Mini-grids are increasingly deployed to expand rural electrification in developing countries, yet evidence on service-quality performance remains uneven. This systematic review synthesises empirical evidence from 22 peer-reviewed studies (2005–2025) on rural mini-grid performance across six energy-access indicators: electrification rate, availability of supply, hours of supply, affordability, reliability, and consistency (power quality). Using PRISMA-guided database searches in Scopus and Web of Science, 138 records were identified; following de-duplication and screening, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. The evidence base is concentrated in Africa and Asia, and most studies adopt mixed-methods approaches combining household- and/or enterprise-level evidence with system or operational data. Across indicators, electrification outcomes are frequently positive but reported using heterogeneous metrics, often relying on connection counts rather than population-referenced rates (10/22 studies report electrification outcomes). Service availability and hours of supply vary widely, ranging from evening-only provision (~5 h/day) to near-continuous service (24 h/day), with several studies documenting demand–capacity mismatch and load shedding (9/22 quantify availability; 12/22 quantify hours). Affordability is most frequently reported (16/22 studies), spanning substantial household cost reductions in some settings to high tariffs that constrain uptake in remote contexts. Reliability is seldom quantified using extractable outage/downtime metrics (4/22 studies). No study reports standardised voltage/frequency power-quality measures; only proxy evidence relates to consistency, leaving power quality as a major evidence gap. Mini-grids can deliver meaningful improvements in rural electricity access, but the literature remains constrained by inconsistent indicator definitions, limited standardised reliability/power-quality measurement, and short monitoring horizons. Future research and regulation should prioritise harmonised service-quality metrics and longer-term, field-based performance evaluation.
Effiong et al. (2026) studied this question.