In national energy policy debates, the terms “plan”, “scenario” and “model” are often heard and sometimes used inter­changeably, even though the concepts are notably different. Thus, to strengthen national long-term planning capabilities, it is necessary to distinguish among these areas of work and assess them separately.

Although no single, universal definition for energy policy planning exists, IRENA has captured the essence:

Long-term energy planning is the process whereby national or regional targets, policies and investment strategies are derived from quantitative analysis of energy sector scenarios, often aided by the modelling of energy systems. Such planning is a central component of energy policy-making processes around the world, guiding decisions on when, where and how to invest in the energy sector.

Simply put, sound long-term energy system planning encompasses domestic and external policy while touching on many key areas of the economy, including natural resources, industry, external trade and the environment. With the objective of laying out a strategic pathway to a clear goal, the process involves multiple government and private sector stakeholders. Importantly, citizens – both as individuals and as part of non-governmental organisations – should also be viewed as policy-planning stakeholders.

From literature reviews and discussions with policymakers and both national and international experts, certain recurring themes have allowed us to identify key enablers for long-term energy policy planning (the “outer perimeter”). The enablers should not be perceived as a cascading sequence of actions, but as parallel elements of the policy planning cycle:

• Enabler 1: Political will to adopt and sustain (finance) quantitative analysis as a policy tool
• Enabler 2: Analytical capacity in relevant national institutes to formulate scenarios and interpret modelling results
• Enabler 3: Adequate, reliable and timely data to support energy modelling and scenario analysis.
  

As scenarios can be used to assess the potential outcomes of alternative actions, their development is an integral part of modern long-term energy policy planning. Energy modelling refers to the technical and analytical exercise of quantifying these scenarios and translating the modelling results into a format that aids decision making. The integration of scenarios and energy models is therefore crucial for effective energy planning.

A wealth of freely accessible literature, technical support and capacity-building activities exists to support the objectives of the inner core. In contrast, less guidance material exists to help countries reach the point at which these resources become relevant. Still, developing a functioning energy policy planning process (the outer perimeter) is a prerequisite to acquire sustainable and relevant energy modelling capacity at the country level.

Based on the same analysis as for the outer perimeter, the key enablers for effective energy modelling are:

• Enabler 4: Relevant set of scenarios to explore strategy options.
• Enabler 5: Modelling of the energy system.
• Enabler 6: Stakeholder engagement and communication.

The next section discusses these enablers in detail and also includes self-assessment questions to gauge the status of each enabler in the national context. Furthermore, the Resources to Strengthen Enablers section lists resources that can be used to assess the strength of enablers and make them more effective.

To ensure that strategic energy policy planning aligns with the objectives of clean-energy transitions, long-term energy plans must be co‑ordinated with the aims of other key areas, such as climate change and water management. Given that roughly 75% of all GHG emissions are energy-related, the domains are strongly connected. 

Areas in which the energy system relies heavily on hydro-based electricity generation should take particular care to consider the water-energy nexus – ideally from a regional perspective. While energy policy planners have become better at incorporating critical minerals into clean-energy transition schemes in recent years, still their focus must not be limited to only critical minerals, as a wealth of common materials will also be required for the energy transition. Energy policies also have wider socioeconomic impacts that should be considered (e.g. green jobs, energy access).

Without a strategic approach, governments may develop only isolated policies and legislation (i.e. tools that do not address energy and climate challenges as a whole). Instead, long-term energy planning should cover an energy system in its entirety rather than address its elements individually. This approach allows policymakers to identify the most important substitution options linked to the system overall – an exercise they cannot carry out when single technologies, commodities or sectors are analysed individually.

For instance, by focusing on the electricity sector only, policymakers may overlook the possibility of unforeseen, fundamental changes in electricity demand due to, for example, transport or heating sector electrification. This is not to say that power system planning should be omitted – quite the opposite: transmission system operators should continue to be responsible for grid development (e.g. through their 10-year plans), but their work should be aligned with overall energy system planning.

A planning approach that encompasses the energy system as a whole, which is the scope of this roadmap, appears obvious when we examine the shares of each energy resource in final energy consumption. 

Although electricity use is trending upwards – with a strong global push for further electrification – electricity makes up only just over 20% of total final energy consumption globally. Therefore, focusing exclusively on long-term planning for the power sector may lead to sub-optimal results for the energy system as a whole. 

Visible outcomes of energy planning include various strategic documents, roadmaps and action plans (e.g. national energy efficiency action plans (NEEAPs) and national energy and climate plans [NECPs]). While these important milestones set the stage for governments to plan their near-term (e.g. five-year) actions, countries should also continue to develop their underlying policy planning capacity.

In the first illustration, the process is a trunk from which different strategies are delivered. As the process – including the co‑operation network and energy modelling capacity – is always in place, planning capacity accumulates over time, increasing the quality (i.e. usefulness) of subsequent deliverables.

The second graphic represents the preparation of strategic documents on an ad-hoc basis with whatever policy planning capacity is available at that moment, be it sufficient or not. In practice, external parties are often involved (e.g. international consultancies), but the lack of an ongoing, permanently established process implies there will likely not be much more capacity available when the deliverable (e.g. an energy strategy) must be updated. Tapping into any resources developed by a consultancy in a previous round is often difficult due to lack of knowledge transfer (“black box” effect). Thus, the country probably will not have the planning capacity necessary to modify or expand upon previously delivered materials (e.g. modelling tools) when updates are required.

While governments lacking the minimum capacity needed to develop and model energy scenarios may initially outsource these activities, knowledge-transfer activities for developing and using scenario modelling tools should follow (i.e., strengthening the inner core). Furthermore, experts involved in the process of delivering strategic documents should maintain and expand both their individual and institutional capacities. The consensus among energy planners is that building up policy planning capacity is a long-term process, so efforts must be made to retain existing capabilities while continuously developing new ones.

Evidently, any future-defining strategy must eventually be updated. Long-term energy policy planning and the process of creating and maintaining an energy strategy are important tools to help countries face challenges coherently and successfully. Rather than having a definite end date, these tasks should be ongoing and must evolve according to circumstances.

A priority for governments should therefore be to design these processes in a permanent but flexible manner, ensuring that policies are impactful but also adaptable to unexpected developments and crises. As targets are met and the policy context shifts, new targets can be added and policies either changed or streamlined.

To achieve the best results, several stakeholders should be involved in the long-term energy planning process, particularly during the scenario development phase.

National research institutions and energy modelling groups fill the important role of using modelling tools and providing scientific insights and guidance based on their knowledge of the field and the models in use. Moreover, modelling group representatives have the expertise to quantify the effects of selected policy measures.

Experts from ministries and other government agencies can have diverse roles, as they represent multiple ministries and other organisations. Functions can include overall co‑ordination, management and external communications, but they can also represent their corresponding sector during scenario building.

Political actors involved in the energy and/or climate policy domain can include members of parliament and their policy advisors. While not directly involved in scenario building nor part of the official working groups, they should be contacted regularly by public officials to ensure political acceptance of the proposed measures. In certain cases, politicians may also provide specific goals for inclusion in the scenarios, but caution should be used when deciding whether to incorporate and subsequently shape the scenario-building process following such guidance (see ‘2050 calculators’).

National statistical information providers, particularly a national statistical office and/or the entity responsible for official national energy statistics, should be considered integral to the planning process. Modern policy planning, including scenario development and modelling, is a data-heavy exercise. If the existing data production system is inadequate, the lead time for new data production may be as long as one year. It is therefore crucial to involve the relevant experts in this domain as early as possible.