By Mukalazi Deus
Board Chair, UBUNTALISM GLOBAL LTD – A member of MUNGAANO INITIATIVE FOR CLIMATE JUSTICE). mubirudeus22@gmail.com
In recent years, Uganda has taken important steps toward addressing the climate crisis and improving its energy sector. One of the latest developments is the proposed Energy Efficiency and Conservation Bill 2024, aimed at promoting efficient energy use and reducing environmental harm. While this proposed legislation is a step in the right direction in terms of sustainability, there is growing concern that it could unintentionally worsen energy poverty—particularly for Uganda’s most vulnerable populations.
The concept of energy poverty is about the inability of households to access adequate energy for essential services, including cooking, heating, cooling, and lighting. Energy poverty has several dimensions, including energy access, adequacy, convenience, reliability, and affordability.
Energy poverty remains a vexing issue in many countries, particularly low-income countries like Uganda. According to International Energy Agency (IEA)’s Energy Access Outlook of 2021, roughly 840 million people globally do not have access to electricity, and 2.9 billion people rely on traditional solid fuels such as charcoal and wood for cooking and heating. Multiple studies have documented that energy poverty is associated with severe physical and mental health consequences. Ensuring energy prices at affordable levels, raising investment in infrastructure, and widening redistributive government policies are only some potential ways to fight energy poverty. However, many developing countries struggle with balancing the burning needs of eradicating energy poverty and the priorities of meeting the climate change agenda. That trade-off may put many more under the energy poverty line if a just agenda is not made the focus of the current energy transitions.
Uganda currently faces a significant energy access gap. According to data from the Uganda Bureau of Statistics, over half of the population still lacks access to electricity. In rural areas, this figure is even higher. Many households rely on traditional energy sources such as firewood, charcoal, and kerosene, which are not only inefficient but also pose serious health and environmental risks. The proposed energy conservation and efficiency law seeks to phase out such sources and enforce efficiency standards for energy appliances, among other measures. This proposed law is part of the ambitious policies being implemented by countries globally to meet their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
The goals and aims of such laws and policies align with international climate commitments. However, these policies have raised concerns about energy poverty, leading to rising energy prices worldwide, partly due to more stringent environmental regulations. Implementing more stringent climate laws in Uganda without addressing affordability and energy infrastructure concerns will exacerbate the problem of energy poverty.
One of the key issues is that the law may place new financial burdens on households and small businesses that cannot afford to transition to energy-efficient alternatives. For example, many people still use low-cost, second-hand electrical appliances that do not meet modern efficiency standards. Under the proposed regulations, such appliances could be banned or heavily taxed, pushing people further into energy poverty. Similarly, small-scale businesses that depend on affordable but less-efficient machinery may face fines or increased operational costs, threatening livelihoods in an already fragile economy.
Moreover, the proposed law assumes a level of awareness, access, and purchasing power that many Ugandans do not have. Without targeted subsidies, phased implementation plans, and robust public education campaigns, the transition to energy efficiency risks becoming a top-down initiative that alienates the very communities it seeks to help. It is important to recognize that energy poverty is not just a matter of availability but also affordability and usability.
To avoid these negative consequences, the Ugandan government must take a more inclusive approach to energy conservation. This includes providing financial incentives for adopting efficient technologies, investing in rural electrification, and engaging communities in the law-making process. Public-private partnerships could also play a role in making renewable and efficient energy solutions more accessible and affordable.
In conclusion, while the proposed energy conservation law is a necessary step toward environmental sustainability, it must be carefully designed to avoid deepening existing inequalities. The effectiveness and feasibility of energy poverty reduction policies, which, according to available evidence, have delivered limited success even in developed countries, are expected to be weaker in the context of developing countries. Moreover, it is essential to carefully consider the particular context and challenges facing different communities and develop tailored solutions that consider the social, economic, and technical factors in each context. Energy justice requires that all Ugandans—not just the urban elite—benefit from clean and affordable energy. Conservation efforts must go hand in hand with expanded access, social equity, and long-term economic support. Without this balance, the law may solve one problem only to create another.
