Connect with us

EDITORIAL

Analyzing China Solar Energy for Poverty Alleviation (SEPAP) Program

Published

on

Spread the love

In 2014, China deployed a large-scale initiative named as Solar Energy Poverty Alleviation Program (SEPAP) to systematically alleviate poverty in poor areas including underdeveloped regions of western China. In recent years, moving the country toward technological leadership and making China the largest solar investor has been on Government’s central Agenda. While having environmental benefits associated, SEPAP is a multi-purpose project which aims to reduce poverty, promote jobs and income in rural areas, boost China’s solar market, and improve rural lives. It is noteworthy that SEPAP is a program that has harmonized the social, developmental, and industrial goals. SEPAP acquired the highest level of political endorsement after Xi Jinping pledged to eradicate poverty from China by 2020, which resulted in its ascension from the pilot program to a nationwide campaign. According to World Bank, China has lifted 800 Million people out of poverty by 2022 and contributed to the Global reduction of people living in poverty as close to three-quarters. China has become able to achieve this milestone by adopting targeted poverty alleviation strategies and by providing economic opportunities to the unprivileged people to raise their income level.

Through this initiative, China aimed to add 10GW of solar capacity by 2020, which will benefit over 2 Million people. The program targeted 35,000 poverty-stricken villages which were located in 471 counties in 16 Provinces. According to an evaluation study conducted in 2020, this program has resulted in an increase of 7%-8% in the per-capita disposable income of the county. Chinese Government investment in solar energy and using it as a strategy for poverty eradication has brought out positive results and the effects are twice as high in the subsequent two to three years, especially in Eastern China.

Three different contexts contributed to making SEPAP a priority on Government’s agenda, making a historical conjuncture. First was the political push to eradicate prolonged rural poverty in China. To combat the higher rural-urban income gap, China adopted an “industrial” approach that emphasized developing innovative industrial facilities in the unprivileged region to make them self-sufficient in the long run. The second was the significant demand for rural electrification, where former technological preferences, especially small hydropower, were no longer feasible. The third driver was the overcapacity and shrinkage of the country’s solar energy sector and the subsequent necessity to stimulate distributed solar PV installation. Before 2013, China’s solar energy sector was mostly export-oriented with a dominant share of exports in overseas markets in Europe. During 2008 Trade disputes in the EU and US combined with the financial crisis lead Chinese solar manufacturers to the brink of Collapse. So, opening the domestic market for solar consumption was launched as a rescue strategy. The officials favored the installation of the distributed, small-scale solar system that can generate energy that may be utilized locally. By 2013, China becomes the world-leading market for solar energy and by 2015, It reached a total installed capacity of more than 43.18GW. Considering the scenario, SEPAP was formulated with a strategic vision that will benefit the local people while also expanding distributed Solar PV generation and absorbing overcapacity.

In 2014, SEPAP was launched by National Energy Administration (NEA) and State Council leading group

Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development (CPAD) as two joint policies. A first policy designed two alternatives for policy implementation. Installing rooftop Solar PV systems for low-income families formerly registered with CPAD was the initial option. The other policy alternative was to build Solar Power Station on the non-arable lands near the counties and villages. Using a robust financial model described in policy guidelines, the SEPAP was funded by both Government subsidies and corporate donations as a part of their corporate social responsibility initiatives. The second joint policy includes detailed guidelines for developing pilot SEPAP Projects in six provinces which included 30 counties. The provinces targeted were relatively underdeveloped while having abundant solar resources. Provincial Governments were involved to carry out the implementation process which include collecting comprehensive data on the poor household, energy supply and consumption, and quality of grid connection for each county. After the approval of plans from central governments, they were executed by the county’s government via an open bidding process. Provincial Governments’ poverty alleviation funds and policy banks’ preferential loans were utilized for the financial support of the pilot project of the Program. To ensure accountability and transparency in projects, monitoring and evaluation teams were designed by NEA and CPAD to maintain a check and balance on program activities and construction maintenance. To raise poor household income through this project, the profits gained from the sale of solar power were distributed fully among residents after Tax deductions. The policy goal also guaranteed 3000RMB of annual income per household for more than 20 years. The program created a win-win situation by alleviating the poor from poverty while absorbing China’s overcapacity of solar energy at the same time.

China’s ambitious plan to align poverty alleviation goals with the expansion of renewable energy has some serious practical concerns associated with it. Analyzing the program leads to significant gaps in policy design and implementation. The program faced severe budgeting and financial problems because of a lack of appropriate arrangements and no detailed financial mechanism was developed for post-construction maintenance of the projects. Only the central government endorsement was not enough to tackle these challenges but consistent support from the banking and bureaucratic sector was the pre-requisite for program implementation. Moreover, proper financial incentives were also required to encourage the solar companies to take lead in the construction of projects. Another challenge associated with the project was the complication in the governance structure where energy regulators took the lead rather than development officials. Misallocation of expertise affected the priorities in agenda setting of the program i.e. energy regulators based on their expertise, advocated the expansion of industrial capacity rather than looking out for poverty and development issues in the local context. Moreover, the time frame designed for the assessment of pilot projects was not enough for the critical evaluation of the success and failure of the project before its transition toward a national program.

Even though it’s a commendable approach, the combination of renewable energy technology with poverty reduction needs to be further examined through rigorous empirical studies both in China and in other developing nations. Future studies on how to integrate industrial strategies with development priorities and what governance institutions or structures might best serve these many policy goals can provide great insight into various policy alternatives that would be beneficial in the long run as well.


Spread the love
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

EDITORIAL

When America Turns Away, Who Will Stand with the World’s Poor?

Published

on

By

Spread the love

The silent dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) by the Trump administration has already begun to cast a long and catastrophic shadow across some of the most vulnerable regions of our planet. While the world watched in disbelief, Washington took a scalpel—and at times a sledgehammer—to decades of humanitarian partnerships, transforming America’s image from a flawed but willing global responder to an indifferent bystander.

Under the guise of the “America First” doctrine, the White House is not only slashing funds—it is uprooting entire systems of international solidarity. USAID, long a cornerstone of the U.S. foreign policy arsenal, is being dissolved into the bureaucratic core of the State Department, its staff decimated, its mission neutered. This is not just policy redirection. It is strategic retreat.

And the consequences are already devastating.

In Myanmar, a country teetering between civil war and natural catastrophe, a deadly 7.7 magnitude earthquake has laid bare the moral vacuum left by the U.S. pullback. More than 3,300 people are dead. Entire neighborhoods are reduced to rubble. While Washington has offered a paltry $9 million in aid, the true toll lies not in numbers but in absence—no boots on the ground, no structured response, no meaningful engagement. By contrast, in the 2023 Turkey-Syria quake, the U.S. pledged $185 million and dispatched hundreds of relief workers. Myanmar, it seems, is now relegated to the back pages of the U.S. conscience.

In Afghanistan, the picture is equally dire. The abrupt halt of funding for World Food Programme (WFP) operations, and the shuttering of hundreds of WHO-supported clinics, has pushed a starving, war-weary population further into the abyss. Twenty-three million Afghans need humanitarian aid. Two million rely on WFP food rations that will now no longer come. The rationale? That funds might trickle to the Taliban. But blanket punishment of a population—especially women, children, and the elderly—is neither just nor strategic.

In Sudan, now entering its third year of a brutal civil war, the picture is almost apocalyptic. More than 30 million people are in need of aid. Nearly half a million have already died of hunger and disease in 2024 alone. With the U.S. pulling out, 80% of community kitchens have shut down. Refugees in Chad, already living on the brink, are now left without food, water, or hope. Once again, the U.S. has ceded moral ground.

Even in South Africa, where the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has for two decades been the world’s most successful anti-HIV initiative, the damage is palpable. Experts now warn that without sustained funding, South Africa could face an additional 565,000 HIV infections and over 600,000 deaths by 2034. Thousands of support services have been halted, and a generation of progress stands at risk.

These aren’t just numbers. They are the real, lived experiences of millions of human beings—trapped in crises not of their making, caught in the crosshairs of global geopolitics, abandoned in their hour of greatest need.

And yet, amid the wreckage, a critical question arises: Who will fill the void?

If the United States is retreating from its role as the world’s emergency responder, the onus must shift to others with the capacity and resources to help. Here, we must issue a moral and strategic challenge to the wealthier nations of the Gulf—Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Oman, and Kuwait.

These countries have benefited from decades of immense oil wealth, and many have built modern economies, world-class cities, and sophisticated diplomatic networks. But with wealth comes responsibility. It is time for the Gulf to rise to the mantle of global humanitarian leadership—not just through quiet diplomacy or symbolic donations, but through bold, coordinated, and sustained intervention in global crises.

Gulf nations, particularly those that claim leadership in the Islamic world, must now walk their talk. Islam’s teachings on compassion, zakat, and the duty to protect the vulnerable are clear and uncompromising. What greater test of faith and moral purpose than to respond to famines in Sudan, earthquakes in Myanmar, or epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa?

In 2022, Qatar showed remarkable leadership by mediating in Afghanistan and offering humanitarian aid during natural disasters. The UAE has increasingly stepped into the humanitarian space in East Africa and Yemen. Saudi Arabia’s King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Centre has made strides in emergency response. But these efforts must now be scaled, systematized, and globalized. The Gulf must move beyond regional charity into international humanitarianism.

Moreover, such leadership is not only ethical—it is strategic. By filling the humanitarian gap left by the United States, Gulf countries can enhance their soft power, build alliances with Global South nations, and demonstrate that a multipolar world need not be a fractured one. If the West is faltering, the Global East and South must not fail.

Let the response to this moment of crisis become a defining chapter in Gulf leadership. Let the world say that when America turned away, others stood up. That amid despair, compassion found new champions.

For in the end, history will judge not the power we held, but the lives we saved with it.


Spread the love
Continue Reading

EDITORIAL

Trump’s Tariff Tsunami: Charting a Strategic Response from the Islamic World

Published

on

By

Spread the love

The world today stands on the precipice of a profound geopolitical and economic recalibration. With his latest sweeping tariff declaration—a 10% blanket levy on nearly all imported goods, alongside severe country-specific tariffs—Donald J. Trump has launched what may prove to be one of the most consequential acts of economic nationalism in modern history. Framed as a patriotic revival of American industry, it is, in fact, a seismic disruption of global trade norms with reverberations that will be especially destructive to the Global South and, by extension, the Islamic world.

This moment calls for clarity—not only of analysis but of strategy. For Muslim-majority countries already navigating fragile developmental paths, Trump’s tariff agenda may well become a catalyst for systemic realignment. It demands not despair, but a redoubling of efforts toward economic self-determination, intra-OIC trade expansion, and a bold embrace of Islamic economic principles.

A Revival of Mercantilism in a Globalized Age

At the heart of Trump’s new economic policy lies a nostalgia-fueled resurrection of mercantilist thought. In seeking to reverse the effects of decades-long globalization, his administration is deploying 20th-century tools against a 21st-century reality. The United States, no longer the singular industrial hegemon it was after World War II, now competes in a multipolar economic world. Yet Trump’s tariff regime assumes that insulating domestic markets from international competition will singlehandedly reindustrialize the American economy.

History, however, warns against such assumptions. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930—often cited by economists as a contributing factor to the Great Depression—demonstrated how aggressive protectionism can lead to retaliatory spirals, global contraction, and social unrest. What we are witnessing today bears alarming similarities, albeit on a digitally interconnected and supply-chain-dependent global stage.

An Asymmetric Earthquake: The Vulnerability of Emerging Islamic Economies

The Islamic world—comprising over 50 nations, many of which are dependent on exports to Western markets—is uniquely exposed to this unfolding economic earthquake. While countries like China and the European Union may possess the leverage and infrastructure to respond with countermeasures, Muslim-majority economies—especially in South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia—face a more existential challenge.

Consider the case of Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Egypt. These nations are not only reliant on textile and agricultural exports to the United States but are also structurally embedded within global value chains that feed Western consumer markets. A sudden imposition of high tariffs on these exports—some reportedly as high as 50%—is not just punitive; it is potentially ruinous.

More alarmingly, these policies threaten to undermine decades of incremental gains achieved through preferential trade agreements, foreign direct investment, and participation in multilateral trading systems. For many of these nations, Trump’s tariffs are not just economic measures—they are external shocks with deeply internal consequences: rising unemployment, inflationary pressures, balance-of-payments crises, and heightened political instability.

An Opportunity to Reclaim Strategic Economic Sovereignty

Yet within this crisis lies a generational opportunity. Trump’s unilateralism and the broader Western trend toward economic insularity may, paradoxically, offer the Islamic world a historic opening to reimagine its position in the global economy—not as passive peripheries, but as an interconnected bloc of strategic importance.

There is a growing case for the acceleration of intra-OIC trade, currently hovering around a modest 20% of total trade among member states. Through strengthened regional economic cooperation, harmonized halal certification, integrated digital payment systems, and Islamic finance-backed industrial projects, Muslim-majority nations can foster alternative markets less susceptible to Western volatility.

Institutions such as the Islamic Development Bank, OIC Trade Negotiating Committee, and D-8 Organization for Economic Cooperation must now take center stage in coordinating a South-South trade renaissance. Additionally, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations, with their sovereign wealth and capital surpluses, have a critical role to play in underwriting industrialization efforts across lower-income OIC partners, creating mutually reinforcing economic corridors.

Furthermore, this is an opportune moment to reinvigorate the Islamic economic paradigm itself. Rooted in risk-sharing, ethical finance, and real-sector investment, Islamic economics offers a framework better attuned to sustainable development than the speculative excesses of neoliberal globalization. The decoupling of global trade may, therefore, provide the Islamic world with the impetus to invest in economic models that reflect its values and aspirations.

The Imperative of Strategic Unity

A fragmented response to this crisis will only deepen vulnerabilities. But a coordinated, principle-driven, and future-focused strategy could transform this tariff tsunami into a platform for economic reawakening across the Islamic world. The choice before us is stark: either remain at the mercy of shifting Western political winds or rise collectively to forge new alliances, institutions, and economic instruments.

Let us be clear: Trump’s tariffs are not simply a U.S. domestic policy—they are a challenge to the very fabric of globalization and an implicit message that the rules-based international economic order may no longer serve emerging economies. If so, then the Islamic world must not only ask what it stands to lose—but what it can gain by standing together.

Conclusion: Beyond Reaction, Toward Reinvention

In Surah Ar-Ra’d (13:11), the Qur’an reminds us: “Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves.” This is not merely spiritual counsel—it is strategic guidance.

The Islamic world now faces a defining test. Will it continue to look outward for validation and markets, or will it summon the internal resolve to build resilient, just, and independent economies? Trump’s tariff tsunami may well be a global economic earthquake—but it could also be the spark of a long-overdue economic renaissance for the Ummah.


Spread the love
Continue Reading

EDITORIAL

Trump’s Tariff Gambit and the Specter of Global Economic Chaos

Published

on

By

Spread the love

From the heart of Washington, D.C., the world is once again being dragged into an economic tailspin orchestrated by one man’s populist instincts and obsession with “winning.” Donald Trump’s latest tariff moves are not merely policy missteps—they are manifestations of a worldview that sees international economic cooperation not as a shared platform for mutual benefit, but as a zero-sum game of dominance and coercion.

For Islamic economists and policymakers concerned with equity, stability, and the moral dimensions of trade, the Trump Tariff Show is more than just theatrics—it’s a warning signal of how deeply distorted the global economic order has become.

Tariffs as Weapons, Not Tools

Unlike the Islamic economic tradition which views trade as a mutual covenant governed by justice (adl) and cooperation (ta’awun), Trump’s tariffs are being wielded as economic weapons. The idea of “reciprocal tariffs”—the notion that trade must always be balanced in numerical terms—is rooted in transactional nationalism, not in economic sense. In fact, scholars from Brookings to Peterson Institute for International Economics have repeatedly warned that such a view misinterprets the nature of global value chains and ignores the very logic of comparative advantage.

Islamic teachings on trade, as found in both the Qur’an and Hadith, emphasize ethical conduct, fairness, and avoiding harm (darar). The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) himself was a merchant whose success came not from closing markets to others, but from being known as “Al-Amin” – the trustworthy. Trump’s approach undermines trust and creates fear, a far cry from the Prophetic model.

A Strategy Without Strategy

Trump’s tariff saga lacks coherence. As reported, there is no clear doctrine—only the impulsive judgments of a leader playing to his domestic base. One day tariffs are imposed, the next day they’re paused. Global markets reel and recover like an abused partner in an unpredictable relationship. As The Economist notes, America has moved from predictable superpower to mercurial bully, unsettling even its closest allies.

Compare this with the Islamic economic emphasis on istiqrar (stability) and maslahah (public interest). Policies must be predictable, transparent, and rooted in long-term welfare—not short-term political spectacle. The Qur’an explicitly condemns deceit and sudden, destabilizing action in commercial dealings. In the Islamic vision of a just economic order, the state should be a shepherd (ra’i), not a predator.

The Myth of Reshoring and Manufacturing Mirages

Trump’s fantasy of “bringing jobs back” through punitive tariffs ignores basic economic realities. U.S. manufacturers are not leaving because tariffs are too low—they’re moving operations because of automation, wage differentials, and global efficiency gains. Punishing trading partners won’t change this. On the contrary, it risks triggering retaliation, increasing consumer costs, and destabilizing emerging economies—including those in the Muslim world.

China has already responded with its own tariffs, and others may follow. The world is being forced into trade blocs and protectionist corners. Islamic economies, particularly those dependent on export markets—like Malaysia, Indonesia, and even parts of the Middle East—stand to lose significantly. The result? Greater inequality, disrupted supply chains, and rising food and energy insecurity.

The Islamic Economic Alternative: Justice and Interdependence

The Islamic economic system envisions a world of interdependence based on moral values. Trade is a bridge, not a battleground. Protectionism must be measured, not malicious. Policies must promote the maqasid al-shari’ah—preservation of wealth, life, and dignity—not endanger them.

Instead of Trump’s chaos, we need international trade governed by mudarabah (risk-sharing), sukuk for infrastructure development, and transparent mechanisms that elevate developing economies rather than suffocate them.

Muslim-majority countries, especially those in the OIC, must use this moment to reevaluate their dependency on unpredictable partners and instead pursue regional trade, South-South cooperation, and Islamic economic integration. The Islamic Development Bank and institutions like D-8 must step up with frameworks that promote intra-OIC trade based on principles of equity, not economic blackmail.

Conclusion: Chaos as a Symptom of Deeper Decay

Trump’s tariff theatrics are not an isolated event—they are symptomatic of a deeper corrosion of global economic ethics. For Islamic economists, the lesson is clear: the time has come to build parallel economic institutions rooted in moral clarity, strategic foresight, and inclusive prosperity.

The Qur’an reminds us: “Woe to those who give less [than due], who when they take a measure from people take in full. But if they give by measure or by weight to them, they cause loss.” (Surah al-Mutaffifin 83:1-3). That, precisely, is the spirit of Trump’s tariff regime—mutaffifin economics. It is neither sustainable nor just.

Let us not merely watch this TV show from the sidelines. Let us offer a better script.


Spread the love
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 Focus on Halal Economy | Powered by Africa Islamic Economic Forum