Community-led Energy Projects: An interview with Ayu Abdullah, Co-Founder of Energy Action Partners (ENACT)

Tell us more about your background and how you got started in rural electrification.

My journey into rural electrification was anything but linear. I started out in aerospace engineering, studying orbital mechanics and space dynamics. When I realised I was more drawn to working with people and solving urgent, real-world problems on the ground than research, I left my PhD programme, took a job in oil and gas, and started working as a field engineer in China. In the field, I witnessed firsthand the environmental toll of fossil fuel extraction. That was my first wake-up call.

Searching for a way to pivot into international development, I then started working as a volunteer teacher in Somaliland in 2009. Our school was installing a 20kW wind turbine—the first in the country—and they asked me to help. Living off-grid on the school campus, reliant on diesel generators, I experienced energy poverty firsthand. I also saw how the neighbouring village struggled without reliable and affordable energy, how it impacted their livelihoods and their children's education, and how access to energy could be transformative. That was when everything clicked. I saw the direct link between energy and development and wanted to leverage my engineering background to be part of solving this problem.

I reached out to universities and organisations working in renewable energy. One of the people who responded was Scott Kennedy, a professor at the Masdar Institute in Abu Dhabi. With Scott as my advisor, I studied community energy systems and explored how decentralised energy could incorporate substantive community involvement and ownership. I quickly realised that, while mini-grids were being deployed, they were designed to simply provide electricity connections—not address real community development needs. That was the gap I wanted to address.

In 2014, Scott and I co-founded Energy Action Partners (ENACT) to place community engagement at the centre of energy planning. Since then, we have worked in remote communities across Southeast Asia, South Asia, and East Africa, building approaches that prioritise local ownership, participation, and long-term sustainability. We specifically develop frameworks and tools that not only make participatory approaches more accessible, scalable, and impactful but also ensure that communities remain at the heart of decision-making.

In Kampung Sempar, Pos Titom, Pahang, ENACT conducted a needs assessment and community engagement session through an all-female workshop. Together with the women of the community, the team discussed and mapped out specific needs for themselves and their families. (Image credits: ENACT)

What are some of the opportunities that you are excited about?

One of the biggest opportunities I see right now is a shift in how we think about mini-grids and decentralised energy—moving beyond technical or economic feasibility to a broader conversation about long-term sustainability, community ownership, and meaningful participation. The sector is moving from "How do we provide electricity?" to "How do we design energy systems that truly serve communities in the long run?" When they are focused around communities, energy projects are more successful, more sustainable, and more transformative in the long run.

Beyond energy access, I see an even greater opportunity in how the world is starting to wake up to the fact that climate, energy, and social equity are deeply interconnected. The way we approach energy access has direct implications on economic resilience, biodiversity, indigenous rights, and climate adaptation. These challenges share root causes and need integrated solutions. This growing awareness presents an opportunity to optimise and align resources in a way that moves multiple priorities forward rather than treating them as separate issues.

Another major opportunity is regional collaboration. While energy access in Sub-Saharan Africa has received significant attention, the Southeast Asia-Pacific region faces its own unique challenges and solutions that remain underrepresented in global conversations. We want to change that by building stronger regional networks, documenting case studies and amplifying insights from Southeast Asia-Pacific to influence policy and financing mechanisms. Our involvement in partnerships like the Sabah RE2 Consortium has shown us the immense value of creating spaces where governments, civil society, and practitioners can work together, and we hope to expand on this model.

Imaginal Seeds recently supported ENACT with a grant to develop a framework that improves how mini-grid projects evaluate investment risks, particularly in remote and indigenous communities. Can you tell us more about this exciting project?

One of the biggest challenges in scaling mini-grid solutions is the perception of high financial risk. Investors and developers often assess mini-grid viability using conventional financial models that rely on household income levels, existing electricity expenditures, and standardised demand projections. However, these models do not reflect how communities actually use energy or how their economic activities evolve once they gain access. They also fail to account for other critical assets and capabilities—such as strong local institutions, a young and growing population, informal education, and local entrepreneurship—that directly shape how communities adapt to and benefit from electrification.

Thanks to Imaginal Seeds’ support, we are developing the Demand-Side Risk Assessment Framework, which aims to address this gap by integrating community-driven insights into risk evaluations. Instead of relying solely on conventional financial indicators, the framework will incorporate livelihood patterns, seasonal income variations, community institutions, education levels, and community-defined assets and resources—all of which influence how mini-grids perform over time. By doing this, we hope to provide a more accurate, holistic understanding of risk that reflects the strengths and resilience of communities rather than just their current financial metrics.

We are designing this as an open-source framework, which we hope will encourage collaboration across the sector. Our goal is to create a more inclusive and nuanced way of assessing mini-grid investments—one that recognises the adaptive capacity, untapped potential, and economic resilience of rural communities.

If successful, this could be a game-changer for unlocking financing in the sector, shifting the narrative from one of financial uncertainty to one of opportunity and long-term sustainability.

What have been some of the main lessons learnt in your journey?

One major lesson is that energy access is not a one-size-fits-all problem. Every community is different—culturally, socially, and economically—which means that the same solution will not work everywhere. Designing solutions that are flexible and adaptable is key. This is why our work at ENACT has always prioritised collaborative tools and frameworks over rigid models; we want to create approaches that allow for context-specific solutions rather than imposing a predetermined structure.

I have also come to realise that the way we measure success in energy access needs to evolve. Electrification rates and kilowatts delivered are important, but they do not tell us whether energy access is actually improving lives. Success should be measured by what communities are able to do with that energy—whether it leads to new businesses, better education, improved healthcare, or greater resilience in the face of challenges. This shift in perspective is crucial if we want energy access to be a true driver of development.

Finally, one of the biggest lessons I have learnt is that patience and persistence matter. The transition to decentralised, community-driven energy is happening, but it takes time. Working with communities, changing narratives around financing, and influencing policy are all long-term efforts. There are setbacks and challenges along the way, but the progress we have seen—whether it is in more governments recognising decentralised solutions, more financiers looking at community resilience as a strength rather than a risk, or more practitioners embedding participatory approaches in their work—reminds me that this work is worth doing.

What would be your advice to someone who is looking at providing support to rural and/or indigenous communities?

The first step is to let go of assumptions. It is easy to approach rural and indigenous communities with preconceptions—about what they need, how they live, or what solutions will work for them. Real impact starts with actively listening and unlearning. Every community has its own systems, knowledge, and aspirations.

Another key piece of advice is to recognise that rural and indigenous communities are not passive “beneficiaries”. Just as we expect to have a say in decisions that affect our own lives, rural and indigenous communities must have the space to lead their own development. Many communities already hold deep knowledge of sustainable resource management, local governance, and economic resilience. The role of external support should be to create enabling conditions, not to dictate outcomes.

We also need to challenge traditional success metrics. Many projects are evaluated by numbers—eg, number of connections, number of systems installed, amount of power generated. However, the real question should be: Has this support improved people’s lives in the way they envisioned?

Finally, be in it for the long run. Real change takes time. Building trust, developing meaningful relationships, and ensuring long-term sustainability requires patience. Short-term funding cycles or project-based approaches often fail because they do not consider how communities will sustain and build upon initiatives after external support ends. It is critical to think beyond immediate impact and invest in long-term capacity building, knowledge-sharing, and community-driven decision-making.