How can new philanthropy help end energy poverty?

Why policy needs more science, and science needs more policy

The launch of Renaissance Philanthropy last week got me thinking. Tom Kalil, Kumar Garg, and a crew of smart people working at Schmidt Futures announced on May 6 that they were forming a new organization to “work with high-net-worth individuals, families, and foundations to help design, launch, and operate high-impact philanthropic programs, focusing on science, technology, and innovation.” (Full disclosure: My organization receives funding from the Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fund for Strategic Innovation.)

What’s especially cool about this news is that Kalil and his team are all science nerds who also have experience in the upper reaches of government. Tom and Kumar worked in the Obama White House and have long been pushing for more science in policy – and more scientists inside the halls of power. They have seen how innovation can have positive ripple effects when applied in the right ways – and how it can fall flat when a technology drops into an inhospitable environment. This all matters greatly for their next venture because of one essential thing: impact. 

That word – impact – has become an empty cliché that could mean just about anything. But what I mean here is the intention to reach the greatest number of people with a lasting transformative effect. No band-aids. No third-best work-arounds. No micro effect that won’t visibly move the needle on a big wicked problem. For donors really hoping to change the world – especially new ultra-wealthy techies just starting to give away their fortunes – the marginal philanthropic dollar can do a lot more shaping policies or markets than they can in a vacuum. And that’s why getting more science into government is so vital. I’ll explain. 

To start, many tech people:

• Have gotten extremely rich.

• Want to use their wealth to tackle mega problems, like climate change or global poverty

• Are more comfortable with science & business than with government & policy

So, if you made a billion dollars by turning a scientific project into a profitable company and then decided to use your wealth to help the world, you could be forgiven for wanting to turn another scientific project into a global solution. You might, for instance, want to redirect an existing technology (like AI, blockchain, or nuclear fission) to a social purpose. Or perhaps you want to help invent or commercialize a new technology (like direct air capture, a vaccine for a neglected tropical disease, or nuclear fusion). Tech was the source of your own business success, so tech seems like the obvious pathway to your next philanthropic success. Our life experiences shape our worldview, and tech billionaires are no different. 

One thing tech billionaires all understand is scale. And if you really want to change the world, you need to go where the real money is. And that’s why, in a weird sorta ironic way, new philanthropists should be rushing to influence governments and global institutions rather than trying to skirt around them. That’s why I’m especially excited about Renaissance Philanthropy: because they are scientists who can talk the language of tech billionaires but also can help leverage donations into policy influence that will go far beyond their individual gifts. Or, in other words, yes, impact. 

That’s why when people sometimes ask me how private citizens, even very wealthy ones, can help end energy poverty, I try to steer them away from inventing a new gadget (remember the Soccket?) or just picking their favorite tech (hammers, nails, and all that…). And I try to encourage them to try to create outward ripples.

Instead of investing in, say, one solar project that might help a thousand people, you could instead invest in a policy change that might reduce the cost of capital for hundreds of clean energy projects, thus helping millions of people. Taking that leap requires finding credible organizations that can help make big stuff happen. 

Five ideas for ripple effects

In that spirit, here are five ideas, plus some specific suggestions, for how philanthropy could help end energy poverty by having an effect far beyond an initial gift:

1. Invest in data...

Good analysis starts with good inputs. While public agencies in most rich countries provide this service (like the EIA in the US), most lower income countries have a dire shortage of robust data, and thus energy and climate policies are often flying blind. A few ideas for prospective givers:

• nLine runs the Gridwatch project which enables remote reliability monitoring that allows better energy infrastructure tracking and planning. Expanding that initiative would be a huge service to clean energy planners and investors. 

• EED Research Institute is a high-performing Nairobi-based organization that uses data across energy, climate, water, and agriculture. I love this group. 

• Ember is a global think tank that uses data to accelerate clean energy. I use their data often and wish they could do even more. 

2. … or accessible data analysis.

A dataset is only as good as how people can use it to understand the real world, so we should all be supporting the data interpreters. 

• Our World in Data at Oxford is a true gem and one of the most valuable public goods. Support their work – or their campaign to end the short-sighted data paywall (grrrr) at the International Energy Agency.

3. Expand human capital where it’s a binding constraint on progress.

The big decisions on infrastructure investments and climate pathways are heavily influenced by models. Yet, as my colleagues have shown compellingly, too much of the energy and climate analysis about Africa is done by foreign consulting firms, rather than by local scholars and institutions. This undercuts the credibility of the models and detaches it from actual policymaking. 

• The African Climate Foundation is very soon (!) launching a major new initiative to tackle this gap. (If interested in more, LMK.)

4. Backstop the watchdogs.

Governments make lots of promises, but someone has to help hold them accountable. 

• Publish What You Fund tracks development spending and pushes for greater transparency.

• The Natural Resources Governance Initiative has an impressive record of helping governments extract value and manage the downsides of their natural endowments. 

• Afrobarometer tracks public opinion on government performance.  

5. Support better policy ideas.

Sometimes governments need outside groups to propose big new ideas or small policy tweaks to be more effective.

• Project Innerspace is a super cool nonprofit using data science to help make “geothermal everywhere” a reality.

• India is the one country where every aspect of energy, poverty, and climate crashes together with arguably the greatest consequences. That’s why the low-profile Prayas Energy Group is so valuable. 

• And (ahem) the Energy for Growth Hub, which played a founding role in creating the $60 billion DFC, then helped lift a ban on nuclear technology that could lead to clean energy for millions, and is now proposing a new way to reorganize energy security support for US allies.

Which all brings us back to Tom Kalil and Renaissance Philanthropy. The more that they can rally new tech-fueled philanthropy for policy impact, the more science we can inject into government decisions — and the better the world will be for it.

A final thought on the method to the messiness

The hard part can be explaining an unpredictable nonlinear pathway from data → idea → policy change → impact. Projecting or calculating a return on investment is almost always messy and uncertain. That places a heavy onus on those of us working for policy change to make our case more clearly: What exactly are we trying to achieve? How are we measuring it? Who else do we need to work with? What does success look like? How can we fairly claim credit? It’s still a work in progress, but here’s what we do at the Hub. 

As always, LMK what you think.

PS - The new Eat More Electrons logo is out. Chomp chomp.