Same intervention, different outcomes: The politics of energy transition planning in Ghana and Kenya

Under what conditions does externally supported energy transition planning produce locally owned and sustainable policy outcomes rather than short-lived plans, and what role do institutional gatekeeping, bureaucratic authority, and the sequencing of technical and political processes play in shaping those conditions? To unpack these questions, this paper comparatively analyses SEforALL's Energy Transition Investment Plan development in Ghana and Kenya, revealing striking divergences in processes and outcomes. Drawing on 22 semi-structured interviews and the theories of policy translation and political settlements, the analysis demonstrates that Ghana's experience was characterised by institutional bypass, limited domestic agency, and a significant reduction in the plan's operational priority following electoral change. Kenya's trajectory, conversely, featured institutional resistance that compelled collaborative engagement, resulting in sustainable policy embedding. The findings reveal that successful policy translation depends not merely on technical capacity but on power configuration, bureaucratic authority, and political settlements. This research advances understanding of energy transition politics whilst offering practical insights for international organisations and governments navigating the complex politics of translating global climate imperatives into national policies in developing countries.