Skip to main content

At the intersection of green hydrogen and social justice, the Hyphen project in Namibia represents one of Africa's most ambitious sustainable development initiatives. This large-scale green hydrogen project promises to transform both the energy landscape and local communities – but it doesn’t come without particular reflections to be made, especially with emerging studies that show the tendency to neglect sociopolitical considerations and prioritise donor interests. It's precisely this complexity that drew Marlene Merchert, a second-year MPhil Development Studies student and 2024 Ignacio Ellacuría Grant recipient, to examine the project through an energy justice lens. 

Her academic journey was shaped by diverse experiences. In Germany, Marlene transitioned from business management in sales and consulting, and working for an IT company, to studying sustainable management while working as a freelance photographer. Ultimately, she realised that research was her path to asking the right questions, developing transdisciplinary approaches, and serving local interests.

It was a lecturer, who Marlene had approached almost by chance, who suggested that she should consider applying to Oxford after reading her paper on climate pricing. During the application process, Marlene recalls writing in her journal, "I feel like I'm going crazy applying to such an institution!" And even after being admitted, she didn't have an easy start: “Development Studies is completely different than what I had imagined. I struggled in the first and second terms: I thought I was not going to be able to pass because I didn’t have a background in the subject.” 

Was it the theoretical heaviness? 
Heavily theoretical, yes. A lot of philosophy and anthropology, and a completely different way of thinking and seeing the world than I was used to. I came in with a very economic mindset, viewing development simply as economic growth, optimising welfare... So, at first, the more critical perspective in Development Studies felt like a very abstract way of seeing the world. But throughout the degree, I started to understand the benefits of these approaches. I felt like I could really combine theories and practices. 

And how did you combine the two as you were designing your research? How did you approach transdisciplinarity and local sensitivity?
First, I find it important to understand the difference between interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. The former takes different disciplines together and draws on them but doesn’t necessarily synthesise them in a combined framework. Transdisciplinarity on the other hand does - and that's what I try to achieve in my research. I connect literature on just transitions, energy and environmental justice with systems thinking to develop a more holistic approach.

Second, I aimed to design a locally sensitive approach by adopting a participatory approach whenever possible, and including a broad range of stakeholders: non-academic, politicians, civil servants, people from industry and civil societies, traditional authorities, and local communities. I used participatory systems mapping, which involves getting a bunch of people around the table, to discuss and visualise connections using post-it notes. I wanted to see stakeholders not as research subjects, but rather as collaborators in the research. 

Another way of designing locally sensitive research lies in the question that you’re asking. A lot of questions are rooted in academic interest: we have this theory, and we want to develop it. Research should not just serve academic debates but also address locally relevant concerns.



Now that you’ve done your fieldwork, and are progressing into your degree, how do you think academia can be in service of communities?
I love this question, because it touches on something I often critique in Development Studies. At times, academia can feel like an ivory tower, drive solely by academic interests. But can research be relevant? I think it absolutely can - and should be. We need to ask questions that matter to the people on the ground. Before setting up my research, for example, I spoke with Namibian activists to understand what issues they found important and what questions they believed needed asking.

Another challenge is how we communicate our findings. The way we speak in academia, and how we publish, makes much of our work inaccessible. Coming from a different discipline myself, I felt like I had to learn a new way of thinking and writing. I understand there might be a need for a particular language for an academic listener, but we should also think about publishing things for our local stakeholders in a more accessible format, and actively reach out to share our findings. 

It forces you to be more genuine and real in your research as well. Oftentimes, because academia incentivises you to publish so much, you’re inclined to develop some interpretations that might be a little bit removed from what is actually going on. I think that, by committing yourself to make your findings accessible to your stakeholders, you’re forced to be grounded in reality. 

Through this grounding, has this experience given you new insights on the relationship between scholarship and social transformation?
It has definitely shown me how much research can contribute, if it asks the right questions. For example, my stakeholders expressed a strong interest in the maps, which is not a technique that is well established in Development Studies yet. This highlighted the potential impact of academic work when it actively integrates diverse perspectives, including those of both marginalised groups and decision-makers. When I talked to activist groups, for example, there was a lot of demand for knowledge. If we can use our research to inform and empower these groups, it has the potential to drive real change.

The Grant encourages students to adopt an integral ecology approach. Could you see it activated in your research? Was it a driving concept?
Absolutely. Systems thinking aligns closely with an integral ecology approach, as it promotes a holistic perspective and emphasises the interconnectedness of social, ecological, and economic systems. One key realisation in my research, for example, is that all dimensions of justice - which are often treated as siloed dimensions - are interconnected. And not only are they interconnected; they also are shaped by different factors, which are in turn interconnected. I approach these dimensions as systems, where each dimension of justice is a system formed by different factors, and the different subsystems are also connected to shape this broader system of energy justice. Through the method of systems mapping, I am trying to visualise these interconnections. I think we intuitively understand that everything is interconnected, but it’s often not reflected in the way we write about things. 

What drew you to this Grant?
It’s transdisciplinary and tackles real-world problems - that really stood out to me. This was actually the first grant I ever received. I had struggled with scholarship applications and interviews before, but this grant focused more on what I wanted to do rather than just my past achievements. That made a huge difference. In a way, it also opened doors - once you have one scholarship, it builds credibility for others, and I did receive another one afterward. I'm especially grateful that the selection process was centred on the project itself and the potential others saw in it.

Congratulations for both, and hopefully more in the future, if you want to continue... Do you?
Yes, I definitely want to continue doing research! For sure!
 
Any advice for our future applicants who might be thinking of transdisciplinary and locally sensitive research? 
Firstly, talk to as many people as possible. I had multiple calls with people - both locally and in Oxford - who helped me refine my focus and ask relevant questions. Have a participatory-driven approach, collaborate with actors on the ground.  Second, read widely and deeply across disciplines. There’s so much knowledge that is siloed, and we must find new ways of applying different ways of thinking from one discipline to the other. I think cross-fertilisation between disciplines is key to developing new ways of thinking and problem-solving.

Interconnection is always at play!
People change the way you think about things. In academia and in life: if I hadn’t talked to that lecturer, I would have never been here.