**3. Methodology**

In terms of renewable energy evaluation and selection, the quantitative approach appears to be the most popular method used [2–10] as it offers a number of benefits, notably providing a more tangible data analysis thus preventing perceived biases [11]. The qualitative approach, on the other hand, takes the benefits of the flexibility of qualitative data and the level of feedback that is capable of explaining phenomena that are difficult to be quantified [11]. In the context of renewable energy selection, many unquantifiable parameters need to be considered, for instance, appropriate technology, political impacts, capacity building, stakeholder engagement, community acceptance, etc. [12]. Obtaining a deeper understanding of these unquantifiable parameters in renewable energy development can be done by incorporating the roles of stakeholders within this industry. Yudha and Tjahjono (2019) [13] performed a stakeholder analysis to map out the actors in the renewable and sustainable energy sector in Indonesia using PESTLE (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental) analysis. Each stakeholder encompasses specific areas, for example, the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources covers the political and economic aspect, while the public covers the social aspect. According to this study, there are numerous stakeholders in the renewable energy sectors that can provide thoughts and opinion in regard to renewable energy development in Indonesia [13]. However, incorporating all this input using a quantitative approach would be less effective than using a qualitative approach.

This research employed a qualitative approach based on a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) as a primary research method, complemented by the document analysis (Figure 1).

**Figure 1.** Flowchart of primary group discussion and document analysis.

This method is selected since it allows the researcher/interviewer to question several individuals systematically and simultaneously [14] or in this case, the stakeholders in sustainable and renewable energy. FGD, or also known as the group interviewing method can be based on structured, semi-structured, or unstructured interviews [15,16] and can generate data [17–19] which can be both descriptive and explanatory [20]. This method is frequently used as a qualitative approach to gain an in-depth understanding of complex issues [21]. Krueger (1994) [11] warned that there are advantages and disadvantages to conducting an FGD. The clear advantage of FGD is that it can capture real-life data within a social environment, and it has high flexibility, high face validity, and a speedy result, in addition to its low cost. However, when conducting FGDs, care must be taken when moderating it, as it can potentially be a problem when there are differences within the group, in which case it could lead to a great deal of difficulty in analysing the outcomes. Following the primary group discussion, document analysis was performed to corroborate the points raised during the FGD and to formulate the policy priorities on Indonesia's renewable energy. The process of policy development and confirmation in this FGD is shown in Figure 2.

**Figure 2.** FGD process of policy development and confirmation.

The group size can range from as few as four to as many as 12 people within a conducive environment to engage in a guided discussion of a certain topic or issue [19], in this case, prospects and challenges in Indonesia's renewable energy development. The participating subjects are selected on the basis of relevance to the topic under study. In addition to this, special consideration is given to the role of the researcher/interviewer, as the moderator in the focus group process. As Babbie (2010) [22] comments: "*In a focus group*

*interview, much more than in any other type of interview, the interviewer has to develop the skills of a moderator*", thus there is a need to control the dynamics within the group.

The FGD was conducted on 15 January 2020, incorporating four participants as the sample population, plus one of the researchers, who acted as the moderator. The participants were chosen due to their expertise and experience in renewable energy development in Indonesia. Their representation encompasses the collective view of stakeholders identified by Yudha and Tjahjono [13], cutting across the political, economic, social, technological, legal, and environmental (PESTLE) aspects of the renewable energy development in Indonesia (Table 1). The participants represent the government of the Republic of Indonesia, comprised of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (executory) and the Special Task Force for Upstream Oil and Gas Business Activities (SKK Migas; regulatory); industry actors, comprised of the renewable energy division of the Indonesian House of Commerce, as well as a business actor and observer (member of public).

**Table 1.** Summary of FGD participants and their representation in the renewable energy sector in Indonesia (modified from Yudha and Tjahjono (2019) [13]).


Without necessarily reducing the essence of the perspective of PESTLE analysis, the numbers of the participants were purposely kept to a small number to keep the forum conducive. This purposive sampling of participants was ensured to cater for the range of expertise at hand, to enable the document analysis that was also used as a basis of the analysis during the FGD.

The unit of analysis chosen, consistent to the previously applied PESTLE method of analysis, is the stakeholders' outlooks and responses with regards to renewable energy development in Indonesia. In this research, the FGD also served other purposes, such as developing specific insight and practical knowledge, as well as obtaining the feedbacks and propositions for renewable energy development, based on each stakeholder's perspectives.

In addition, the FGD was also open to members of the press, including the House of Representative's official press, covering the political, environment and legal aspect, to inquire and provide input to the participants during the questions and answer session.
