The authors acknowledge support from the Climate Compatible Growth programme (#CCG) and the UK Partnering for Accelerated Climate Transition (UK PACT) programme of the UK's Foreign Development and Commonwealth Office (FCDO). The views expressed in this research do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies. REFERENCES • UNESCO. 2021. ‘UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science’. SC-PCB- SPP/2021/OS/UROS. Paris, France: UNESCO. • Wilkinson, Mark D., Michel Dumontier, IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg, Gabrielle Appleton, Myles Axton, Arie Baak, Niklas Blomberg, et al. 2016. ‘The FAIR Guiding Principles for Scientific Data Management and Stewardship’. Scientific Data 3 (1): 160018. • Open Data Charter. 2015. ‘International Open Data Charter’. opendatacharter.net. There is an increased recognition of the need for openness, transparency, and accessibility of both governance and technical aspects of long-term systems planning, including data to inform the planning process. In Kenya, the new constitution is pushing for reforms aiming at increasing the participation of institutions and county govt. into decision-making processes. This is valid for energy data management and governance. Hence, this paper investigates: how can an open data approach to data management and governance effectively support robust and inclusive long-term energy planning in Kenya? RESULTS Overlap of roles and responsibilities System Design: aiming for up-to-datedness, accuracy, security, and reliability. • Centralised system with controlled access, need for easy data aggregation/disaggregation function Transparency and Accessibility: • Positive: data as resource to support decision- making in society and create trust) • Critical: fear of data being misused, distorted, expose to scrutiny. Open Data value: positive, but with concerns (i.e. credibility, up-to-datedness, security). • Strengths: free and easy accessibility, good formatting, useful for complementing and validating existing datasets. • Weaknesses: highly aggregated, outdated, non- validated, non-credible. METHODOLOGY 1. Stakeholders’ mapping: National + County govt., energy utilities, statistical office, energy regulator, International Organisation 2. Qualitative Document Analysis • 2010 Constitution of Kenya • 2018 National Energy Policy • 2019 Energy Act 3. Semi-structured Interviews: • 10 stakeholders • focus on: system design, transparency and accessibility, the value of open data 4. Assessing the evidence against open science values and principles • UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science • Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable (FAIR) Data • International Open Data Charter (ODC) NEXT STEPS: UK PACT project, year 2 • Supporting stakeholders in identifying common datasets of interest and comfortable ‘degree of openness’ for data sharing • Prototyping an energy data repository DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Open data can address the following: supporting collaboration and simplified data processing; data accessibility, retrievability, and coherence; enabling accountability and citizens awareness. Main challenges: 1) contradictory understanding of what open data entails and how it can be realised in practice affects their suitability; 2) principles and practices differ and require to find compromises. Recommendations: • Need for further investigation as to what resources, expertise and infrastructure is available to handle energy data in Kenya. • Need for considering various degree of openness, as to best fit the Kenya context. County-level planning SIG Energy Data renewable energy data energy resources data energy infrastruct. data petroleum data renewable resources maps electricity T&D data County Governments Grid Operator(s) Cabinet Secretary National Government REREC EPRA Data Governance and Open Science in Energy Planning: A case study of the Kenyan ecosystem A. Beltramo, A. Leonard, J. Tomei, W. Usher Agnese Beltramo, Email: beltramo@kth.se Authors’ affiliations: