How Can Improved Stoves Achieve Higher Diffusion Rates
Amongst Households at the Bottom of the Energy Ladder?
Temilade Sesan | Institute for Science and Society | University of Nottingham NG7 2RD UK | [email protected] | Supervisors: Dr Sujatha Raman, Dr Ian Forbes, Dr Mike Clifford
Fuel Use is Proportional to Income Level
Introduction
An estimated 2.4 billion people worldwide continue to depend on
solid biomass fuels to meet their cooking energy needs. Local
practices whereby biomass is burnt over open fires and traditional
cooking devices are considered by global experts to be the largest
source of indoor air pollution in developing countries.
Primary
Household
Fuel
Improved stoves offer great health and environmental benefits to
solid biomass users by reducing or completely eradicating smoke
emissions. In addition, improved stove projects are often explicitly
targeted at improving livelihoods and enhancing empowerment
opportunities for local populations.
However, since the promotion of improved stoves by local and
international organisations since the 1950s, their rate of diffusion
amongst target populations has been consistently low.
Average Annual Fuel Expenditure
(US$)
Low Income
Middle Income
High Income
Fuelwood
25
18
64
Kerosene
96
317
681
295
431
1053
LPG
Total
Hypothesis
416
766
1200
Fuelwood
Kerosene
Comparative analysis of two improved stove projects in Nigeria and
Kenya.
Main fieldwork: 61 semi-structured in-depth interviews,
participant observation sessions
•
In-depth analysis of key project documents
Case Studies
•
The market route prescribed by implementers for scaling up
diffusion of improved stoves is not sufficient to cater for the
energy needs of the poorest, who sometimes cannot
participate in formal markets
•
Stove projects that are labelled ‘bottom-up’ – much like
those which are explicitly top-down - often take the priorities
of the project, rather than those of local energy users, as
their starting point
•
Uncritically engaging the ‘community’ in bottom-up stove
projects means that the goal of empowerment is often not
achieved amongst the most vulnerable groups
Conclusions
•
The participatory methods employed in bottom-up stove
projects can potentially deliver more sustainable outcomes
than top-down approaches. However, the content of
participation needs to be revised to allow for identification of
local priorities
•
The expressed priorities of local energy users may not be
stove-related. Stove diffusion may be improved in the long
term as a result of some other intervention that directly
addresses an issue of immediate priority for users, e.g.
income generation
•
Market-based models may appear to be a relatively fast route
to achieving scale in a sustainable way, but they are often
ineffective with the poorest at whom smoke alleviation
interventions were targeted in the first instance
600
400
Proposed average
annual expenditure
on improved fuel
(ethanol) = US$ 138
0
Low Income
The CleanCook Stove and Fuel Project, Nigeria
Households with the least access to improved stoves coincide
with those that use solid biomass as their primary fuel source
800
200
The Upesi Stove Project, Kenya
•
1000
Average Annual Fuel Expenditure (US$)
•
Households at the bottom of the income and energy ladder
are the least likely to adopt improved stoves because it is less
cost-effective for them than the combination of energy
sources that their incomes currently allow them to adopt
LPG
Interpretivist approach employed focuses on understanding, rather
than explaining, social behaviour in particular cases.
Preliminary fieldwork: Telephone interviews and project visits
to determine nature and scope of both projects
•
1798
Fuelwood Users Can Least Access Improved Stoves
Methodology
•
Results
Average Annual Fuel Expenditure by Income Group. Adapted from Bailey et al. (2006) Baseline Data for 150
Homes in Delta State, Nigeria.
Low rates of diffusion of improved stoves are a result of the topdown, market-based approaches commonly employed by project
implementers. Higher diffusion rates are more likely to be produced
with bottom-up, participatory approaches in which stove projects
are designed to reflect local user priorities.
Qualitative research methods:
Local Priorities Outrank ‘Expert’ Priorities
Middle Income
Fuel Type by Income Group
High Income
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the Petroleum Technology Development Fund of the Federal
Government of Nigeria for providing funding for this research. Special thanks also go to
Practical Action East Africa and Project Gaia International for facilitating project access.