How much do alternative cookstoves reduce biomass fuel use? Evidence from North India |
| |
| Institution: | 1. School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA;2. Department of Sociology, Delhi School of Economics, Delhi University, Delhi 110007, India;3. Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA;4. Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA;5. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA;6. Energy and Resources Group, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, Haryana 122002, India;1. UNHCR, Rue de Montbrillant 92, Geneva 1201, Switzerland;2. Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA;3. Walter A. Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA;1. Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, Campus Box 1196, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA;2. Foundation For Ecological Security, 16/620-B, 1st Cross, Seshappathota, Madanapalle 517 325, District: Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh, India;1. Department of Public Policy and Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB#8120, 211 West Cameron Avenue, Chapel Hill, NC, USA;2. Center for Agricultural Research and Development, Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources, P.O. Box 219, Lilongwe, Malawi;1. The University of Agriculture Peshawar, Pakistan;2. Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Pakistan;3. Department of Statistics, University of Peshawar, Pakistan;4. Fatima Jinnah Women University, Rawalpindi, Pakistan;1. Department of Economics, Mekelle University, P.O. Box 451, Mekelle, Tigray, Ethiopia;2. Environment and Climate Research Center (ECRC), Ethiopian Development Research Institute (EDRI), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia;3. Department of Economics, Portland State University, USA;4. Department of Economics, University of Gothenburg, Sweden;5. Department of Economics, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia;6. Development Research Group, World Bank, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Despite widespread global efforts to promote clean cookstoves to achieve improvements in air and forest quality, and to reduce global climate change, surprisingly little is known about the degree to which these actually reduce biomass fuel consumption in real-world settings. Using data from in-house weighing of fuel conducted in rural India, we examine the impact of cleaner cookstoves ⿿ most of which are LPG stoves ⿿ on three key outcomes related to solid fuel use. Our results suggest that using a clean cookstove is associated with daily reductions of about 4.5 kg of biomass fuel, 160 fewer minutes cooking on traditional stoves, and 105 fewer minutes collecting biomass fuels. These findings of substantial savings are robust to the use of estimators with varying levels of control for selection, and to alternative data obtained from household self-reports. Our results support the idea that efforts to promote clean stoves among poor rural households can reduce solid fuel use and cooking time, and that rebound effects toward greater amounts of cooking on multiple stoves are not sufficient to eliminate these gains. We also find, however, that households who have greater wealth, fewer members, are in less marginalized groups, and practice other health-averting behaviors, are more likely to use these cleaner stoves, which suggests that socio-economic status plays an important role in determining who benefits from such technologies. Future efforts to capture social benefits must therefore consider how to promote the use of alternative technologies by poor households, given that these households are least likely to own clean stoves. |
| |
| Keywords: | Improved cookstoves Heckman selection Solid fuel use India |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
