilled workers for design and development, manu-
facturing, installation, operation and maintenance services has
been often cited as a barrier to the diffusion of DRESs
[6,7,9,18,23,25,28,29,33,43–47,58,60,64,66–69,73–80]. A study has
discussed the negative impact of dearth of skilled workers for
installation, operation and maintenance on the diffusion of DRESs
[4]. Similarly, lack of experience and awareness in technology and
management of DRESs has reportedly acted as barriers to its dif-
fusion in ASEAN countries [69]. Lack of trained technicians has
been reportedly hindering the growth of wind installations in
Turkey [34]. For the diffusion of DRESs in Lebanon, non-existence
of local manufacturers has been reported as a barrier [63]. A
researcher has deliberated that, in cross-cultural technology
transfer of sustainable energy systems it is important to address
knowledge and skill barriers [12]. Communication and training
barriers due to language difference between field staff and local
people have reportedly resulted in poor transfer of skills leading to
the failure of solar battery charging programmes in Northern
Thailand [22]. In addition, lack of knowledge of renewable energy
technology operation and management has also been listed as a
barrier by few studies [17,39,81]. Hence, it can be inferred that
skill related barriers are detrimental to the dissemination
of DRESs.
2.1.4. Potential remedial measures
Several remedial measures have been suggested by researchers
to overcome technical barriers to the diffusion of DRESs. Table 2
presents some of the suggested remedial measures to overcome
technical barriers. In addition, appropriate responsibility centers
that are expected to support and/or implement the suggested
remedial measures are also listed in Table 2. It may be noted that
most of the remedial measures suggested to overcome technical
barriers to the diffusion of DRESs point towards the establishment
of appropriate institutional set-ups for: (a) resource assessment,
(b) research and development, (c) capacity building, and (d)
quality control and standardization.
Apart from the frequently cited general remedial measures
listed in Table 2, there are few other case-specific measures that
have been recommended to overcome technical barriers. To
overcome intermittency problem associated with DRESs due to
irregular resource availability, two or more energy systems can be
integrated. A study has recommended integrating photovoltaic
with compressed air energy storage and increasing the thermal
storage capability in concentrated solar power [52]. Utilization of
solar dryers at community level has been recommended to offset
the problem of low capacity utilization associated with solar dry-
ers [70]. Extensive testing of solar photovoltaic pumps under
similar climatic conditions has been advocated to ensure their
reliability for drip irrigation in arid zones [62].
It may be noted from Table 2 that research and development
(R&D) institutions and academic institutions (universities and
colleges) have major roles to play in overcoming technical barriers.
Thus, such institutions need to be supported by both government
and private sector to promote DRESs.
2.2. Economic barriers and remedial measures
Diffusion of DRESs face economic and/or financial barriers [5–
7,10,12–14,16,18,20–23,53,54,73,76,80,84,85]. As per an article,
financial and economic viability and awareness barriers are
important economic barriers affecting the promotion of family-
type biogas plants, improved biomass cookstoves, box-type solar
480 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490

Table 2
Potential remedial measures suggested to overcome the sub-barriers of Technical barrier.

Sub-barrier Remedial measure(s) Responsibility center(s) Relevant reference(s)

Resource availability Accurate resource assessment Institutions for resource [6,7,13,46,49,55,63,82]

Technology-design,installation and
performance
Skill requirement for design and
development, manufacturing, instal-
lation, operation and maintenance
Research and Development (R&D)
International cooperation
Indigenization of technology by study-
ing local conditions and involving all
stakeholders during product
development
Training for skill related to product
development
Introduction of standards and regula-
tions during product development
Deployment of mature, reliable, easy to R&D institutions
maintain and long lasting technologies
Education and training
assessment
R&D institutions [6,7,13,19,23,28,43,57,58,63,73,82]
R&D institutions, govern- [19,25,33,38,40,46,60,69,80]
ment organizations, aca-
demic institutions
R&D institutions [6,7,10,12,13,15,24,25,33,56,82]
R&D institutions, academic [6,18,19,23,28,29,33,43,73,80,82]
institutions
R&D institutions, quality [6,18,20,29,33,57,61,67,72,79,83]
assurance and quality con-
trol institutions
[15,34]
R&D institutions, NGOs, [4,20,22,44,47,55,57,58,63,64,65,67,68,71,76, 77,82,83]
academic institutions

cookers, domestic solar water heaters and solar photovoltaic lan-
terns [49]. Several other research papers have discussed the fol-
lowing economic barriers-subsidies for competing conventional
fuels, high initial capital cost, difficulty of fuel price risk assess-
ment, high transaction costs of renewable energy projects, non-
inclusion of environmental externalities in the cost of conven-
tional energy, lack of access to capital and inadequate information
[4,18,25,74]. Another study has listed high investment cost, long
payback period, lack of purchasing power, uncertainty about
benefits and availability of cheaper alternative fuels as economic
barriers affecting the diffusion of family size biogas plants and
solar cookers [7]. As per some researchers, high initial investment
cost, negative image caused by failed biogas plants, limited private
sector participation, lack of money and lack of awareness are the
economic barriers hindering the adoption of biogas plants by
farmers in Kenya [86]. Lack of private sector investments due to
profit uncertainties has also been reported as a critical economic
barrier [58]. It has also been argued that availability of highly
subsidized conventional energy as well as inadequate fiscal
incentives to DRES users are preventing the diffusion of DRESs in
Oman [73,84]. Thus, economic barriers can be classified as cost
related or market related and further discussion in this section is
presented under these two categories.
2.2.1. Cost
DRESs often suffer from high upfront cost [4–8,12,17–
20,23,43,45,47,48,82,86–97]. For example, it has been reported
that cooking technologies based on biogas and solar energy have
high initial cost that has limited their diffusion [24]. In rural
households of developing countries such as India, traditional
cookstoves are generally constructed free of cost with locally
available materials (stone and mud) and fuelwood is also available
at almost zero private cost. Availability of such a zero cost option
for cooking usually discourages a rural household to invest
around `2 26000 on a 2 m3 biogas plant [Project Officer of Uttar-
akhand Renewable Energy Development Agency, India, Personal
Communication, May 11, 2014] or about ` 1800 on an improved
cookstove [Project Officer of Uttarakhand Renewable Energy
Development Agency, India, Personal Communication, May 11,
2014]. Similarly, a solar home system of 35 Wp is reported to cost
around ` 12,000 with resultant levelized unit cost of electricity of `
2
1 USD ¼ ` 65.75
38.80 per kWh that is much costlier than the prevailing unit cost
of grid electricity in India [3]. Several other studies have also
reported high cost as a major barrier to the diffusion of solar PV
systems [14,20,37,72,83,98–100]. For example, as per experiences
of a renewable energy company named Grameen Shakti in Ban-
gladesh, high cost of solar PV module has been the main barrier to
Bangladesh’s PV program [101].
Likewise, high cost of solar water heaters has been pointed as a
barrier to their diffusion [38].
Apart from high upfront cost, high fuel cost, operation and
maintenance costs, and taxes and insurance costs have also been
reported as barriers to the diffusion of DRESs such as biomass
gasifiers [5]. Additional burden on villagers due to operation and
maintenance cost of PV battery charging stations for village elec-
trification in Thailand has been cited as a barrier [22]. High
operation and maintenance cost due to the lack of technically
skilled personnel has also been cited as a barrier for the diffusion
of DRESs in Nigeria [67]. Similarly, few other studies have also
reported high maintenance cost as a barrier to the diffusion of
DRESs [47,54,75].
Often, smaller size of DRES projects lead to high transaction
cost (cost incurred in various approvals, regulatory and adminis-
trative procedures) and the same has been reported as a barrier to
its diffusion [4,13,18,25,26,33,42,45,55,57,67,74,100]. For example,
in Mexico, DRES projects have faced high project development
cost as a barrier since these projects are typically smaller in size
compared to their conventional counterparts [78]. Similarly, high
transaction cost has been cited by a study as a barrier to the uti-
lization of domestic biogas plants [32]. Solar PV systems are also
reportedly suffering from high transaction costs during sales,
installation, etc., due to the lack of conducive and enabling
investment policies and a small market size [100]. In addition, lack
of awareness among customers and dealing with multiple stake-
holders (government agencies) increases transaction cost for solar
PV system projects [65]. From the above mentioned examples, it
can be inferred that for accelerated dissemination of DRESs, cost
related barriers need to be addressed.
2.2.2. Market
In comparison to conventional energy technologies, DRESs
have been facing economic barriers due to the existing market
structure and its policies that favor their conventional counter-
parts through subsidies and other incentives.
 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490
2.2.2.1. Market structure. Lack of competitiveness of DRESs in com-
parison to conventional energy technologies in current market sce-
nario is an important barrier [5]. Also, current market is reportedly
biased against DRESs and favors established technologies such as
large-scale fossil fired power plants [102]. Market related barriers to
the diffusion of DRESs have been highlighted by various studies
[13,18,21,26,30,33,35,40,45,53,57,58,74,77,80,82,83,103,104]. Lack of
competition, trade barriers and inadequate information are the fac-
tors responsible for market barriers with respect to the diffusion of
DRESs [105]. For example, state ownership of energy related enter-
prises has reportedly created market barriers in Thailand for private
entities that are promoting DRESs in the country [68]. Similarly,
distortions in energy market are reported as one of the significant
barriers to the diffusion of DRESs in India [11]. Distortions in energy
market are a result of policies that favor conventional energy tech-
nologies through various incentives (subsidies, tax rebates, etc.) and
discourage the utilization of DRESs through trade barriers and non-
internalization of externalities [18]. Small size of DRESs market and
subsequent lack of economies of scale has also been cited as an
economic barrier [6,9,18]. In addition, a study has reported that 100%
accelerated depreciation in the first year, capital subsidies and tax
incentives for wind installations created market distortions in India
that led to siting of wind turbines at sites with poor wind resource
leading to project failures [99].
2.2.2.2. Fuel/Energy pricing. Pricing and affordability issues
reportedly reflect as financial barriers to the adoption of DRESs
[20]. High cost of electricity from DRESs for rural electrification is
considered as an impediment to their diffusion [46,106]. Failure to
take into account all costs and benefits (particularly environment and
health related) associated with both conventional energy and
renewable energy is another barrier [66]. Subsidies to fossil fuels and
non-internalization of externalities in the energy cost are significant
barriers impeding the diffusion of DRESs [4,18,25,28,33,35,74,78,90].
A researcher has cited uncompetitive market price of renewable
energy due to its lack of economies of scale and price distortion as a
result of subsidies to its competitors (conventional energy sources) as
barriers to the diffusion of DRESs [26].
Subsidized conventional energy sources create market distortions
favoring conventional energy sources [17,55,67,69,76,7982,93,103]. For
example, subsidies to oil and gas have been considered as a barrier to
active solar systems for water or space heating in USA [9,72]. Likewise,
subsidies for conventional electricity sources have created a distorted
market for solar PV that discourages its usage [14,100]. In the state of
Punjab in India, solar PV pumps have been unfairly put against pumps
that operate on free electricity or subsidized diesel [65].
Non-inclusion of externalities in the cost of energy from fossil
fuels is reported to have created imperfect market hindering large-
scale diffusion of DRESs [30,76,89,103]. Consequent availability of
cheaper but less sustainable fossil fuel derived energy options has
put renewable energy at disadvantage [39]. For example, abun-
dance of fossil fuels and cheap electricity has been considered as a
significant barrier to the diffusion of DRESs in Australia [43].
Likewise, easy availability of fuelwood at zero private cost has
been cited as a barrier to the utilization of biogas in Nepal [8].
Reportedly, non-monetary benefits such as time savings or
reduction in the consumption of freely available firewood are not
motivating the potential users enough to adopt DRESs such as
family-type biogas plants [15]. Also, non-monetary benefits may
not be considered for adoption of improved biomass cookstoves in
developing countries, especially where adoption decisions are
taken by men whereas fuelwood collection and cooking is per-
formed by women [10]. The difficulty of fuel price risk assessment
(due to risk associated with the fluctuation of future fossil fuel
prices in international/domestic market) has also been considered
as a barrier to the dissemination of DRESs [4,74].
481
2.2.2.3. Incentives/Taxes/Duties. Government may support the dif-
fusion of DRESs through incentives such as capital subidy, soft loan,
carbon credit, etc. Also, reduction or waiver of taxes and duties on
DRESs and associated projects may help the dissemination of
DRESs. However, DRESs often receive inadequate incentives to
promote its adoption among its potential users. Inadequate incen-
tives to DRES users have been considered as a barrier to its diffusion
[14,46,68,69,84]. In Australia, dearth of incentives for renewable
energy has been cited as a barrier [43]. Similarly, lack of incentives
to wind installations in Greece has been cited as a major barrier to
its diffusion [35]. Conventional power generation technologies have
been reaping the benefits of tariff support, tax holidays and other
conducive policies since decades and this gives them significant
edge over solar PV systems in the absence of conducive renewable
energy policies in developing countries [100]. A study has cited
taxes on DRESs as barriers that lead to market distortions [18]. In
addition, distortions in tariff policies on imported equipments are
reportedly retarding the dissemination of DRESs [82]. For example,
import duty on solar PV systems has further worsened its compe-
titiveness in energy market [65].
2.2.2.4. Purchasing power and spending priorities. Poor purchasing
power of potential users has been a significant hurdle to the dis-
semination of biogas, biomass and solar energy based cooking
systems [7,24]. Poverty or affordability has been reported as a
barrier to the promotion of DRESs [45,68,107]. Dissemination of
solar water heating systems is also reported to be adversely affected
by the lack of purchasing power of households that are potential
adopters of the system [59,79]. Similarly, low purchasing power of
potential adopter households due to poverty has been preventing
usage of solar home systems in un-electrified areas of rural Ban-
gladesh [101] and other countries [65]. Other spending priorities of
households in Greece is also reported as a barrier to the dis-
semination of solar domestic hot water system in the country [61].
2.2.2.5. Financial issues. Lack of access to credit facilities has been
widely reported as a critical barrier to the dissemination of DRESs
[4,6,7,17,18,25,26,33,34,39,40,43,44,45,57,58,65,66,69,74,79,80,86].
For example, limited access to financial resources and high cost of
finance are preventing commercialization of DRESs in India [11].
Similarly, difficulties with financing and insuring biomass based
projects in Europe have been reported as barriers to their successful
implementation in the region [85]. As many of the potential users of
improved cookstoves in rural areas of developing countries are very
poor, need for access to subsidized credit has been stressed [10].
Limited access to affordable credit facilities is also reported as a
barrier to solar PV diffusion as it prevents the entry of private sector
in the industry [14,100]. Also, lack of long-term financing [93] and
high interest rate for capital are important barriers to the diffusion of
DRESs [18,72]. Moreover, lack of supportive investment climate in a
country is also reported as a barrier as it may affect the growth of
DRES industry in the country [68]. Some researchers have cited long
economic payback period as a barrier to the dissemination of biogas
plants and solar cookers [7]. Long payback period of DRES projects
has also been cited as a barrier by several other studies
[18,33,47,61,64,72,94].
2.2.2.6. Awareness and risk perception. Awareness among various
stakeholders is a very important requirement for effective func-
tioning of a market or economy. Lack of information among the
stakeholders has been cited in many studies as a barrier to the
dissemination of DRESs [18,26,32,33,43,48,54,64,66–68,75,79,
108,109]. For example, in the case of family-size biogas plants in
Kenya, lack of information is rated one of the critical barriers
affecting their adoption among the farmers of the country [86]. On
similar lines, some researchers have mentioned that innovation
482 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490

systems for renewable energy technologies in United Kingdom are
suffering due to lack of exchange of information among various
stakeholders [23].
Perception of financial or investment risk is another challenge
to the dissemination of DRESs [26,33,53,55,76,82,93,94,110]. In
developing countries, public has general perception that new
technologies such as DRESs are costlier as compared to their
conventional counterparts [102]. Increased risk perception
regarding the performance and durability of DRESs results in
higher desired rate of return on investment leading to less capital
availability for DRES projects [4].
2.2.3. Potential remedial measures
Generally, most of the renewable energy policies attempt to
address economic barriers [4]. Table 3 presents some of the sug-
gested remedial measures to overcome the sub-barriers under
economic barrier category. From Table 3, it can be gauged that
overcoming economic barriers to DRESs would need institutional
support from government and DRES related policymaking and
implementation agency for: (a) setting up R&D institutions for cost
reduction, (b) market facilitation to DRESs through various
incentives, (c) developing a fair energy pricing regime with
internalization of externalities, and (d) delivery of microfinance
facilities to poor households for DRES adoption.
In addition to the generic broad based remedial measures listed
in Table 3, there are few other case-specific measures that have
been reportedly suggested to overcome economic barriers to the
dissemination of DRESs. Through a discussion on commercializa-
tion of solar technology in USA, a study has recommended
matching of government’s commercialization strategy with the
stage of evolution of the industry [9]. Need for long-term fiscal
incentives has also been stressed [43]. Also, rationalization of
subsidies has been recommended as large state subsidies in
Thailand towards solar battery charging programmes for 15 years
have reportedly destroyed the market for private companies [22].
Developing solar PV promotion schemes that prevents subsidy
leakages to wealthy farmers has been recommended to improve
dissemination of solar PV systems in Indian agricultural sector
[65]. Moreover, appropriate
financial funding depending upon the relative maturity of solar
water heating industry has also been recommended [59]. Local
credit schemes need to be set up in rural areas to overcome the
cost barrier of DRESs [12]. Soft loan schemes of Grameen Shakti in
Bangladesh have been found to be very successful in overcoming
affordability barriers associated with solar PV systems and its
replication in other areas has been recommended [101]. Creation
of self-help groups among farmers to raise revolving funds for
construction of biogas plants is also reported as a viable option for
promotion of DRESs in Kenya [86].
As indicated in Table 3, role of institutions including DRES
related policymaking and implementation agency, R&D institu-
tions, banks, NGOs and academic institutions is critical to sur-
mount cost and market barriers. Besides supporting R&D for cost
reduction, efforts should also be made towards the development
of a conducive market for DRESs through appropriate policy
measures.
2.3. Institutional barriers and remedial measures
A large number of studies have reported the relevance of
institutional barriers in preventing the dissemination of DRESs
[5,7,9,12–14,16,18–21,23,28,29,33–35,90,92,111–116]. The sub-
barriers that may be listed under the category of institutional
barrier include: lack of agencies to disseminate information;
uncertain government policies; lack of a legal/regulatory frame-
work; tedious bureaucratic procedures; unstable macro-economic
environment; lack of stakeholder participation in decision making;
clash of interests among stakeholders; lack of R&D culture;
insufficient professional institutions; and lack of private sector
participation [18]. For example, institutional barriers reported to
be affecting family-type biogas plants, improved biomass cook-
stoves and solar cooker in developing countries are: lack of

Table 3
Potential remedial measures suggested to overcome the sub-barriers of Economic barrier.

Sub-barrier Remedial measure (s) Responsibility center(s) Relevant reference(s)

Cost Incentives to DRES users or consumers
(subsidy, tax rebate)
R&D for cost reduction
Funds for R&D on DRES
Reduction in transaction cost (learning by
doing effect)
Market Innovative financing schemes (soft loans,
grants, revolving fund, fee for service
delivery model)
Micro-credit facilities
Internalization of externalities in cost of
energy
Withdrawal of subsidies to fossil fuels
Quotas for DRES usage
Incentives (subsidies, tax break, reduced
import duty) to private sector or entrepre-
neurs (acting as manufacturers/project
developers/distributors/retailers)
Market intermediation by government
Awareness or information dissemination
programme
DRES related policymaking and [4,5,8,14,17–19,21,26,28–30,35,43–47,49,51,53,60,61,63,67,71–75,79,82–
implementation agency 84,88,90,92,98,100,105]
R&D institutions [8,13,46,52,90,99]
DRES related policymaking and [13,19,58,63,69,79,90]
implementation agency
DRES related implementation [57,90,105]
agency and other relevant gov-
ernment agencies
DRES related policymaking and [4–6,13,14,17–19,21,26,29,33,49,57,58,63,64,67,69,75,76,79,82,83,89,90]
implementation agency, banks,
energy service companies
Banks, NGOs, energy service [6,32,64,67,83,105]
companies
Policymaking agencies related to [21,26,30–33,35,46,51,57,58,64,74,76,89,90]
energy sector
Policymaking agencies related to [17,20,26,33,44,51,58,63,67,72,74,106]
energy sector
DRES related policymaking [28,83]
agency
DRES related policymaking [17,19,23,28,45–48,53,57,63,67–69,72,73,84,100]
agency
Relevant government agency [40,75,80,93]
DRES related implementation [4,18,20,21,26,29,33,43,44,51,55,58,60,61,72,79,82,89,111]
agency, NGOs, academic
institutions
 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490
infrastructure; incompatibility with existing work organization;
difficulties in obtaining loans from government; lack of coordi-
nation among various agencies; poor technology transfer and
after-installation services; and differences in priority of policy-
maker and users [7]. Based on their characteristics, institutional
barriers can be classified as: (a) policy and regulatory; (b) infra-
structure; and (c) administrative barriers.
2.3.1. Policy and regulatory
Lack of consistent policies and regulations to support DRESs
(e.g., lack of incentives to consumers, difficult zoning and per-
mitting processes, etc.) has been cited as a barrier to their dis-
semination [14,16,31,44,45,47,106,114,115,117,118]. Worldwide,
policies are reportedly biased towards fossil fuels and nuclear
energy [44,90]. Lack of suitable legal and regulatory framework for
dissemination of DRESs is also a major institutional barrier
[4,5,13,25,28,36,46,111]. Wind turbines, rooftop solar water-hea-
ters, photovoltaic installations, etc. face opposition from urban
planning agencies due to the lack of established procedures for
siting and installation of domestic DRESs [4,25]. The opposition
may be based upon height, esthetics, noise, or safety [4]. While
excessive/inefficient/outdated regulation is reported to be hin-
dering the dissemination of DRESs [26], the risk of change of
legislation has also been reported as a major institutional barrier
to the diffusion of DRESs in South Africa [40].
2.3.2. Infrastructure
For the development of a DRES friendly environment, the
institutions involved in its dissemination are expected to be
effective in the following roles: planning at central, federal and
local level; programme implementation; quality control and
standardization; performance monitoring; human resource
development; technology development and transfer; awareness
generation and information dissemination; and market develop-
ment [49]. However, many studies have pointed that the institu-
tional infrastructure may not have evolved enough to effectively
support the dissemination of DRESs. For example, in China,
underdeveloped market support infrastructure for DRESs has
reportedly acted as an institutional barrier [57]. Lack of institu-
tional, financial and technical structures to promote DRESs has
been found to be detrimental to their dissemination in ASEAN
[69]. In another study, a researcher has observed that ineffective
market and contract institutions and lack of institutional frame-
work are the major institutional barriers in Russia [80]. Also,
multiplicity of agencies for wind energy in India has been reported
as a barrier as it has resulted in lack of coordination and unne-
cessary delays [13]. Lack of organizational structure for installa-
tion, sales, repair and maintenance of DRESs is also cited as a
barrier to their diffusion [17]. As per a study on Europe, lack of
infrastructure to support market introduction and subsequent
dissemination of biomass based DRESs has been a significant
barrier to their dissemination in the region [85]. Similarly, service
infrastructure for the promotion, distribution, sales, technical
assistance and maintenance of solar PV systems is reported to be
poorly developed and has been hindering their diffusion in many
parts of the world [14]. Mismatch between organizational aspects
of DRESs and adopters also lead to unsuccessful diffusion (e.g.,
DRESs requiring frequent maintenance and services generally fail
in rural areas of developing countries as these areas suffer from
inaccessibility and lack of skilled workforce) [12].
Availability of infrastructure for after sales services is also
crucial for accelerated diffusion of DRES. Underdeveloped exten-
sion services for spare parts supply and maintenance services are
reportedly hindering the dissemination of renewable energy
technologies for decentralized applications in rural areas [8,13,14,
18–20,33,38,45,47,49,51,57,65,68,72,82]. In developing countries,
483
poor extension and after-installation services have resulted in slow
dissemination of family-type biogas plants, improved biomass
cookstoves and box-type solar cookers [7]. Also, an article has
noted that lack of maintenance services has been the major factor
behind the failure of biomass gasifiers in Philippines [15]. Lack of
technical support for installation and maintenance is also reported
as a barrier impeding the dissemination of solar home systems in
Africa [83].
Institutional support to ensure easy availability of spare parts is
necessary to ensure effective maintenance services for DRESs.
Limited availability of spare parts and maintenance expertize has
been cited as a barrier to the growth of DRESs [39,60]. For exam-
ple, as most of the renewable energy systems are imported in
Pakistan, non-availability of spare parts is reported to be an
important barrier to the dissemination of DRESs in the country
[33]. Similarly, frequent failure of mantle lamps of biogas plants
and its unavailability as spare part has led to the non-usage of
biogas plants in Nepal [8].
As renewable energy sources are site specific, reliable resource
availability data is essential for selection of favorable site for
renewable energy projects. However, diffusion of DRESs is
reportedly facing barrier due to lack of reliable resource avail-
ability data [33,55,60,63,69,73]. According to a study, lack of
accurate data on resource availability, and inadequate support to
research are hindering the development of DRESs in Oman [73].
Similarly, another research article has cited lack of detailed
renewable energy resource assessments and data banks as barriers
hindering the diffusion of DRESs in Pakistan [33]. Accurate and
reliable resource assessment would need institutional infra-
structure for strong coordination between government agencies
and research institutions.
2.3.3. Administrative
Administrative barriers limit effective implementation of renew-
able energy programme. Lack of coordination between various sta-
keholders has been frequently cited as a major administrative barrier
to the diffusion of DRESs [6,53,55,64–66,71,76]. For example, dearth
of good coordination between various ministries and agencies, and
dependence of renewable energy budget on national budget has
been acting as barriers to the dissemination of DRESs in Bangladesh
[6]. In addition, few studies have cited poor monitoring and evalua-
tion as a significant barrier to the diffusion of DRESs [38,112]. For
example, large scale implementation of improved biomass cook-
stoves with poor monitoring and evaluation lead to the failure of the
programme in China [112]. Similarly, poor monitoring and evaluation
and subsidy driven nature of National Programme on Improved
Cookstoves has been instrumental in limiting the impact of the
programme in India [38]. Tedious administrative and documentation
procedures involved in the approval of DRES projects also hinder the
diffusion of DRESs [6,39,87,106]. Few studies have also cited
bureaucratic administrative procedures of government institutions as
barriers impeding the dissemination of DRESs [58,68].
2.3.4. Potential remedial measures
Institutional barriers (policy and regulatory, infrastructure, and
administrative) can be addressed through several measures. Table 4
presents the suggested remedial measures to overcome the sub-
barriers listed under institutional barrier. From the table, it may be
noted that the role of DRES related policymaking agency is important
to overcome institutional barriers due to inappropriate policy and
regulatory framework. Worldwide, conducive regulatory frameworks
have been enacted to accelerate the diffusion of DRESs. For example,
through a regulation introduced in 1980, Israel achieved 80% coverage
of the roofs of residential households with solar water-heaters [28]. To
promote solar energy utilization in buildings, building code of Florida
(USA) mandates all new educational buildings to include passive solar
484 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490

Table 4
Potential remedial measures suggested to overcome the sub-barriers of Institutional barrier.

Sub-barrier Remedial measure (s) Responsibility center(s) Relevant reference(s)

Policy and Conducive long-term policies for all
regulatory stakeholders
Conducive regulatory framework
Integration of DRES policies with
developmental programmes
Policy involving incentives for DRES
utilization
Private sector participation
Infrastructure Specialized institutions for R&D,
financing, capacity building, mar-
keting and commercialization of
DRES
After sales services infrastructure for
training and extension programmes
Administrative Strong coordination between var-
ious agencies and stakeholders
Involvement of local stakeholders in DRES related implementation
planning and implementation of
DRES programme
Simplified approval procedures or
single window clearance
Support and facilitation by govern- DRES related policymaking and
ment from R&D to commercializa-
tion of DRES
Effective project monitoring and
evaluation
DRES related policymaking agency [7,19–21,23,29,31,45,46,55,57,58,63,64,67,69,75,76,77,79,94,106]
DRES related policymaking agency [4,14,16,18,26,28,36,38,46,47,48,55,57,58,63,67,69,71,72,73,79,80,84,94]
DRES related policymaking agency [29,57]
and other participating government
agencies
DRES related policymaking agency [46,73,84,111]
DRES related policymaking agency [6,38,45,58,63,72]
DRES related policymaking and [6,13,18,57]
implementation agency, R&D insti-
tutions, banks, NGOs and academic
institutions
DRES related implementation [8,20,22,47,65,82,83]
agency, energy services companies,
NGOs and academic institutions
DRES related implementation [23,25,33,43,44,55,64,76,78,85]
agency and other relevant govern-
ment agencies such as municipal
corporations
[6,16,35,45,58,64,67,76]
agency
DRES related implementation [28,85,106]
agency
[18,21,45,46,53,57,64,65,67,69,90,111]
implementation agency
DRES related implementation [6,17,92,93,112]
agency

design [4]. Similarly, through renewable access laws in some countries,
property owners are provided the right to continued access to a
renewable resource [4]. The access is ensured through voluntary
contracts between neighbors or covenant laws [4]. In addition to
conducive policy and regulatory framework, setting up of specialized
institutions (for R&D, financing, capacity building, marketing and
commercialization of DRESs), infrastructure support for after sales
services, strong coordination between relevant stakeholders, simpli-
fied approval procedure for DRES projects, and effective project
monitoring and control have been recommended to overcome the
institutional barriers that affect the dissemination of DRESs.
Apart from the generic remedial measures listed in Table 4,
there are few other case-specific measures that have been
recommended to overcome institutional barriers. Rather than just
focusing on number of installations, a study has advocated meti-
culous planning and in-depth socio-economic evaluation studies
for improved diffusion of biogas engines in India. Market inter-
mediation by Russian government for securing support of gov-
ernment officials, securing funds, obtaining necessary licenses and
approvals, and managing, monitoring and evaluating projects to
promote renewable energy in the country has been recommended
[93]. Creation of an umbrella organization for monitoring, reg-
ulating and capacity building is recommended to overcome insti-
tutional barriers in Bangladesh [6]. For Turkey, it is recommended
that DRESs be promoted as unique products with attributes such
as environmental and social benefits [34]. Appropriate institu-
tional infrastructure to plan and implement well-coordinated
programme at all levels and simplified time-bounded adminis-
trative procedure for various approvals and clearances are sug-
gested to promote wind installations in India [13]. Learning from
the success of China’s diffusion programme of improved biomass
stoves, a study advocates: working in the best areas first; regular,
systematic and consistent monitoring and evaluation; and pro-
motion of rural energy companies [112].
It can be concluded that in addition to framing conducive long-
term policies and a favorable regulatory framework for the dis-
semination of DRESs, the concerned policymaking agency is also
expected to create conducive environment for development of
specialized institutions for R&D, financing, capacity building,
marketing and commercialization (including awareness genera-
tion and quality control) of DRESs.
2.4. Socio-cultural barriers and remedial measures
Social/socio-cultural/cultural barriers have been extensively
reported with reference to the diffusion of DRESs [5,7,10,12,30,33–
35,37,39,87,102,105,117,119,120–126]. Moreover, negative impacts of
socio-economic, socio-political and political barriers on the diffusion
of DRESs have also been discussed in [16,31] and [12] respectively.
Socio-cultural barriers may arise as a result of the following: (a)
societal structure, norms and value system; (b) awareness and risk
perception; (c) behavioral or lifestyle issues [105].
2.4.1. Societal structure, norms and value system
A socio-cultural barrier may exist due to the lack of satisfaction
of perceived needs of the user and non-integration of the tech-
nology with the social structure, and disharmony with prevailing
social values and ideology [7]. For example, in many rural societies,
higher efficiency improved biomass cookstoves have not been
adopted by traditional cookstove users as apart from cooking,
traditional biomass cookstoves satisfy other perceived needs of the
users (lighting, space heating, pest control, drying, etc.) which the
improved biomass cookstoves could not fulfill [7]. Lack of under-
standing about the needs of the users primarily contributed to the
failure of early Chinese biogas program [15]. A biogas project failed
in Indonesia because it was incompatible with the local belief
which considered rice fields as holy and installation of biogas units
on it was considered a taboo [121]. In Nepal, many households did
not accept improved cookstoves and continued with open fire
 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490 485

Table 5
Potential remedial measures suggested to overcome the elements of Socio-cultural barrier.

Sub-barrier Remedial measure(s) Responsibility center(s) Relevant reference(s)

Societal structure, Comprehensive assessment R&D institutions [7,10,12,15]

norms and value of the perceived needs of the
system end user
Involvement of local stake-
holders in planning and
promotion of DRES
Awareness and Awareness generation or
perception information dissemination
programmes
Demonstration programmes
Behavioral or life- Demonstration programmes
style issues
DRES related policymaking [6,24,25,35,61,65,85,87]
and implementation agency
DRES related implementation [4,6,16,18,26–29,32,33,39,43,44,55,58,60,61,64,67,68,72,76,78,79,85,86,87,100,123]
agency, NGOs and academic
institutions
DRES related implementation [4,26,28,46,55,68,71]
agency, NGOs and academic
institutions
DRES related implementation [26,28,71]
agency, NGOs and academic
institutions

cooking as they believed that their family spirit resided in it [10].
For family-size biogas plants, improved cookstoves and box-type
solar cookers, socio-cultural acceptability factor is reported to be
relatively more important as compared to solar water heating
systems and solar photovoltaic technologies [49]. This reflects
better socio-cultural acceptance of non-cooking devices such as
solar water heating and photovoltaic technologies.
A research article has reported that diffusion faces hurdles when
there are cultural differences between the donor and the receiver [12].
In Turkey, wind energy installations have reportedly faced opposition
due to its weak social compatibility [34]. Likewise, for preservation of
natural resources and cultural heritage in Crete Island (Greece), local
population opposed wind energy projects [87].
Psychological barriers and conservative rural traditions also act
as hindrances to the successful diffusion of DRESs [87]. In USA,
psychological attributes such as comfort, freedom, control, trust,
social status, ritual, and habit are reportedly impeding the diffusion
of DRESs in the country [120]. Cooking is generally done by women,
but gender bias leading to lack of women participation in decision
making and inadequate access to credit have reportedly hindered
the adoption of improved cookstoves [10]. Non-ownership of house
is a psychological barrier to diffusion of domestic solar water heater
in Greece as it creates a condition of split incentives where the
tenant pays the energy bill and the developer/owner has very little
motivation to invest in energy saving equipments [61]. A researcher
has also reported the problem of split incentives with respect to the
diffusion of solar thermal technologies [28].
2.4.2. Awareness and risk perception
Lack of information or awareness is a widely reported socio-
economic barrier impeding diffusion of DRES [4–6,14,16,18,21,
24,25,86,93,96,100,102,105,108,116,127,128]. Because of lack of
awareness, DRESs are often perceived as inferior technologies in
terms of utility and user comfort [21]. For example, for wind parks
in the Dodecanese Islands of Greece, public opinion on its esthetic
harmful effect and insufficient information on social benefits are
acting as social barriers [35]. As per a survey conducted in Greece,
respondents consider opinion of friends as a barrier to the diffu-
sion of domestic solar water heaters in the country [61].
Negative perception about DRESs is another issue that is hindering
its diffusion. Generally, DRESs suffer from perceptions of greater
technical risk than conventional technologies because of lack of visible
installations and familiarity with the system [4]. Perceived technology
performance uncertainty, poor reliability and associated risks with
respect to the usage of DRESs have also been cited by other studies
[7,11,13,21,23,24,25,32,38,64,74,75,76,82,129,130]. Negative impression
created by the failure of DRES projects in the past also hinder diffusion
of technically sound DRESs [12,28,102]. For example, negative image
caused by failed biogas plants in Kenya has been reported as a major
barrier to its diffusion [86]. Moreover, failure of DRESs in raising the
standard of living of its users has developed negative perception about
the DRESs among their potential users [22,51]. Past failures have
increased the risk perception regarding DRESs among public, politician
and local authorities that are reportedly impeding their diffusion
[18,85,90]. Lack of demonstration of the utility of DRESs among their
potential users aggravates its risk perception [93]. Some researchers
have also pointed that inadequate demonstration of the utility of solar
energy devices is a significant barrier affecting their diffusion in
Pakistan [19].
2.4.3. Behavioral or lifestyle issues
Preference for traditional energy sources and resistance to
change (consumer inertia) has reportedly created behavioral bar-
riers that impede the diffusion of DRESs [18,21,105,131]. Few
studies have cited behavioral or lifestyle issues impeding the dif-
fusion of DRESs that are used for cooking [7,24,27,28,102]. Beha-
vioral barriers are not limited to cooking devices. Power engineers
and others working in large energy supply companies are also
reportedly resisting innovations such as DRESs [102]. In United
Kingdom, inconvenience and subsequent behavioral changes
involved in the adoption of DRESs are reportedly preventing their
adoption [75].
2.4.4. Potential remedial measures
For successful diffusion of DRESs, it is necessary to address the
socio-cultural barriers faced by them. Suggested remedial measures
and the corresponding responsibility centers to address the socio-
cultural barriers are presented in Table 5. Comprehensive assess-
ment of the perceived needs of the end user, local stakeholder
consultation during planning and promotion of DRES, awareness
generation and appropriate demonstration have been recom-
mended to counter the socio-cultural barriers associated with the
diffusion of DRESs.
In addition to the generic remedial measures listed in Table 5,
few other case-specific remedial measures have been recom-
mended to overcome the socio-cultural barriers. For example,
installation of solar home systems for public view in the neigh-
borhood of potential users has been advocated to increase its
awareness in rural Nicaragua [108]. For Russia, a study recom-
mends market intermediation and joint ventures with foreign
corporations for enhanced information dissemination and
demonstration experiences [93]. It is also suggested that the pol-
icymakers should strive to improve public understanding of
renewable energy systems [1120]. Increased women participation
and adequate consideration of social equity for the poor and
marginalized mountain population are recommended for
486 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490
Table 6
Potential remedial measures suggested to overcome the sub-barriers of environmental barrier.
Sub-barrier Remedial measure and reference(s)
Resources (land and water), pollu- Life cycle analysis of the project
tion, esthetics R&D for development of efficient systems with
minimum possible footprint
Awareness generation among stakeholders
improved DRESs dissemination programmes in the mountainous
areas of China, India, Nepal and Pakistan [16].
From Table 5, we can conclude that surmounting socio-cultural
barriers associated with the diffusion of DRESs would need insti-
tutional support for participative and indigenous R&D, demon-
stration and awareness generation. Government may support
these activities through academic and R&D institutions, and NGOs.
2.5. Environmental barriers and remedial measures
In comparison to fossil fuel based energy technologies, most of
the RETs are relatively better in terms of environmental emissions
and are expected to promote environmental sustainability. How-
ever, their dissemination also face environmental barriers [96,117,
119,126] and the environmental impacts of installation and opera-
tion of DRESs must be analyzed for their large-scale diffusion [61].
Environmental barriers with respect to DRESs involve competi-
tion for natural resources (e.g., water and land) and pollution (e.g.,
air and noise pollution) [18]. For example, non-availability of water
has been reported as one of the significant barriers to the utilization
of biogas engine in India [17]. A study on solar desalination plants in
Israel has listed large land requirement as a major issue [89]. Land
issues affecting the diffusion of DRESs have also been reported from
Nigeria [67]. Environmental barrier is also significant to biomass
gasifiers as their operation involves combustion, gasification and
pyrolysis that release pollutants in the atmosphere [5]. Similarly,
biogas and wind energy systems are also reported to have envir-
onmental concerns [5]. For example, leakage of biogas (mixture of
methane, carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide) pollutes atmo-
sphere and leads to global warming. Also, noise and odor have been
reportedly hindering the usage of bioenergy technologies in United
Kingdom [53]. Wind energy installations are also facing environ-
mental barriers as they negatively affect the ecosystem (damage to
flora and displacement of fauna such as migratory birds) [35]. Other
environmental issues hindering the utilization of wind energy
systems are microwave interference, possibility of climate mod-
ification, noise, esthetic (landscape) impact, bird collision and
change of land use [5,34,35,44]. Few other studies have also noted
that esthetic issues or its perception with respect to DRESs are
acting as barriers to their diffusion [47,53,61,66,75].
2.5.1. Potential remedial measures
Environmental barriers need to be assessed and addressed for
improved diffusion of DRESs. Table 6 presents the suggested
remedial measures and relevant responsibility centers to address
various environmental barriers. Life cycle analysis (LCA) has been
recommended for assessment of environmental impact of various
DRESs [30]. For a given energy project, based on the results of the
LCA, the cleaner technology must be selected from a set of com-
peting DRESs. Research for development of efficient technologies
with minimum possible environmental footprint, and awareness
generation campaigns regarding environmental/esthetic issues of
DRESs are also recommended. Institutions that deal with envir-
onmental protection and R&D, as well as academic institutions and
NGOs can play a major role in addressing environmental concerns
associated with the diffusion of DRESs.
Responsibility center(s) Relevant reference(s)
Environment protection agency [30]
R&D institutions [5]
DRES related implementation agency, NGOs and [61]
academic institutions
3. Mapping of critical barriers for individual DRES and trend
assessment of evolution of barriers
In general, the barriers and sub-barriers discussed in the earlier
sections affect the dissemination of almost all DRESs. However, for
the dissemination of a particular DRES, the impact of some of the
barriers and sub-barriers may be more profound. Table 7 presents a
snapshot of the barriers that are critical to the diffusion of individual
DRES. Awareness, resource availability and lack of after sales services
are critical to the adoption of all DRESs and thus they have not been
mentioned separately in Table 7 for individual DRES.
From the barriers highlighted for individual DRES in Table 7
and the corresponding literature, the following trends have been
observed:
1. Technical barriers (technological appropriateness and skill
requirement for operation and maintenance) are more critical to
the diffusion of DRESs that require frequent maintenance ser-
vices such as family-size biogas plants and biomass based
power plants.
2. Market barriers are critical to almost all DRESs as these high cost
systems generally replace conventional energy technologies that
benefit from their large market size, low fuel price (due to sub-
sidies on fuel) and non-internalization of externalities. However,
with recent advancements in solar PV technology and introduc-
tion of LED lamps, the costs of solar lantern and solar home system
have reduced substantially. Evolution of evacuated tubular collec-
tor (ETC) based solar water-heater technology has led to consider-
able cost reduction of solar water-heaters. On the contrary, with
recent increase in cost of construction material (cement, brick and
metal), the costs of family-size biogas plant and biomass based
power generation system have increased significantly.
3. Institutional (administrative and regulatory) barriers are more
relevant to the dissemination of electricity generating DRESs
such as solar home system, biomass based power generation
system and wind energy system as the users face difficulties
with siting approvals and supply of surplus power to grid.
Institutional barrier (lack of infrastructure for after sales ser-
vices) are more important for the dissemination of DRESs that
require frequent maintenance services such as family-size
biogas plants and biomass based power plants.
4. Socio-cultural barriers are more critical to the dissemination of
cooking related DRESs such as family-type biogas plants,
improved biomass cookstoves and solar cooker as cooking is
performed as a ritual in many societies.
Institutional support to R&D activities in the field of solar PV
technologies and commercialization of Thin- Film solar PV tech-
nology has led to significant cost reduction of solar home system,
solar lantern and solar PV pump. Adequate institutional support to
the development and market introduction of LED lamps also
helped to overcome technical, cost and market related barriers
associated with solar lighting systems. All these developm-
ents during the last few decades have resulted in increased dis-
semination of solar PV based DRESs in countries around the world.
Similar institutional support is needed to overcome barriers that
 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490 487

Table 7
Critical barriers (in addition to awareness, resource availability and lack of after sales services) to the dissemination of individual DRES and corresponding remedial
measures.

DRES Barrier (s) identified Suggested remedial measures

Domestic solar water-heater High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
Low capacity utilization due to poor access to solar radiation in urban Regulation for sharing of terrace space among the
households households in multi-storied buildings
Lack of incentives to users Rebate in electricity bill
Solar lantern Poor reliability Standards and certification in manufacturing
Solar home system High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
Lack of access to solar radiation in urban households Regulation for sharing of terrace space among the
households in multi-storied buildings
Poor reliability Standards and certification in manufacturing
Lack of appropriate regulatory framework to support injection of surplus Single window clearance for siting and connection to the
electricity to local grid grid and attractive feed-in tariff
Solar PV pump High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
Availability of highly subsidized fuel alternatives (electricity or diesel) Fair pricing mechanism in energy market that takes
externalities into account
Poor reliability Standards and certification in manufacturing
Parabolic solar cooker High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
Low capacity utilization as meals can be cooked only during bright sunshine Use of cooker in community mode at schools (for mid-day
meals), temples, etc
Lack of flexibility with respect to the style of cooking (generally, only boiling Use of cooker in community mode at schools, temples,
type cooking possible) etc. where primarily boiling type cooking is done
Lack of socio-cultural acceptance due to cooking in open Awareness generation
Solar dryer High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
Low capacity utilization Use of dryer in community mode at village level
Family-size biogas plant High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
Frequent need for maintenance and repair Design and installation of improved/matured technology
Lack of socio-cultural acceptance primarily due to the usage of dung for Awareness generation
cooking
Improved biomass cookstove Availability of biomass at no private cost and zero tangible cost attached Awareness generation
with time spent on biomass collection in rural areas Consideration of user’s perspective in design and manu-
Lack of flexibility with respect to the size of cooking pot and wood-chips facturing of cookstoves
Wind turbine High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
Bureaucratic administrative procedures for various approvals and lack of Single window clearance for siting and connection to the
appropriate regulatory framework for injection of surplus electricity to local grid and attractive feed-in tariff
grid
Biomass based power genera- High cost and lack of access to credit Capital subsidy and/or soft loan facility
tion system Frequent need for maintenance and repair Design and installation of improved/matured technology
Bureaucratic administrative procedures for various approvals and lack of Single window clearance for siting and connection to the
appropriate regulatory framework for injection of surplus electricity to local grid and attractive feed-in tariff
grid

hinder the dissemination of other DRESs. For cooking related
DRESs, it is necessary to exhibit the technological appropriateness
and utility of the systems to the masses through demonstration
projects at institutions, temples, etc. Such demonstration projects
can reduce the socio-cultural barriers associated with cooking
related DRESs and may accelerate their dissemination.
4. Conclusion
Dissemination of DRESs may face variety of technical, eco-
nomic, institutional, socio-cultural and environmental barriers.
Inappropriateness of technology, unavailability of skilled workers
for maintenance, unavailability of spare parts, high cost, lack of
access to credit, poor purchasing power and other spending
priorities, unfair energy pricing, lack of information or awareness,
and lack of operation and maintenance training are the critical
barriers impeding the dissemination of DRESs.
The barriers to the dissemination of DRESs can be addressed
through conducive policy environment, supportive regulatory
framework, and appropriate institutional arrangements. Long-
term conducive policies and appropriate regulatory framework
that involve financial incentives (capital subsidies and soft loans)
to users, inclusion of externalities in the cost of energy, withdrawal
of subsidies to fossil fuels, development of specialized institutions,
cooperation with international agencies, and participation of local
community in planning and implementation are the frequently
prescribed measures for increased dissemination of DRESs. In
addition, for improved diffusion of DRESs, appropriate institu-
tional arrangements are required to facilitate R&D, capacity
building, conducive market, credit facilities and awareness gen-
eration. Role of DRES related policymaking and implementation
agency, R&D institutions, NGOs and academic institutions would
be crucial to overcome barriers to the promotion of DRESs.
During last few decades, adequate institutional support to R&D
activities and commercialization of solar PV technology and LED
lamps has significantly reduced the cost of solar lighting systems and
consequently led to their accelerated adoption. For other DRESs,
similar institutional support is needed to improve their dissemina-
tion. As socio-cultural barriers are more critical to the dissemination
of cooking related DRESs, it is necessary to demonstrate their utility
to the public at institutions and community centers to overcome
socio-cultural barriers associated with them. Also, institutional sup-
port to awareness generation, resource assessment and after sales
service is crucial for increasing the rate of dissemination of DRESs.
Appendix
The literature (research papers and articles) that has been used
in the review of barriers to the dissemination of DRESs have cited
the barriers with reference to various technologies and/or geo-
graphical locations. Table A.1 presents a technology and geography
based classification of the literature.
488 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490

Table A.1
Technology and region based classification of literature on barriers to the dissemination of DRESs.

Technology Region/Country and reference(s)

Renewable energy technologies (including DRESs) World [4,5,12,18,26,30,39,41,50,58,77,90,95,96,102,105,110,111,117,119]; Europe [124]; Developing countries
[64,109]; Arab states of the gulf [25]; ASEAN countries [69]; France and Sweden [125]; Tanzania and Mozambique
[45]; Australia [43]; Bangladesh [6,115]; Canada [44]; China [42,57,97,128]; Greece [87]; India [11,38,99,106,126];
Ireland [113]; Lebanon [63]; Maldives [103]; Mexico [78]; Nepal [116]; Oman [73,84]; Pakistan [31,33]; Russia
[80,93]; South Africa [40]; Sweden [129]; Switzerland [122]; Thailand [68]; Turkey [34]; UAE [74],United King-
dom [23,75]; USA [52,120]
DRESs in general World [15,51,82]; Developing countries [29]; China, India, Nepal and Pakistan [16]; India [36]; Nepal [20]; Tan-
zania [60]; United Kingdom [48,94]
DRESs (Biogas plant, improved biomass cookstove, India [49]
box-type solar cooker, domestic solar water-heater,
solar photovoltaic lantern)
DRES (Family- type biogas plant, improved biomass Developing countries [7]; India [24]
cookstove, solar cooker)
Biomass energy technologies (including DRESs) Europe [85,76]; Thailand [55]; United Kingdom [53]; Uganda [107]
DRES (Improved biomass cookstove) World [10]; China [112]
DRES (Biogas plant) World [32]; Europe, USA and Australia [118]; Africa, Rwanda, Tanzania, China, India and Nepal [127]; Indonesia
and Africa [121]; India [81]; Kenya [86]; Nepal [8]
DRES (Biogas engine) World [130]; India [17]
Solar energy technologies (including DRESs) World [66]; Hong Kong [47]; Nigeria [67]; Taiwan [46]; USA [9]
DRESs (solar – photovoltaics and thermal) Pakistan [19]; USA [72]
Solar PV (including DRESs) World [14,100]; Europe [92]
DRES (Solar photovoltaic system or solar home World [114]; Africa [83]; Japan, Germany and USA [131]; Bangladesh [101]; India [37,65]; Nicaragua [108]
system)
DRES (Solar photovoltaic pump) India [62,98]
DRES (Solar photovoltaic battery charging system) Thailand [22]
DRESs (Solar thermal technologies) World [28]
DRESs (Renewable heating technologies) Ireland [54]
DRESs (Solar space heating and cooling systems) Kenya [71]
DRES (Solar still) India [91]; Israel [89]
DRES (Solar dryer) India [70]
DRES (Solar cooker-parabolic) India [27]
DRESs (Solar water heater and solar space heater) Germany [88]
DRES (Solar water-heater) World [59]; China [104]; Greece [61]; Lebanon [79]
DRES (Solar water heater) and grid connected wind India [21]
energy
Wind energy (including DRES) India [13]; Greece [35,123]
DRES (water wheel) Nepal [56]

References
[1] Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovation. 5th ed.. . New York: Free Press; 2003.
[2] Flavin C, Aeck MH. Energy for development – the potential role of renewable
energy in meeting the millennium development goals. Renewable Energy
Policy Network for the 21st Century, Worldwatch Institute; 2005.
[3] Chaurey A, Kandpal TC. A techno-economic comparison of rural electrifica-
tion based on solar home systems and PV microgrids. Energy Policy
2010;38:3118–29.
[4] Beck F, Martinot E. Renewable energy policies and barriers. In: Cleveland CJ,
editor. Encyclopedia of energy. New York: Academic Press, Elsevier Science;
2004. p. 365–83.
[5] Jarach M. An overview of the literature on barriers to the diffusion of
renewable energy sources in agriculture. Appl Energy 1989;32:117–31.
[6] Mondal MAH, Kamp LM, Pachova NI. Drivers, barriers and strategies for
implementation of renewable energy technologies in rural areas in Bangla-
desh – an innovation system analysis. Energy Policy 2010;38:4626–34.
[7] Quadir SA, Mathur SS, Kandpal TC. Barriers to dissemination of renewable
energy technologies for cooking. Energy Convers Manag 1995;36:1129–32.
[8] Rijal K. Resource potential and economic evaluation of bio-gas utilization in
Nepal. Energy 1986;11:545–50.
[9] Roessner JD. Commercializing solar technology: the government role. Res
Policy 1984;13:235–46.
[10] Agarwal B. Diffusion of rural innovations: some analytical issues and the case
of wood-burning stoves. World Dev 1983;11:359–76.
[11] Bakthavatsalam V. Renewable energy financing: India’s experience. Renew
Energy 1999;16:1160–6.
[12] Green D. Cross cultural technology transfer of sustainable energy systems: a
critical analysis. Renew Energy 1999;16:1133–7.
[13] Jagadeesh A. Wind energy development in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh,
India institutional dynamics and barriers – a case study. Energy Policy
2000;28:157–68.
[14] Oliver M, Jackson T. The market for solar photovoltaics. Energy Policy
1999;27:371–85.
[15] Barnett A. The diffusion of energy technology in the rural areas of developing
countries: a synthesis of recent experience. World Dev 1990;18:538–53.
[16] Rijal K. Renewable energy policy options for mountain communities:
experiences from China, India, Nepal and Pakistan. Renew Energy
1999;16:1138–42.
[17] Bhatia R. Diffusion of renewable energy technologies in developing coun-
tries: a case study of biogas engines in India. World Dev 1990;18:575–90.
[18] Painuly JP. Barriers to renewable energy penetration; a framework for ana-
lysis. Renew Energy 2001;24:73–89.
[19] Mirza UK, Maroto-Valer MM, Ahmad N. Status and outlook of solar energy
use in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2003;7:501–14.
[20] Pokharel S. Promotional issues on alternative energy technologies in Nepal.
Energy Policy 2003;31:307–18.
[21] Reddy S, Painuly JP. Diffusion of renewable energy technologies – barriers
and stakeholders' perspectives. Renew Energy 2004;29:1431–47.
[22] Green D. Thailand's solar white elephants: an analysis of 15 yr of solar
battery charging programmes in northern Thailand. Energy Policy
2004;32:747–60.
[23] Foxon TJ, Gross R, Chase A, Howes J, Arnall A, Anderson D. UK innovation
systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and
systems failures. Energy Policy 2005;33:2123–37.
[24] Pohekar SD, Kumar D, Ramachandran M. Dissemination of cooking energy
alternatives in India – a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2005;9:379–93.
[25] Patlitzianas KD, Doukas H, Psarras J. Enhancing renewable energy in the Arab
States of the Gulf: constraints & efforts. Energy Policy 2006;34:3719–26.
[26] Owen AD. Renewable energy: externality costs as market barriers. Energy
Policy 2006;34:632–42.
[27] Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M. Utility assessment of parabolic solar cooker
as a domestic cooking device in India. Renew Energy 2006;31:1827–38.
[28] Philibert C. Barriers to technology diffusion: the case of solar thermal tech-
nologies Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Inter-
national Energy Agency; 2006.
[29] Renewable energy technologies and poverty alleviation: overcoming barriers
and unlocking potentials. Global Network on Energy for Sustainable
Development; 2007.
[30] Stangeland A. The potential and barriers for renewable energy. Bellona
Foundation; 2007.
[31] Sahir MH, Qureshi AH. Assessment of new and renewable energy resources
potential and identification of barriers to their significant utilization in
Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12:290–8.
 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490
[32] Srinivasan S. Positive externalities of domestic biogas initiatives: implica-
tions for financing. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12:1476–84.
[33] Mirza UK, Ahmad N, Harijan K, Majeed T. Identifying and addressing barriers
to renewable energy development in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2009;13:927–31.
[34] Nalan ÇB, Murat Ö, Nuri Ö. Renewable energy market conditions and barriers
in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:1428–36.
[35] Oikonomou EK, Kilias V, Goumas A, Rigopoulos A, Karakatsani E, Damasiotis
M, et al. Renewable energy sources (RES) projects and their barriers on a
regional scale: the case study of wind parks in the Dodecanese islands,
Greece. Energy Policy 2009;37:4874–83.
[36] Hiremath RB, Kumar B, Balachandra P, Ravindranath NH, Raghunandan BN.
Decentralised renewable energy : scope, relevance and applications in the
Indian context. Energy Sustain Dev 2009;13:4–10.
[37] Purohit P. CO2 emissions mitigation potential of solar home systems under
clean development mechanism in India. Energy 2009;34:1014–23.
[38] Bhattacharya SC, Jana C. Renewable energy in India: historical developments
and prospects. Energy 2009;34:981–91.
[39] Doukas H, Karakosta C, Psarras J. RES technology transfer within the new
climate regime: A “helicopter” view under the CDM. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2009;13:1138–43.
[40] Pegels A. Renewable energy in South Africa: Potentials, barriers and options
for support. Energy Policy 2010;38:4945–54.
[41] Rao KU, Kishore VVN. A review of technology diffusion models with special
reference to renewable energy technologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2010;14:1070–8.
[42] Wang Q, Chen Y. Barriers and opportunities of using the clean development
mechanism to advance renewable energy development in China. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:1989–98.
[43] Martin NJ, Rice JL. Developing renewable energy supply in Queensland,
Australia: a study of the barriers, targets, policies and actions. Renew Energy
2012;44:119–27.
[44] Krupa J. Identifying barriers to aboriginal renewable energy deployment in
Canada. Energy Policy 2012;42:710–4.
[45] Ahlborg H, Hammar L. Drivers and barriers to rural electrification in Tanzania
and Mozambique – grid extension, off-grid and renewable energy sources.
Renew Energy 2014;61:117–24.
[46] Liu SY, Perng YH, Ho YF. The effect of renewable energy application on Tai-
wan buildings: what are the challenges and strategies for solar energy
exploitation? Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;28:92–106.
[47] Zhang X, Shen L, Chan SY. The diffusion of solar energy use in HK: what are
the barriers? Energy Policy 2012;41:241–9.
[48] Allen SR, Hammond GP, McManus MC. Prospects for and barriers to
domestic micro-generation: a United Kingdom perspective. Appl Energy
2008;85:528–44.
[49] Chandrasekar B, Kandpal TC. An opinion survey based assessment of
renewable energy technology development in India. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2007;11:688–701.
[50] Trainer FE. The limitations of alternative energy sources. Conserv Recycl
1984;7:27–42.
[51] Joseph S, Burton R. Small is usable: lessons from alternative energy projects.
Solar Wind Technol 1990;7:89–91.
[52] Fthenakis V, Mason JE, Zweibel K. The technical, geographical, and economic
feasibility for solar energy to supply the energy needs of the US. Energy
Policy 2009;37:387–99.
[53] Adams PW, Hammond GP, McManus MC, Mezzullo WG. Barriers to and
drivers for UK bioenergy development. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2011;15:1217–27.
[54] Kennedy M, Basu B. A study on the implementation of renewable heating
technologies in the domestic sector in Ireland with implications on con-
sumers' decision-making. J Clean Prod 2013;44:133–42.
[55] Prasertsan S, Sajjakulnukit B. Biomass and biogas energy in Thailand:
potential, opportunity and barriers. Renew Energy 2006;31:599–610.
[56] Rijal K. Evaluation of small hydel units in Nepal. Energy 1986;11:265–9.
[57] Junfeng L, Li Z, Runqing H, Zhengmin Z, Jingli S, Yangin S. Policy analysis of
the barriers to renewable energy development in the People's Republic of
China. Energy Sustain Dev 2002;6:11–20.
[58] Zyadin A, Halder P, Kahkonen T, Puhakka A. Challenges to renewable energy:
a bulletin of perceptions from international academic arena. Renew Energy
2014;69:82–8.
[59] Srinivasan S. Transforming solar thermal – policy support for the evolving
solar water heating industry. Refocus 2006;7:46–9.
[60] Kassenga GR. Promotion of renewable energy technologies in Tanzania.
Resour Conserv Recycl 1997;19:257–63.
[61] Sidiras DK, Koukios EG. Solar systems diffusion in local markets. Energy
Policy 2004;32:2007–18.
[62] Pande PC, Singh AK, Ansari S, Vyas SK, Dave BK. Design development and
testing of a solar PV pump based drip system for orchards. Renew Energy
2003;28:385–96.
[63] Kinab E, Elkhoury M. Renewable energy use in Lebanon: barriers and solu-
tions. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:4422–31.
[64] Kennedy M, Basu B. Overcoming barriers to low carbon technology transfer
and deployment: an exploration of the impact of projects in developing and
emerging economies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;26:685–93.
[65] Radulovic V. Are new institutional economics enough? Promoting photo-
voltaics in India’s agricultural sector Energy Policy 2005;33:1883–99.
489
[66] Margolis R, Zuboy J. Nontechnical barriers to solar energy use: review of
recent literature. United States: National Renewable Energy Laboratory;
2006.
[67] Ohunakin OS, Adaramola MS, Oyewola OM, Fagbenle RO. Solar energy
applications and development in Nigeria: drivers and barriers. Renew Sus-
tain Energy Barriers 2014;32:294–301.
[68] Adhikari S, Mithulananthan N, Dutta A, Mathias AJ. Potential of sustainable
energy technologies under CDM in Thailand: opportunities and barriers.
Renew Energy 2008;33:2122–33.
[69] Lidula NWA, Mithulananthan N, Ongsakul W, Widjaya C, Henson R. ASEAN
towards clean and sustainable energy: potentials, utilization and barriers.
Renew Energy 2007;32:1441–52.
[70] Kumar A, Kandpal TC. Solar drying and CO2 emissions mitigation: potential
for selected cash crops in India. Sol Energy 2005;78:321–9.
[71] Njuguna DG. Diffusion of bio-climatic building design techniques in Kenya:
impediments and opportunities. Habitat Int 1997;21:347–59.
[72] Dorf RC. Managerial and economic barriers and incentives to the commer-
cialization of solar energy technologies. Eng Manag Int 1984;2:17–31.
[73] Al-Badi AH, Malik A, Gastli A. Assessment of renewable energy resources
potential in Oman and identification of barrier to their significant utilization.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:2734–9.
[74] Mezher T, Dawelbait G, Abbas Z. Renewable energy policy options for Abu
Dhabi: drivers and barriers. Energy Policy 2012;42:315–28.
[75] Balcombe P, Rigby D, Azapagic A. Motivations and barriers associated with
adopting microgeneration energy technologies in the UK. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2013;22:655–66.
[76] McCormick K, Kaberger T. Key barriers for bioenergy in Europe: economic
conditions, know-how and institutional capacity, and supply chain co-
ordination. Biomass Bioenerg 2007;31:443–52.
[77] Negro SO, Alkemade F, Hekkert MP. Why does renewable energy diffuse so
slowly? A review of innovation system problems Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2012;16:3836–46.
[78] Huacuz J. RE in Mexico – barriers and strategies. Refocus 2001;2:18–9.
[79] Ruble I, El-Khoury P. Lebanon's market for domestic solar water heaters:
achievements and barriers. Energy Sustain Dev 2013;17:54–61.
[80] Martinot E. Energy efficiency and renewable energy in Russia – transaction
barriers, market intermediation, and capacity building. Energy Policy
1998;26:905–15.
[81] Singh KJ, Sooch SS. Comparative study of economics of different models of
family size biogas plants for state of Punjab, India. Energy Convers Manag
2004;45:1329–41.
[82] Perlack RD, Jones HG. Waddle DB. A survey of renewable energy technologies
for rural applications. Energy 1990;15:1119–27.
[83] Wamukonya N. Solar home system electrification as a viable technology
option for Africa’s development. Energy Policy 2007;35:6–14.
[84] Al-Badi a H, Malik a, Gastli a. Sustainable energy usage in Oman – oppor-
tunities and barriers. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:3780–8.
[85] Rosch C, Kaltschmitt M. Energy from biomass – do non-technical barriers
prevent an increased use? Biomass Bioenergy 1999;16:347–56.
[86] Mwirigi JW, Makenzi PM, Ochola WO. Socio-economic constraints to adop-
tion and sustainability of biogas technology by farmers in Nakuru Districts,
Kenya. Energy Sustain Dev 2009;13:106–15.
[87] Michalena E, Angeon V. Local challenges in the promotion of renewable
energy sources: the case of Crete. Energy Policy 2009;37:2018–26.
[88] Mills BF, Schleich J. Profits or preferences ? Assessing the adoption of resi-
dential solar thermal technologies Energy Policy 2009;37:4145–54.
[89] Sagie D, Feinerman E, Aharoni E. Potential of solar desalination in Israel and
in its close vicinity. Desalination 2001;139:21–33.
[90] Boyle S. Making a renewable energy future a reality: case studies in suc-
cessful renewable energy development. Renew Energy 1994;5:1322–33.
[91] Arjunan TV, Aybar HS, Nedunchezhian N. Status of solar desalination in
India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:2408–18.
[92] Jäger-Waldau A. Photovoltaics and renewable energies in Europe. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2007;11:1414–37.
[93] Martinot E. Renewable energy in Russia: markets, development and tech-
nology transfer. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 1999;3:49–75.
[94] Finney KN, Sharifi VN, Swithenbank J. The negative impacts of the global
economic downturn on funding decentralized energy in the UK. Energy
Policy 2012;51:290–300.
[95] Verdolini E, Galeotti M. At home and abroad: An empirical analysis of
innovation and diffusion in energy technologies. J Environ Econ Manag
2011;61:119–34.
[96] Aslani A, Mohaghar A. Business structure in renewable energy industry: key
areas. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;27:569–75.
[97] Hast A, Alimohammadisagvand B, Syri S. Consumer attitudes towards
renewable energy in China—the case of Shanghai. Sustain Cities Soc
2015;17:69–79.
[98] Purohit P, Michaelowa A. CDM potential of SPV pumps in India. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12:181–99.
[99] Pillai IR, Banerjee R. Renewable energy in India: status and potential. Energy
2009;34:970–80.
[100] Muntasser MA, Bara MF, Quadri HA, El-Tarabelsi R, La-azebi IF. Photovoltaic
marketing in developing countries. Appl Energy 2000;65:67–72.
[101] Barua DC. Strategy for promotions and development of renewable technol-
ogies in Bangladesh: experience from Grameen Shakti. Renew Energy
2001;22:205–10.
490 M. Yaqoot et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 477–490
[102] van der Gaast W, Begg K, Flamos A. Promoting sustainable energy technology
transfers to developing countries through the CDM. Appl Energy
2009;86:230–6.
[103] van Alphena K, Kunzb HS, Hekkert MP. Policy measures to promote the
widespread utilization of renewable energy technologies for electricity
generation in the Maldives. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12:1959–73.
[104] Goess S, de Jong M, Ravesteijn W. What makes renewable energy successful
in China? The case of the Shandong province solar water heater innovation
system Energy Policy 2015;86:684–96.
[105] Verbruggen A, Fischedick M, Moomaw W, Weir T, Nadaï A, Nilsson LJ, et al.
Renewable energy costs, potentials, barriers: conceptual issues. Energy Policy
2010;38:850–61.
[106] Puri S. Bridging the divide – the role of renewable energy based rural elec-
trification in India. Refocus 2006;7:40–2.
[107] Edera JM, Mutsaerts CF, Sriwannawit P. Mini-grids and renewable energy in
rural Africa: How diffusion theory explains adoption of electricity in Uganda.
Energy Res Soc Sci 2015;5:45–54.
[108] Rebane KL, Barham BL. Knowledge and adoption of solar home systems in
rural Nicaragua. Energy Policy 2011;39:3064–75.
[109] El Fadel M, Rachid G, El-Samra R, Boutros GB, Hashisho J. Knowledge man-
agement mapping and gap analysis in renewable energy: Towards a sus-
tainable framework in developing countries. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2013;20:576–84.
[110] Arnold U, Yildiz O. Economic risk analysis of decentralized renewable energy
infrastructures – a Monte Carlo simulation approach. Renew Energy
2015;77:227–39.
[111] Charters WWS. Developing markets for renewable energy technologies.
Renew Energy 2001;22:217–22.
[112] Qiu D, Gu S, Catania P, Huang K. Diffusion of improved biomass stoves in
China. Energy Policy 1996;24:463–9.
[113] Claudy MC, Michelsen C, O’Driscoll A. The diffusion of microgeneration
technologies – assessing the influence of perceived product characteristics on
home owners’ willingness to pay. Energy Policy 2011;39:1459–69.
[114] Karakaya E, Sriwannawit P. Barriers to the adoption of photovoltaic systems:
the state of the art. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;49:60–6.
[115] Islam MR, Islam MR, Beg MRA. Renewable energy resources and technologies
practice in Bangladesh. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12:299–343.
[116] Gurung A, Ghimeray AK. Hassan SHA. The prospects of renewable energy
technologies for rural electrification: a review from Nepal. Energy Policy
2012;40:374–80.
[117] Tsoutsos TD, Stamboulis YA. The sustainable diffusion of renewable energy
technologies as an example of an innovation-focused policy. Technovation
2005;25:753–61.
[118] Edwards J, Othman M, Burn S. A review of policy drivers and barriers for the
use of anaerobic digestion in Europe, the United States and Australia. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2015;52:815–28.
[119] Ellabban O, Abu-Rub H, Blaabjerg F. Renewable energy resources: current
status, future prospects and their enabling technology. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2014;39:748–64.
[120] Sovacool BK. The cultural barriers to renewable energy and energy efficiency
in the United States. Technol Soc 2009;31:365–73.
[121] Alit R. Barriers and incentives: experience of small scale developments. Sol
Wind Technol 1990;7:93–6.
[122] Pohl C, Gisler P. Barriers and opportunities in realising sustainable energy
concepts – an analysis of two Swiss case studies. Energy Policy 2003;31:175–83.
[123] Kaldellis JK. Social attitude towards wind energy applications in Greece.
Energy Policy 2005;33:595–602.
[124] Darmani A, Arvidsson N, Hidalgo A, Albors J. What drives the development of
renewable energy technologies? Toward a typology for the systemic drivers
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;38:834–47.
[125] Mignon I, Bergek A. System- and actor-level challenges for diffusion of
renewable electricity technologies: an international comparison. J Clean Prod
2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.048.
[126] Luthra S, Kumar S, Garg D, Haleem A. Barriers to renewable/sustainable
energy technologies adoption: Indian perspective. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2015;41:762–76.
[127] Rupf GV, Bahri PA, de Boer K, McHenry MP. Barriers and opportunities of
biogas dissemination in Sub-Saharan Africa and lessons learned from
Rwanda, Tanzania, China, India, and Nepal. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2015;52:468–76.
[128] Zhu B, Zhang W, Du J, Zhou W, Qiu T, Li Q. Adoption of renewable energy
technologies (RETs): a survey on rural construction in China. Technol Soc
2011;33:223–30.
[129] Persson J, Gronkvist S. Drivers for and barriers to low-energy buildings in
Sweden. J Clean Prod 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.094.
[130] Browne D, O’Mahony M, Caulfield B. How should barriers to alternative fuels
and vehicles be classified and potential policies to promote innovative
technologies be evaluated? J Clean Prod 2012;35:140–51.
[131] Strupeit L, Palm A. Overcoming barriers to renewable energy diffusion:
business models for customer-sited solar photovoltaics in Japan, Germany
and the United States. J Clean Prod 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2015.06.120.