NIGER Beyond Connections Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework NIGER Beyond Connections Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework Marina Brutinel, Farouk Nabourema, Niki Angelou, Bryan Bonsuk Koo, Elisa Portale and Dana Rysankova ©2020 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org Publication date: June 2020 This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Report and Cover design: Lauren Kaley Johnson, GCSPM, The World Bank Group Text Layout: Duina Reyes Cover photo: World Bank CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii ABBREVIATIONS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Access to Electricity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Access to Modern Energy Cooking Solutions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Gender Analysis.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi MEASURING ENERGY ACCESS IN NIGER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii Country Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Global Survey on Energy Access Using the Multi-Tier Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Access to electricity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Access to modern energy cooking solutions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Using the Multi-Tier Framework to Drive Policy and Investment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Multi-Tier Framework Survey Implementation in Niger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Assessing Access to Electricity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Technologies.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 MTF tiers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 MTF attributes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Use.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Improving Access to Electricity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Providing electricity access to households without a source of electricity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Improving electricity access among grid-connected households.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Policy Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 ACCESS TO MODERN ENERGY COOKING SOLUTIONS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Assessing Access to Modern Energy Cooking Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 MTF tiers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 MTF attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 i NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework Improving Access to Modern Energy Cooking Solutions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Policy Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 GENDER ANALYSIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Access to Electricity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Access to Modern Energy Cooking Solutions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Policy Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 ANNEX 1. MULTI-TIER FRAMEWORK.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 ANNEX 2. SAMPLING STRATEGY.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Sample Frame and Sample Selection Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Listing and Second-degree Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 ANNEX 3. COOKSTOVE TYPOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 REFERENCES.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 ii BOXES BOX 1 • Summary of RISE energy access indicator for Niger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 BOX 2 • Minimum electricity requirements, by tier of electricity access. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 BOX 3 • Typology of off-grid solar devices and tier calculation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 BOX 4 • Typology of cookstoves in Niger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 TABLES TABLE 1 • Appliances by load level and associated Capacity tiers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 TABLE 2 • Distribution of final enumeration areas and sampled households, MTF Survey, Niger.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 TABLE A1.1 • The Multi-Tier Framework for measuring access to electricity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 TABLE A1.2 • The Multi-Tier Framework for measuring access to modern energy cooking solutions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 TABLE A2.1 • Breakdown of sample enumeration areas by region, urban/rural, and electrification status. . . . . . . . 56 TABLE A2.2 • Breakdown of sample urban households by region and electrification status.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 TABLE A2.3 • Breakdown of sample rural households by region and electrification status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 MAPS MAP 1 • Map of Niger.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 MAP 2 • Sample distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 FIGURES FIGURE 1 • Progress in improving electricity access, by indicator, 2010, 2015, and 2017. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 FIGURE 2 • Distribution of expenditure quintiles (urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 FIGURE 3 • Access to electricity by technology (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 FIGURE 4 • Access to electricity by technology (urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 FIGURE 5 • Access to electricity by technology and across expenditure quintiles (nationwide).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 FIGURE 6 • MTF Tier distribution (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 FIGURE 7 • MTF Tier distribution, by technology (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 FIGURE 8 • Distribution of households by Capacity (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 FIGURE 9 • Distribution of households based on daily Availability (over a 24-hour day) (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 FIGURE 10 • Distribution of households based on evening Availability (4-hour period) (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 FIGURE 11 • Distribution of households based on Reliability (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 FIGURE 12 • Distribution of households based on Quality (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 iii NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework FIGURE 13 • Distribution of households based on Affordability (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 FIGURE 14 • Distribution of households based on Formality (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 FIGURE 15 • Distribution of households based on Health and Safety (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 FIGURE 16 • Household ownership of appliances by load level (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 FIGURE 17 • Types of appliances owned by grid-connected households (urban/rural) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 FIGURE 18 • Types of appliances owned by households with grid and off-grid solutions (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . 21 FIGURE 19 • Monthly household expenditure on and consumption of electricity (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 FIGURE 20 • Monthly grid electricity consumption by expenditure quintile (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 FIGURE 21 • Share of household budget spent on grid electricity by expenditure quintile (nationwide).. . . . . . . . . . 23 FIGURE 22 • MTF Tier 0 disaggregation, by source of electricity (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 FIGURE 23 • Comparison between village electrification and household electrification rates (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 FIGURE 24 • Barriers to gaining access to grid electricity (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 FIGURE 25 • Willingness to pay for the grid connection fee (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 FIGURE 26 • Distribution of households by share of budget spent on electricity (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . 25 FIGURE 27 • Willingness to pay for a solar home system (nationwide).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 FIGURE 28 • Reasons cited by households for not being willing to pay for a solar home system (nationwide).. 26 FIGURE 29 • MTF Tier distribution of grid-connected households (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 FIGURE 30 • Distribution of grid-connected households based on daily Availability (over a 24-hour day) (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 FIGURE 31 • Distribution of grid-connected households based on evening Availability (4-hour period) (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 FIGURE 32 • Distribution of grid-connected households based on Reliability (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . 28 FIGURE 33 • Distribution of grid-connected households based on Affordability (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . 29 FIGURE 34 • Main issues related to grid electricity supply (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 FIGURE 35 • Share of grid-connected households using a backup power source for lighting (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 FIGURE 36 • Distribution of cookstove types and fuel used (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 FIGURE 37 • Distribution of cookstoves and fuels used (urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 FIGURE 38 • MTF tier distribution (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 FIGURE 39 • Tier distribution of Cooking Exposure (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 FIGURE 40 • Distribution of households based on Cooking Exposure, by primary cookstove (nationwide).. . . . . . . 36 FIGURE 41 • Distribution of households based on ventilation, by primary biomass cookstove (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 FIGURE 42 • Distribution of households based on Convenience (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 FIGURE 43 • Distribution of households based on Affordability (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 FIGURE 44 • Distribution of households based on Fuel Availability (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 FIGURE 45 • Tier distribution by stove technology.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 iv FIGURE 46 • Main stoves used, by expenditure quintile (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 FIGURE 47 • Average share of household expenditure on cooking fuel by stove technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 FIGURE 48 • Main fuel distribution by expenditure quintile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 FIGURE 49 • Distribution of households by sex of the household head (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 FIGURE 50 • Marital status of the household head, by sex (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 FIGURE 51 • Distribution of male- and female-headed households by household expenditure quintile (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 FIGURE 52 • Access to finance (loan/credit) by sex of the head of household (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . 47 FIGURE 53 • Access to electricity, by technology and by sex of the household head (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 FIGURE 54 • MTF electricity tier distribution, by sex of the household head (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . 48 FIGURE 55 • Barriers to gaining access to the electricity grid, by sex of the household head (nationwide). . . . . . . 49 FIGURE 56 • Ownership of appliances by load level, by gender of the household head (nationwide, urban/rural, grid/off-grid access).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 FIGURE 57 • Access to cooking solutions, by type of primary cookstove and by sex of the household head (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 FIGURE 58 • MTF cooking tier distribution, by sex of the household head (nationwide, urban/rural).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 FIGURE 59 • Time spent on cooking (minutes per day) by sex and age of household members (nationwide). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 FIGURE 60 • Time spent on fuel preparation (hours per week), by sex and age of household members (nationwide, urban/rural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 v NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS T he international Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) initiative would not have been possible without the valued technical and financial support of the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), which is administered by the World Bank. ESMAP is a global knowledge and technical assistance program to support low- and middle-income countries to increase their knowledge as well as their institutional capacity to achieve environmentally sustainable energy solutions for both poverty reduction and economic growth. ESMAP is funded by Australia, Austria, Denmark, the European Commission, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the Rockefeller Foundation, as well as the World Bank. Financial and technical support from ESMAP for the MTF survey is gratefully acknowledged. This Energy Access Diagnostic Report details the results of the MTF survey in Niger and provides the status of both access to electricity and access to modern energy cooking solutions in the country. This initiative has relied on the critical support of multiple entities and individuals that the MTF team would like to acknowledge. First and foremost, MTF-ESMAP would like to thank the Government of Niger for its enthusiasm and support for this project, particularly the Ministry of Energy. MTF-ESMAP’s partnership with the Institut National de la Statistique du Niger (INS), the survey implementer in Niger, was also critical to the successful implementation of this national survey initiative. All mentioned have helped guide the MTF team and given their support throughout the entire process of survey preparation, implementation, and analysis. Support and contributions from the World Bank Niger Energy Team were also vital to realizing the MTF’s Niger survey project. This team included Léon Biaou (Senior Energy Specialist), David Vilar (Senior Energy Specialist), and Laurent Durix (Consultant); the field coordinators, Marina Brutinel (Consultant), Farouk Nabourema (Consultant), Bryan Bonsuk Koo (Energy Specialist), and Sandra Keller (Consultant); and the MTF Task Team Leaders, Dana Rysankova (Global Lead for Energy Access) and Elisa Portale (Senior Energy Specialist). The MTF team would like to extend its thanks to the Living Standards Measurement Study (LSMS) team, whose support and input was critical to the realization of the MTF survey. Additionally, the MTF team would like to recognize Crispin Pemberton-Pigott (Consultant) for providing technical support to the MTF team in identifying cookstove performance. The gender analysis of the report was written by Nicolina Angelou (Consultant), Diego Wachs (Consultant), and Marina Brutinel (Consultant). Suchada Nevis helped improve the graphic presentation and edited the report. vii NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework ABBREVIATIONS CFAF CFA francs (Currency)* CFL compact fluorescent lamp EA enumeration area ESMAP Energy Sector Management Assistance Program ICS improved cookstove kW kilowatt kWh kilowatt-hour LED light-emitting diode LPG liquefied petroleum gas MTF Multi-Tier Framework RISE Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy SHS solar home system SLS solar lighting system W watt WHO World Health Organization WTP willingness to pay *Average exchange rate, February 2, 2018, was US$1 = CFAF 524.35. viii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Niger is a vast, landlocked, and mostly arid Sub-Saharan country, located in the heart of the Sahel region, with a rapidly growing population, estimated at 22.4 million (World Bank 2018a), of which the majority lives in rural areas. Despite considerable progress in the area of poverty reduction, extreme poverty remains very high, at an estimated 41.5% in 2019, affecting more than 9 million people in a country prone to climate risk and insecurity. The World Bank, with support from the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), has launched the Global Survey on Energy Access, using the Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) approach. The survey’s objective is to provide more nuanced data on energy access, including access to electricity and cooking solutions. The MTF approach goes beyond the traditional binary measurement of energy access—for example, “having or not having” a connection to electricity, “using or not using” clean fuels in cooking—to capture the multidimensional nature of energy access and the vast range of technologies and sources that can provide energy access, while accounting for the wide differences in user experience.1 ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY The MTF defines access to electricity according to a spectrum that ranges from Tier 0 (no access) to Tier 5 (full access) through seven attributes: Capacity, Availability, Reliability, Quality, Affordability, Formality, and Health and Safety.2 The final aggregate tier for a given household is based on the lowest tier that that household attained among all the attributes. • Source of electricity: The MTF survey data show that, as of 2018, 19.5% of Niger households have access to electricity through either the national grid or off-grid sources, while the remaining 80.5% have no access to electricity. Four out of five households with access to a source of electricity are connected to the national grid (15.8%), and the remaining 3.7% primarily use solar off-grid solutions. A severe gap exists in access to electricity between urban and rural areas: close to half of urban households (45.4%) access electricity through the national grid, while 7.3% of rural households do. • MTF aggregate tier for access to electricity: The MTF defines Tier 1 or above as having access to electricity based on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator 7.1.1. Nationwide, 17.5% of Niger households are in Tier 1 or above for electricity access. Specifically, 48.8% of urban households and 8.5% of rural households are in Tier 1 or above. Grid users are mainly concentrated in Tiers 3 through 5, while the very few users of off-grid solutions are primarily in Tiers 0 through 2. • Households in Tier 0: Nationwide, 82.5% of households are in Tier 0 for access to electricity, and virtually all of them do not have any source of electricity. For households without any source of electricity, it will be critical to provide either a grid connection or an off-grid energy solution. A major barrier preventing households from gaining a grid connection is the up-front cost. More flexible payment plan options or access to financing, such as subsidies, could help in addressing the burden of paying high up-front costs, while other direct costs associated with gaining a connection, such as internal wiring, should be examined. Mini-grid development could be considered in areas not The MTF access rate includes access provided by off-grid technologies, which is often excluded by the binary rate, but excludes connections that do not meet its 1 criteria for minimum level of service. For descriptions of the MTF and its attributes, see Annex 1. 2 ix NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework covered by the grid, where sizeable electricity demand exists. Off-grid solar products could help households in other villages not yet reached by the grid infrastructure. Expanding access to such solutions relies on both developing the market for solar products in Niger (by expanding product offerings and also initiating a consumer awareness program) as well as addressing affordability issues through payment plans. • Grid-connected households: Grid-connected households are mostly in higher tiers: four out of five grid-connected households (79.6%) are in Tier 3 or above, with 31.1% being in the highest tier, Tier 5. Challenges related to Availability, Reliability, and Affordability are the main ones preventing grid-connected households from being in the highest tier. ACCESS TO MODERN ENERGY COOKING SOLUTIONS The MTF measures access to modern energy cooking solutions along a spectrum ranging from Tier 0 (no access) to Tier 5 (full access) through six attributes: Cooking Exposure, Cookstove Efficiency, Convenience, Safety of the Primary Cookstove, Affordability, Feul availability.3 The final aggregate tier for a household is based on the lowest tier that the household attained among all the attributes. • Primary cookstove and fuel: Niger households reported using one of four types of cookstoves as their main cookstove: 86.8% of households use a three-stone stove,4 7.1% use a traditional stove, 4.6% use a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stove, and the remaining 1.5% use an improved cookstove. Rural and urban households rely on different cooking technologies. While virtually all rural households cook on three-stone stoves (95.1%), this share, among urban households, drops to more than half (58.1%). Beyond this, urban households rely to an almost equal degree on LPG stoves (19.9%) and traditional cookstoves (19.2%). LPG penetration is essentially an urban phenomenon (such stoves are used by only 0.3% of households in rural areas). The share of households who practice stove stacking is negligible. • MTF aggregate tier for access to modern energy cooking solutions: The majority of households are concentrated in Tiers 0 and 1 (21.2% and 74.1%, respectively). Households in Tiers 0 and 1 for access to cooking solutions mostly use biomass fuels5. Most rural households are in Tier 0 and 1 while 20.2% of urban households are in Tiers 2 to 5 with 8.6% reaching the top tier. Clean fuel stove users tend to be in higher tiers for access to modern energy cooking solutions. • The main constraint for 94.4% of households in Tiers 0 and 1 is Cooking Exposure (as indicated by their use of three-stone stoves as primary stoves). Since no improved cookstoves are currently on the market in Niger, a possible solution is to introduce adequate cookstoves for firewood (used as a primary fuel by 87.5% of Niger households) based on an assessment of households’ needs, preferences, and willingness to pay—and the promotion of the stoves’ use through awareness- raising campaigns. • The promotion of clean fuel stoves is the ultimate goal in improving access to modern cooking solutions, especially for those who can more readily afford and acquire them, notably in urban areas. It is recommended that the potential for increasing the adoption of LPG stoves be analyzed, 3 For descriptions of the MTF and its attributes, see Annex 1. 4 The three-stone stove consists of three stones of approximately the same height on which a pot may rest over a fire built amid the stones. 5 Biomass fuels used in Niger are firewood (collected or bought), charcoal, animal waste/dung, crop residue/plant biomass x Executive Summary and a comprehensive and systematic plan be devised that covers both the supply and demand side, including awareness-raising campaigns. • For the significant share (81.6%) of households lacking both access to the grid and access to an improved cookstove for cooking with biomass, synergies can be found by providing public support to distributors that can deliver both solar products and improved cookstoves to this segment, improving access to electricity as well as access to modern cooking solutions while reducing the cost of serving these households. GENDER ANALYSIS Nationwide, 7.8% of Niger households are headed by women. Female-headed households account for 10% of urban households and 7.2% of rural households. Over half of the women who head these households are widows. Female heads of households are on average older than male heads, less likely to have attended school, and less likely to have a job. Female-headed households tend to be poorer than male-headed households: 35.8% of female-headed households are in the bottom expenditure quintile compared with 18.7% of male-headed households. They are also less likely to have access to finance than male heads (73.5% versus 78.6%, respectively). Female-headed households are slightly less likely to have access to electricity than male-headed households (16.5% versus 19.8%). In urban areas, female-headed households are less likely to have access to grid electricity than are male-headed households (38.2% versus 46.1%), and in both rural and urban areas, their access to off-grid solutions is also lower. This translates into a marginally better performance in terms of the tier ranking for male-headed households: 9% of them are in Tiers 4–5, compared with 7.6% of female-headed households. Female-headed households are slightly more likely to use three-stone stoves and less likely to use traditional stoves compared to male-headed households, while there is no gender gap in the use of LPG stoves. In terms of access to modern energy cooking solutions, the distribution of tiers under the MTF shows fairly small gaps between female- and male-headed households overall. In Niger, women aged 15 and older spend considerably more time cooking or in the cooking area (more than 2 hours per day) than men, girls, or boys. Women are thus much more likely to be affected by indoor air pollution and to benefit from the use of cleaner cooking solutions. xi MEASURING ENERGY ACCESS IN NIGER Photo: Flickr/Bruce Guenter A t the nexus of critical development challenges in Niger lies access to energy. Energy deeply influences human development and is an engine for economic growth and social development. The importance and wide-ranging impact of energy access is recognized by the United Nations under Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 7.1, which seeks universal access to affordable, reliable, and modern energy services. SDG7 is crucial to achieving many other SDG targets as well—from poverty eradication via advancements in health, education, water supply, and industrialization to mitigating climate change.6 The Government of Niger has been committed to achieving SDG 7 to benefit its people, and has thus collaborated with the World Bank to conduct the Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) survey to obtain guidance on setting targets, policies, and investment strategies for enhancing energy access. Also working toward this objective is the Sustainable Energy for All (SEforALL) initiative, launched by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, which sets universal access to modern energy as one of its three energy-access goals to be met by 2030. BOX 1 • SUMMARY OF RISE ENERGY ACCESS INDICATOR FOR NIGER Niger has instituted a moderately developed policy framework for electrification as of 2018, with marked improvements since 2010. The country saw major policy advances between years 2015 and 2017, when it developed electrification plans as well as frameworks for grid electrification, mini-grids, and stand-alone systems. The National Policy and Strategy for Electricity Access to a 2035 horizon was officially approved in 2018 as the country’s first electrification plan. The plan was developed based on geospatial mapping, which includes a time frame for planned grid extension as well as for mini-grids. It also includes off-grid development and specifically targets female-headed households. Active policies are in place to bolster the development of off-grid solar systems. For example, Niger works with Lighting Africa to exempt taxes on the import of solar and other renewable energy products and their components (the exemption went into effect in September 2017). On the other end of Niger’s electricity sector, its utilities have started improving their transparency, monitoring, and creditworthiness levels since 2018. The latest tariff revisions in 2018, which included a social tariff, are great strides toward making electricity access affordable and have benefited 42% of the utilities’ customers across the nation. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2016/goal-07/. 6 1 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework FIGURE 1 • Progress in improving electricity access, by indicator, 2010, 2015, and 2017 Electrification planning Utility creditworthiness Scope of electrification planning 2017 2015 Utility transparency and monitoring Grid electrification 2010 framework Affordability Framework for mini grids Framework for standalone systems Source: World Bank 2018b. COUNTRY CONTEXT Electrification planning Niger is a vast, landlocked, Scope country, and mostly arid Sub-Saharan Utility creditworthiness located in the heart of the Sahel of electrification region, with a rapidly growing population, estimated at 22.4 million (World Bank 2018a), of which the planning 2017 majority lives in rural areas. 2015 Utility transparency and monitoring Grid electrification 2010 The 5.6%economy Nigerien 11.9% is not well 12.0% and depends diversified 24.4% primarily on framework 46.0% which represents agriculture, 40% of its gross domestic product. Urban Affordability Framework for mini grids Economic growth increased 24.3% 6.5% between 2017 and from 4.9% to 22.2% 2018, surpassing the 22.4% estimated potential 18.6% 12.5% was due for growth rate of 4.8%. This increaseFramework primarily to the sound standalone systems performance of the agricultural sector Rural and sustained activity in the construction and services sectors. The medium-term economic outlook is positive: as of 2018, growth was projected to reach an average of 6% between 2019 and 2021, which is expected to reduce poverty Major by 1.5%. 2nd Bottom 20% projects 3rd quintile the agriculture, in quintile energy, and 4th quintile services Top 20% sectors, as well as the construction of a crude oil pipeline, will support this growth. Downside risks include fluctuations in the prices of basic goods, climate shocks, and insecurity.7 Over the past decade, Niger has made considerable progress in the area of poverty reduction. However, extreme poverty remains very high, at an estimated 41.5% in 2019, affecting more than 9 million people. Rural households are overrepresented in the bottom expenditure quintile (Figure 2). FIGURE 2 • Distribution of expenditure quintiles (urban/rural) 5.6% 11.9% 12.0% 24.4% 46.0% Urban 24.3% 22.2% 22.4% 18.6% 12.5% Rural Bottom 20% 2nd quintile 3rd quintile 4th quintile Top 20% All data collection and analysis were conducted prior to the global coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). It is expected that the pandemic will strain Niger’s economy, 7 owing mainly to increased spending on health and social assistance services for vulnerable households to mitigate the impact of COVID-19. The pandemic will also have an adverse impact on international trade and foreign direct investment channels.  2 Measuring Energy Access in Niger For a number of years, Niger has become a host country to populations fleeing conflict. It currently harbors 246,000 refugees and 186,000 displaced persons, primarily in Diffa and Tillabéri, and more recently, in Maradi, which is further exacerbating the country’s fragility. Security conditions have deteriorated in recent years, particularly in the areas bordering Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Mali, where armed groups have established bases and carry out repeated attacks against security forces and civilians. MAP 1 • Map of Niger The percentage of Niger’s population with access to electricity increased from 6% to 20% between 2000 and 2017. While this progress is notable, the electrification rate remains far below Sub-Saharan Africa’s average, and is among the lowest in the region. Also, access is concentrated in urban areas; almost all rural areas remain without. And even in urban areas connected to a grid, low generation capacity means that consumers suffer from a typically unreliable and low-quality supply. Additionally, less than 5% of the population has access to clean fuels and technologies for cooking (IEA et al. 2019). Pollution from solid fuel stoves causes eye problems and respiratory diseases in addition to environmental harm. The electricity system in Niger is small, fragmented, and dependent on imports from Nigeria. Niger’s power system comprises (i) two grids that are interconnected with Nigeria, which sells electricity at low cost; (ii) one grid supplied by a coal plant operated by Sonichar (a private company); and (iii) a number of diesel-based isolated grids. Decentralized mini-grids operated by the national utility supply 82 centers with electricity service levels ranging from continuous power to a few hours of power per day, using small diesel generators at prohibitive costs. 3 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework Off-grid electricity access in Niger has been limited, based mostly on unsustainable delivery models. Most off-grid initiatives have focused on stand-alone solar PV systems that meet the lowest tiers of electricity service, providing up to 4 hours of electricity per day. So far, these have not included adequate measures (e.g., technicians, spare parts, and product quality guarantees) to build the technical and commercial capacity of markets, or a sustainable revenue stream to ensure the maintenance and renewal of systems. The Government of Niger has acted to improve the institutional and legal framework in the power sector, but further work is required, specifically for off-grid electrification. GLOBAL SURVEY ON ENERGY ACCESS USING THE MULTI-TIER FRAMEWORK The World Bank, with support from the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), has launched the Global Survey on Energy Access, using the Multi-Tier Framework (MTF). The survey’s objective is to provide more nuanced data on energy access, including access to electricity and cooking solutions. The first phase is being carried out in 16 countries across Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The MTF approach goes beyond the traditional binary measurement of energy access—for example, “having or not having” a connection to electricity, “using or not using” clean fuels in cooking—to capture the multidimensional nature of energy access and the vast range of technologies and sources that can provide energy access, while accounting for the wide differences in user experience. The MTF approach measures energy access provided by any technology or fuel, based on a set of attributes that capture key characteristics of the energy supply that affect the user experience. Based on those attributes, it then defines six tiers of access, ranging from Tier 0 (no access) to Tier 5 (full access) along a continuum of improvement. Each attribute is assessed separately, and the overall tier for a household’s access to electricity is the lowest tier attained across the attributes (Bhatia and Angelou 2015). ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY Access to electricity is measured based on seven attributes: Capacity, Availability, Reliability, Quality, Affordability, Formality, and Health and Safety (see Annex 1, Table A1.1). Tier 0 refers to households that receive electricity for less than 4 hours a day (or less than 1 hour per evening) or that have a primary energy source with a Capacity of less than 3 watts. (See Box 2 for the minimum requirements, by tier of electricity access.) Tier 1 refers to households with limited access to small quantities of electricity provided by any technology, even a small solar lighting system (SLS), for a few hours a day, enabling electric lighting and phone charging. (See Box 3 for a typology of off-grid solar devices.) 4 Measuring Energy Access in Niger Measuring Energy Access: the Tiers BOX 2 • MINIMUM ELECTRICITY REQUIREMENTS, BY TIER OF ELECTRICITY ACCESS Improving attributes of energy supply leads to higher tiers of access. TIER 0 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4 TIER 5 4HRS 4HRS 8HRS 16HRS 23HRS Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Electricity is not available or Electricity is available at least 4 Electricity is available at least 4 is available less than 4 hours hours a day, including at least 1 hours a day, including at least 2 a day (or less than 1 hour per hour per evening, and the Capacity hours per evening, and Capacity evening). Households cope by is sufficient to power task lighting is sufficient to power low-load using candles, kerosene lamps, and phone charging or a radio (see appliances as needed during that or battery-powered devices, such Table 1). Sources that can be used to time, such as multiple lights, a as flashlights and radios. meet these requirements include a television, or a fan (see Table solar lighting system (SLS), a solar 1). Sources that can be used to home system (SHS), a mini-grid (a meet these requirements include small-scale, isolated distribution rechargeable batteries, an SHS, a network that provides electricity mini-grid, and the national grid. to local communities or a group of households), and the national grid. Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Electricity is available at least 8 Electricity is available at least 16 Electricity is available at least 23 hours a day, including at least 3 hours a day, including at least 4 hours a day, including 4 hours hours per evening, and Capacity is hours per evening, and Capacity per evening, and Capacity is sufficient to power medium-load is sufficient to power high-load sufficient to power very-high-load appliances as needed during that appliances as needed during that appliances as needed during that time, such as a refrigerator, freezer, time, such as a washing machine, time, such as air conditioners, food processor, water pump, rice iron, hair dryer, toaster, and space heaters, vacuum cleaners, cooker, or air cooler (see Table 1). In microwave. There are no long or and electric stoves. The most addition, the household can afford frequent unscheduled interruptions, likely source for meeting these a basic consumption package of 365 and the supply is safe. The grid requirements is the national grid, kWh per year. Sources that can be connection is legal, and there are though a generator or mini-grid used to meet these requirements no voltage issues. Sources that can might suffice as well. include an SHS, a generator, a mini- be used to meet these requirements grid, and the national grid. include diesel-based mini-grids and the national grid. Source: Bhatia and Angelou 2015. 5 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework BOX 3 • TYPOLOGY OF OFF-GRID SOLAR DEVICES AND TIER CALCULATION Solar devices are classified into three types based on the number of light bulbs and the type of appliances or electricity services a household uses. This typology is used to assess the Capacity attribute and the related tier. • Solar lanterns power a single light bulb and allow only part of the household to be classified in Tier 1 for the Capacity attribute. Under the Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) methodology, the number of household members in Tier 1 is based on the light output (lumen-hours) and phone charging capability of the solar lantern. • Solar lighting systems (SLSs) power two or more light bulbs and allow part of or the entire household to be classified in Tier 1 for Capacity. • Solar home systems (SHSs) power two or more light bulbs and appliances such as televisions, irons, microwaves, or refrigerators. See Table 1 for the load level associated with each Capacity tier. TABLE 1 • Appliances by load level and associated Capacity tiers Load level Capacity tier typically Indicative electric appliances (in watts, W) needed to power the load Very low load Incandescent light bulb, fluorescent tube, compact (3–49 W) fluorescent lamp, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), torch/ flashlight/lantern, radio/CD players/sound system, TIER 1 smartphone (Internet phone) charger, regular mobile phone charger Low load Black-and-white television, computer, fan, flat-screen (50–199 W) color television, regular color television, TIER 2 VCD/DVD Medium load Indoor air cooler, refrigerator, electric water pump, (200–799 W) electric food processor/blender, rice cooker, freezer, TIER 3 electric sewing machine, electric hot water pot or kettle High load Washing machine, electric iron, microwave oven, hair TIER 4 (800–1,999 W) dryer Very high load Air conditioner, space heater, electric water heater, TIER 5 (2,000 W or more) solar-based water heater Source: Bhatia and Angelou, 2015 A key issue that the MTF survey explores is the nature of the barriers that prevent a household from moving to a higher tier for access to electricity. This is the value-added of the MTF survey. By capturing full-spectrum data, it empowers policy makers to pursue data-informed energy policies and to design interventions that remove barriers so households can graduate to higher tiers. The value of access to electricity for households is defined by analyzing the MTF attributes based on responses to questions in the MTF survey, as follows: • Capacity (“What appliances can be powered?”): The Capacity of the electricity supply (or peak capacity) is the ability of the system to provide a certain amount of electricity to operate various appliances, ranging from a few watts for light-emitting diode (LED) lights and mobile phone chargers to several thousand watts for space heaters or air conditioners. First, appliances are classified into tiers based on their power ratings (see Table 1). Then, each household’s appliance tier is determined by the highest tier of all its appliances, that is, if a household owns multiple 6 Measuring Energy Access in Niger appliances, the highest-capacity appliance determines the household tier.8 Capacity is measured in watts for grids, mini-grids, and fossil-fuel-based generators, and in watt-hours for rechargeable batteries, solar lanterns, solar lighting systems (SLSs), and solar home systems (SHSs). It may be difficult to determine the Capacity of the system by simple observation. An estimate of the available Capacity may be done based on the source of the supply (for example, grid power is considered ≥2,000 watts) or the appliances used (Table 1). • Availability (“Is power available when needed?”): The Availability of supply refers to the amount of time during which electricity is available. It is measured through two indicators: the total number of hours per day (24-hour period) and the number of evening hours (the 4 hours after sunset) during which electricity is available. • Reliability (“Is service frequently interrupted?”): The Reliability of electricity supply is a combination of the frequency and the duration of unexpected disruptions. In this report, the Reliability attribute is only measured for households connected to the grid. • Quality (“Will voltage fluctuations damage my appliances?”): The Quality of the electricity supply refers to the absence of severe voltage fluctuations that can damage a household’s appliances. Electric appliances generally require a certain level of voltage to operate properly. Low or fluctuating voltage can damage appliances, and even result in electrical fires. A low or fluctuating voltage supply tends to result from an overloaded distribution system or from long-distance low-tension cables connecting spread-out households to a single grid. The MTF survey does not measure voltage fluctuation directly but uses incidents of appliance damage as a proxy. In this report, the Quality attribute is measured for households connected to the grid or mini-grid. • Affordability (“Can a household afford to purchase the minimum amount of electricity?”): The Affordability of the electricity service is determined by comparing the price of a standard electricity service package (1 kWh of electricity per day or 365 kWh per year) with household expenditure. The price of the package is determined from the prevailing lifeline tariff. If the household spends more than 5% of household expenditure on electricity, then electricity service is considered unaffordable for that household. • Formality (“Is grid electricity provided through a formal connection?”): If households use electricity service from the grid, but do not pay anyone for their consumption, their connection could be defined as an informal connection. The Formality of the grid connection is important, since it ensures that the electricity authority gets paid for the services it provides, besides providing for the safety of electric lines. A grid connection is considered formal when the bill is paid to the utility, a prepaid card seller, or an authorized representative. Informal connections pose a significant safety risk and affect the financial sustainability of the utility. Reporting on the Formality of a connection is challenging. Households may be sensitive about disclosing such information in a survey. The MTF survey therefore infers information on Formality from indirect questions that respondents may be more willing to answer, such as what method a household uses to pay its electricity bill. • Health and Safety (“Is it safe to use an electricity service?”): This attribute refers to any injuries to household members from using grid electricity services during the 12 months preceding the survey. “Injury” could mean limb injury or even death from burns or electrocution. Such injuries can happen not just from faulty internal wiring (exposed bare wire, for example), but also from incorrect use of Households’ MTF Capacity tier, furthermore, is determined based on their appliance tier and the main source of electricity. While a household’s appliance tier is 8 the major determinant of its allocation in the MTF ranking, there is not a one-to-one correspondence, since the source of electricity plays a role too. Please note that grid-connected households are automatically assigned to Tier 5 for the Capacity attribute regardless of their appliance ownership, so Capacity is discussed for off-grid households only. 7 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework electrical appliances or negligence; however, the MTF analysis does not make a distinction between the two. Electricity access is considered safe when users have not suffered from past accidents due to their electricity supply resulting in permanent injuries. For each of these attributes, households are placed in a tier depending on the level of service as defined by the different thresholds (see Annex 1, Table A1.1). A household’s overall Access Tier is determined by the lowest tier value the household obtains among the attributes. The distribution of the final aggregated tiers and also the individual attribute tiers can then be shown for all households at the national level, according to urban or rural residence, and by the gender of the household head. ACCESS TO MODERN ENERGY COOKING SOLUTIONS Despite the well-documented benefits of access to clean cookstoves, around 3 billion of the world’s population still use polluting and inefficient cooking solutions. The inefficient use of solid fuels has significant impacts on health, socioeconomic development, gender equality, education, and climate (Ekouevi and Tuntivate 2012; UNDP and WHO 2009; World Bank 2011).9 The consequences of inefficient energy use for cooking extend beyond direct health impacts. Such use also affects socioeconomic development. For example, fuel collection and cooking tasks are often carried out by women and girls. Collection time depends on the local availability of fuel and may reach up to several hours a day (ESMAP 2004; Gwavuya et al. 2012; Parikh 2011; Wang et al. 2013). The time spent on fuel collection and preparation often translates into lost opportunities for gaining education and increasing income (Blackden and Wodon 2006; Clancy, Skutsch, and Bachelor 2003). In addition, the associated drudgery increases the risk of injury and attack (Rehfuess, Mehta, and Prüss-Üstün 2006). The MTF measures access to modern energy cooking solutions based on six attributes: Cooking Exposure, Cookstove Efficiency, Convenience, Affordability, Health and Safety of Primary Cookstove, and Fuel Availability (see Annex 1). • Cooking Exposure (“How is the user’s respiratory health affected?”): This attribute assesses personal exposure to pollutants from cooking activities. Personal exposure, in turn, depends on stove emissions and ventilation (affected by, among other variables, the location of the stove and also the size of the kitchen enclosure, if applicable).10 Thus, Cooking Exposure is a proxy indicator to measure the health impacts of cooking activity on a household’s primary cook. This attribute is a composite measurement of the emissions from the cooking solution (that is, a combination of the stove type and fuel), mitigated by the ventilation in the cooking area. Each of these components has one or more subcomponents. The Cooking Exposure Tier is assigned as a composite of the Emissions and Ventilation Tiers and is weighted by the amount of time spent on each stove, if a household relies on multiple stove types. • Cookstove Efficiency (“How much fuel will a person need to use the stove?”): This attribute is a combination of combustion efficiency and heat-transfer efficiency. Laboratory testing of the efficiency 9 Household air pollution has been associated with a wide range of adverse health impacts, such as an increased risk of acute lower respiratory infections among children under age 5 and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer (in relation to coal use) among adults over age 30. An association between house- hold air pollution and adverse pregnancy outcomes (such as low birthweight), ischemic heart disease, interstitial lung disease, and nasopharyngeal and laryngeal cancers may also be tentatively drawn based on limited studies (Dherani et al. 2008; Rehfuess, Mehta, and Prüss-Üstün 2006; Smith, Mehta, and Maeusezahl-Feuz 2004). 10 In this report, ventilation is defined as using a chimney, hood, or other exhaust system while using a stove or having doors or windows in the cooking area. The ventilation factor plays a role in mitigating pollutants from cooking. 8 Measuring Energy Access in Niger of various types of cookstoves informs the breakdown of efficiency levels by cookstove and fuel combinations, which can be observed in the field with relative ease.11 • Convenience (“How long does it take to gather and prepare the fuel and the stove before a person can cook?”): This attribute is measured by the amount of time a household spends collecting or purchasing fuel and preparing the fuel and stove for cooking. Convenience is measured through two indicators: the amount of time household members spend collecting or purchasing cooking fuel and preparing the fuel (in minutes per week), and the amount of time needed to prepare the cookstove for cooking (in minutes per meal). • Safety of Primary Cookstove (“Is it safe to use the stove?”): The degree of risk to life and limb can vary by type of cookstove and fuel used. Risks may include exposure to hot surfaces, fire, or potential for fuel splatter. This attribute is measured through reported incidences of past injury and/or fire. • Affordability (“Can a household afford to pay for both the stove and the fuel?”): This attribute assesses a household’s ability to pay for the primary cooking solution (cookstove and fuel). Affordability is measured using the levelized cost of the fuel. A cooking solution is considered affordable if a household spends less than 5% of its total expenditure on cooking fuel. For the purposes of this analysis, the cost of the cookstove is not taken into account. • Fuel Availability (“Is the fuel available when a person needs it?”): The Availability of a given fuel can affect the regularity of its use, while shortages in the fuel can force households to switch to inferior fuel types. This attribute assesses the Availability of fuel when needed for cooking purposes. A methodology similar to the electricity framework is applied to obtain the aggregate tier for modern energy cooking solutions. The lowest tier among the attributes is taken as the final tier for the household (for more information on the threshold and tier calculation, see Annex 1.) BOX 4 • TYPOLOGY OF COOKSTOVES IN NIGER In consultation with development partners and government officials, cookstoves in Niger are classified into four categories (see Annex 3), as follows: • Three-stone stove: A pot balanced on three stones or a tripod over an open fire. In general, this stove uses firewood, has a low combustion temperature, and its fire is exposed, leaving a significant percentage of heat to be lost to the ambient air. • Traditional stove: In Niger, some basic wood (malgaches à bois) stoves, charcoal burning stoves (fourneaux à charbon ronds ou carrés), and mineral coal stoves fall within this category. The pot sits for the most part on the fuel, has a low combustion temperature due to poor insulation, and a lot of cold excess primary air because of too many openings. • Improved stove: In Niger, only wood-burning improved stoves can be found. They are locally manufactured (Maisauki). The number of self-made improved mud stoves is negligible. An improved stove has a higher combustion temperature due to an enclosed combustion chamber and some insulation. The pot sits above the fire, allowing more time for combustion. • Clean fuel stove: Stoves that use a clean burning fuel. In Niger, these are liquefied petroleum gas stoves. In cases where the cookstove also serves as a source of heating for the dwelling, the Efficiency attribute is ignored because heat-transfer efficiency becomes 11 irrelevant. The Cookstove Efficiency attribute could not be taken into account in assessing access to modern cooking solutions in Niger due to the absence of laboratory testing for those cookstoves used in the country. 9 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework USING THE MULTI-TIER FRAMEWORK TO DRIVE POLICY AND INVESTMENT The MTF survey provides detailed data on household energy consumption that is valuable for governments, development partners, the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, investors, and service providers. On the supply side, it captures data on all energy sources that households use, with details on each MTF attribute. On the demand side, it provides data on energy-related spending; energy use; user preferences; willingness to pay (WTP) for grid, off-grid, and cooking solutions; and the satisfaction of consumers with their primary energy source. Insights derived from the MTF data enable governments to set country-specific access targets. The data can be used in setting targets for universal access based on the country’s conditions, the resources available, and the target date for achieving universal access. They can also help governments balance improvements in energy access among existing users (raising electrified households to higher tiers) and providing new connections. They also help governments determine the minimum tier that the new connections should target. MTF data can inform the design of interventions meant to expand access, in addition to prioritizing them so that they may have the maximum impact on tier access for a given budget. The data can be disaggregated by attribute and technology, providing insights into the variables that keep households in lower tiers and key barriers, such as lack of generation capacity, high energy costs, or a poor transmission and distribution network. Access interventions can thus be targeted to maximize household access. MTF data also provide guidance on the technologies that are most suited to satisfy the demand of non-electrified households (for example, grid or off-grid). MTF demand-side data, such as on energy spending, WTP, energy use, and appliances, can also be used to inform the design and targeting of government programs, projects, and investments for energy access. The MTF surveys provide three types of disaggregation: by urban or rural location, by expenditure quintile, and by the gender of the household head. For the gender-disaggregated data, non-energy information, such as socioeconomic status, is also collected. Indicators such as primary energy source, tier of access, energy-related spending, WTP, and user preferences are disaggregated by male- and female-headed households. Such disaggregated analysis could add value to energy access planning, implementation, and financing. The MTF survey provides additional gender-related information, including on gender roles in determining energy-related spending and gender-differentiated impacts on health and time use. MULTI-TIER FRAMEWORK SURVEY IMPLEMENTATION IN NIGER MTF data collection in Niger started on February 3, 2018, and ended on April 2, 2018. The household survey sample selection was based on a stratified household sampling by (i) region, (ii) urban/rural location, and (iii) connection to the national electricity grid (or not), and aimed at being nationally representative. A two-degree sample selection was applied. The first degree corresponds to the enumeration area (EA) selection. For each region, the sampling frame used was the exhaustive list of all EAs from the latest population census dating from 2012 (4ème Recensement Général de la Population et de l’Habitat). The first degree sample was drawn independently in each strata. A total of 344 EAs were drawn randomly, proportional to their size and according to their electrification status. This includes 138 urban EAs and 139 rural EAs.12 An additional sample of 67 urban EAs was drawn, independent of their electrification status. Rural areas of the Diffa region were not covered for security reasons. 12 10 Measuring Energy Access in Niger A comprehensive list of households was compiled in the sample EAs, of which 12 households each were systematically selected. A total of 4,071 households were surveyed—2,412 in urban areas (including an oversample of 804 in 7 main cities excluding Diffa) and 1,659 in rural areas. TABLE 2 • Distribution of final enumeration areas and sampled households, MTF Survey, Niger Urban Rural Total  State/Region Electrified Nonelectrified Electrified Nonelectrified   EAs HHs EAs HHs EAs HHs EAs HHs EAs HHs Agadez 8 96 8 108 2 24 2 24 20 252 Diffa 3 36 2 24 5 60 Dosso 8 106 4 47 10 120 7 84 29 357 Maradi 10 167 10 178 15 192 10 120 45 657 Niamey 37 519 25 370 1 12 63 901 Tahoua 13 176 8 106 19 237 13 155 53 674 Tillaberi 6 70 6 69 13 156 9 104 34 399 Zinder 11 166 14 174 21 267 14 164 60 771 Note: EA = enumeration area; HH = household. MAP 2 • Sample distribution 11 ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY Photo: World Bank ASSESSING ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY TECHNOLOGIES In Niger, 19.5% of households have access to at least one source of electricity: about 15.8% have access to the grid, and 3.7% use off-grid solutions (Figure 3). Solar devices are owned by 2.6% of households, while mini-grids13 reach only 0.3% of households. FIGURE 3 • Access to electricity by technology (nationwide) 80.5% Solar Home 0.8% System Solar Lighting 0.6% System Solar Lantern 1.2% Rechargeable 0.6% Battery 15.8% Electric 0.2% 3.7% generator Mini-grid 0.3% NO ACCESS GRID ACCESS OFF GRID ACCESS In Niger, 80.5% of households have no access to any source of electricity.14 The share of households without electricity reaches 89.1% in rural areas, compared to 50.4% in urban areas (Figure 4). is more common in urban areas, where 45.4% of households are connected to a grid, Grid usage 89.1% compared to only 7.3% of rural households. About 3.6% of rural households use off-grid solutions versus 4.2% of urban households. Rural off-grid households tend to own solar devices, whereas urban off-grid households are as likely to be connected to a mini-grid, or use rechargeable Solar Home 1.3% batteries or a generator. System 0.7% Solar Lighting 0.3% 50.4% System 0.7% 45.4% Urban 0.5% Solar Lantern 1.4% Rural Rechargeable 0.8% Battery 0.6% 7.3% Throughout this report, “mini-grids” refer 13 Electric to NIGELEC-owned mini-grids, which were the only 0.5% at the time of the survey. functional mini-grids in operation 14 3.6% In this report, and according to the Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) 4.2% classification, households using dry-cell batteries are not considered as having access generator 0.1% to electricity. 0.8% NO ELECTRICITY GRID ACCESS OFF-GRID ACCESS Mini-grid 0.1% 13 Mini-grid 0.3% NO ACCESS GRID ACCESS OFF GRID ACCESS NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework FIGURE 4 • Access to electricity by technology (urban/rural) 89.1% Solar Home 1.3% System 0.7% Solar Lighting 0.3% 50.4% System 0.7% 45.4% Urban 0.5% Solar Lantern 1.4% Rural Rechargeable 0.8% Battery 0.6% 7.3% Electric 0.5% 3.6% 4.2% generator 0.1% 0.8% NO ELECTRICITY GRID ACCESS OFF-GRID ACCESS Mini-grid 0.1% 0ver 9 in 10 households in the bottom quintile lack access to electricity, while this is the case for less than 6 in 10 households in the highest quintile (Figure 5). The grid access rate increases dramatically with the level of households’ expenditure. About 40% of households in the highest expenditure quintile have access to the grid, compared to only 5% of households in the lowest quintile. Off-grid solutions are used among all expenditure quintiles. FIGURE 5 • Access to electricity by technology and across expenditure quintiles (nationwide) 54.9% 40.4% 4.7% Top 20% 76.9% 17.7% 5.4% 4th quintile 90.9% 7.9% 1.2% 3rd quintile 86.5% 8.3% 5.2% 2nd quintile 93.2% 4.8% 2.0% Bottom 20% No Electricity Grid Off-grid 4.8% 3.9% 3.8% 82.5% 4.4% 0.6% Nationwide 51.2% 0.9% 9.7% 9.4% 12.3% 16.5% 14 Urban 4th quintile 90.9% 7.9% 1.2% 3rd quintile Access to Electricity 54.9% 86.5% 40.4% 8.3% 5.2% 4.7% 2nd Top 20% quintile MTF TIERS 76.9%93.2% 17.7% 4.8%5.4% 2.0% 20% 17.5% of households fall into Tier 1 or above (Figure 6). The share reaches 48.8% in urban Nationwide, 4th quintile Bottom 15 areas, while it drops to 8.5% in rural areas. Because of the relatively high penetration of the grid in 90.9% 7.9% 1.2% urban areas, almost 3 in 10 urban households reach Tier 4 or No Electricity Tier 5. Off-grid Grid 3rd quintile FIGURE 6 • MTF Tier distribution (nationwide, urban/rural) 86.5% 8.3% 5.2% 2nd quintile 4.8% 3.9% 3.8% 82.5% 93.2% 4.4% 4.8% 2.0% 0.6% Nationwide Bottom 20% 51.2% No Electricity 9.7% 0.9% Grid 9.4% Off-grid 12.3% 16.5% Urban 1.4% 91.5% 2.2% 1.5% 2.9% 4.8% 0.5% 3.9% 3.8% Rural 82.5% 4.4% 0.6% Nationwide Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 51.2% 0.9% 9.7% 9.4% 12.3% 16.5% Urban 2.0% Almost all households in Tier 2 and above are connected to the grid (Figure 7). Only 0.1% of grid-connected 1.4% 0.1% 91.5% 2.2% 1.5% households fall in Tier 1 and below. Off-grid households reach up to Tier 3, but more than half of them 0.5% 2.9% Tier 0. Of households in Tier 0, almost all lack access to any source of electricity. Only 2.1% of are inRural Tier 0 households have access to electricity but their supply does not satisfy Tier 1 requirements (i.e., 3 watts or 12 watt-hours) (see Annex 1, Table A1.1). Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 FIGURE 7 • MTF Tier distribution, by technology (nationwide) 80.5% 2.0% 0.1% 1.0% 0.2% 3.9% 4.8% 0.5% 3.4% 3.6% TIER 0 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4 TIER 5 80.5% No Electricity Grid Off-grid 1.0% 0.2% 3.9% 4.8% 0.5% 3.4% 3.6% TIER 0 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4 TIER 5 No Electricity Grid Off-grid For more details about the MTF tiers, attributes, and formulation, please see Annex 1. 15 15 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework MTF ATTRIBUTES Capacity The Capacity of electricity supply denotes the ability of a system to provide a certain amount of electricity to operate various appliances. Assuming that the Capacity of the grid is over 2 kW, all grid-connected households have Tier 5 Capacity (Figure 8). The Capacity of off-grid solutions typically ranges between 3 and 199 watts (Tier 1 and Tier 2) for 2% of households, while only 0.1% of households have a larger off-grid solution (≥200 watts). FIGURE 8 • Distribution of households by Capacity (nationwide, urban/rural) 82.1% 1.2% 0.1% 16.0% 0.6% Nationwide 50.8% 0.4% 45.8% 1.1% 1.9% Urban 91.1% 1.0% 7.4% 0.5% 82.1% 1.2% 0.1% 16.0% Rural 0.6% Nationwide Tier 0 (<3W) Tier 1 (3 - 49W) Tier 2 (50 - 199W) Tier 3 (200 - 799W) 50.8% 0.4% 45.8% 1.1% 1.9% Tier 4 (800 - 1,999W) Tier 5 (≥2Kw) Urban Availability 91.1% 1.0% 7.4% 0.5% The Availability of supply refers to the amount of time during which electricity is available within a 24-hour day and Rural 2.1% in particular 9.4% during27.8% the evening (from 6pm to 10pm). In Niger, 56.9% over half of electrified 3.8% households Nationwide have electricity for at least 23 hours a day, and over 8 in 10 households have 4 hours of evening supply (Figures 9Tier and 10). About 0 (<3W) 5.8% Tier 1 (3 -of households 49W) receive Tier 2 (50 less than - 199W) Tier 3 8 hours (200 of supply per - 799W) day. The share is higher in rural areas. 0.2% 29.8% 61.5% 3.5% Tier 4 (800 - 1,999W) Tier 5 (≥2Kw) 5.0% FIGURE 9 • Distribution of households based on daily Availability (over a 24-hour day) (nationwide, Urban urban/rural) 5.0% 4.4% 16.4% 24.6% 49.6% 2.1% 9.4% 27.8% 56.9% Rural 3.8% Nationwide Tier 0 (< 4 hours) Tier 2 (4 - 8 hours) Tier 3 (8 - 16 hours) 0.2% 29.8% 61.5% 3.5% 5.0% Tier 4 (16 - 23 hours) Tier 5 (≥ 23 hours) Urban 5.0% 4.4% 16.4% 24.6% 49.6% Rural 0.2% 5.4% 13.8% 80.6% Nationwide Tier 0 (< 4 hours) Tier 2 (4 - 8 hours) Tier 3 (8 - 16 hours) 0.2% 5.3% 13.2% Tier 4 (16 - 23 hours) 81.3% Tier 5 (≥ 23 hours) Urban 0.1% 16 0.2% 14.8% 79.3% 5.6% 0.2% Rural 5.4% 13.8% 80.6% Rural Access to Electricity Tier 0 (< 4 hours) Tier 2 (4 - 8 hours) Tier 3 (8 - 16 hours) Tier 4 (16 - 23 hours) Tier 5 (≥ 23 hours) FIGURE 10 • Distribution of households based on evening Availability (4-hour period) (nationwide, urban/rural) 0.2% 5.4% 13.8% 80.6% Nationwide 0.2% 5.3% 13.2% 81.3% Urban 0.1% 0.2% 14.8% 79.3% 5.6% Rural Tier 0 (<1 hour) Tier 1 (1 - 2 hours) Tier 2 (2 - 3 hours) Tier 3 (3 - 4 hours) Tier 5 (4 hours) Reliability The Reliability of electricity supply captures the frequency and duration of unscheduled (unexpected) outages, and applies only to grid-connected households. Nationwide, 48.8% of households experience less than four unscheduled outages per week, lasting less than 2 hours in total (Figure 11). The issue of unreliable electricity supply is larger in rural areas, where this share drops to 37.7%. Also, about 7.2% of households reported more than 14 unscheduled interruptions per week. This share is twice as high in rural areas. On average, households in Niger experience unscheduled outages about five times per week lasting about 23 minutes. FIGURE 11 • Distribution of households based on Reliability (nationwide, urban/rural) 7.2% 44.0% 48.8% Nationwide 3.8% 42.1% 54.1% Urban 14.5% 47.8% 37.7% Rural Tier 3 (> 14 interruptions per week) Tier 4 (4-14 interruptions OR <4 interruptions of >2 hours per week) Tier 5 (<4 interruptions lasting <2 hours per week) 5.0% 95.0% Nationwide 5.7% 94.3% Urban 17 3.6% 96.4% Nationwide 3.8% 42.1% 54.1% NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework Urban 14.5% 47.8% 37.7% Quality Rural A low-quality electricity supply is 44.0% 7.2% characterized by low or fluctuating voltage, 48.8%resulting in damage to appliances. This attribute is measured only for households connected to the grid or a mini-grid. Nationwide Tier 3 (> 145% interruptions per week) Tier 4 (4-14 interruptions OR <4 interruptions of >2 hours per week) Nationwide, only about of households face voltage issues (Figure 12). Quality, as opposed to Reliability, tends to be a slightly larger issue in urban areas. Tier 5 (<4 interruptions lasting <2 hours per week) 3.8% 42.1% 54.1% FIGURE 12 • Distribution of households based on Quality (nationwide, urban/rural) Urban 5.0%14.5% 47.8% 95.0% 37.7% Rural Nationwide 5.7% 94.3% Tier 3 (> 14 interruptions per week) Tier 4 (4-14 interruptions OR <4 interruptions of >2 hours per week) Urban Tier 5 (<4 interruptions lasting <2 hours per week) 3.6% 96.4% Rural 5.0% 95.0% Tier 3 (inadequate voltage) Tier 5 (adequate voltage) Nationwide Affordability 5.7% 41.7% 94.3% 58.3% Nationwide Urban The Affordability of electricity service is determined by whether the cost of a standard consumption package of 365 kWh 3.6% 18.5% a year (or 30 kWh per month) is less or more than 5% of a household’s total 96.4% 81.5% expenditure. By this metric, service is unaffordable for 48.3% of rural households, and about 18.5% of urban households (Figure 13). The current monthly fixed fee plus 30 kWh consumption corresponds to Urban Rural CFA francs (CFAF) 2,033.5 (US$3.88), according to Niger’s national utility company (NIGELEC).16 48.3% 51.7% Tier 3 (inadequate voltage) Tier 5 (adequate voltage) FIGURE Rural 13 • Distribution of households based on Affordability (nationwide, urban/rural) 41.7% 58.3% Tier 2 (cost of 365kWh/year ≥ 5% of household expenditure) Nationwide Tier 5 (cost of 365kWh/year < 5% of household expenditure) 18.5% 81.5% Urban 48.3% 51.7% Rural Tier 2 (cost of 365kWh/year ≥ 5% of household expenditure) Tier 5 (cost of 365kWh/year < 5% of household expenditure) DECRET No2017-796/PRN/ME du 06 octobre 2017 portant approbation de la Méthodologie tarifaire et la structure des tarifs applicables aux usagers finaux du ser- 16 vice public de l’énergie électrique fourni par la Société Nigérienne d’Electricité (NIGELEC). 18 Access to Electricity Formality A formal connection is one that has been provided or sanctioned by a governing authority. This attribute is measured only for households connected to the grid or a mini-grid. In Niger, it is estimated that 0.7% of connected households have an informal connection (Figure 14). Reporting on Formality is a challenge since household respondents may be sensitive to disclosing information on the nature of their grid connection in a documented survey. As a result, the MTF survey infers the Formality of a connection through indirect questions that respondents may be more willing to answer (such as whom a household member pays for electricity service). FIGURE 14 • Distribution of households based on Formality (nationwide, urban/rural) 99.3% 0.7% Nationwide 1.1% 98.9% Urban 100.0% Rural Tier 3 (Informal connection) Tier 5 (Formal connection) 99.3% 0.7% Health and safety Nationwide 99.9% 0.1% Nationwide Health and Safety1.1%are inferred based on self-reported accidents related to electricity (such as faulty 98.9% internal wiring or incorrect use of appliances) over the 12 months preceding the survey. In Niger, 99.8% Urban 0.2% electricity supply from the grid is generally safe; 0.1 % of the households surveyed reported permanent Urban limb damage or death because of electrocution. In urban 100.0%areas, 0.2% of households reported serious 100.0% report such injuries. To prevent accidents, injuries due to electrocution (Figure 15); no rural households households Rural must be encouraged to install all wiring according to national standards, and all household membersRuralmust be made aware of basic safety measures. Tier 3 (Informal connection) Tier 5 (Formal connection) FIGURE 15 • Distribution of Tier households 3 (Accidents in thebased TierSafety on Health and last 12 months) (nationwide, 5 (No accidents urban/rural) in the last 12 months) 99.9% 0.1% Nationwide 99.8% 82.1% 0.2% 73.3% Urban 100.0% Rural 44.4% 40.4% 22.7% Tier 3 (Accidents in the last 12 months) Tier 5 (No accidents in the last 12 months) 17.4% 11.8% 3.1% 1.5% 1.9% 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% Nationwide Urban Rural Very low power Low power Medium power High power 82.1% Very high power 73.3% 19 99.8% 0.2% Urban NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework 100.0% USE Rural Households in Niger mainly use low and very low power appliances Tier 3 (Accidents in the last 12 months) (Figure 16). The penetration of high Tier 5 (No accidents in the last 12 months) and very high load appliances is minimal in urban areas and almost non-existent in rural areas. Medium load appliances are more common in urban areas, where one in five households owns at least one. FIGURE 16 • Household ownership of appliances by load level (nationwide, urban/rural) 82.1% 73.3% 44.4% 40.4% 22.7% 17.4% 11.8% 3.1% 1.5% 1.9% 0.5% 0.4% 0.5% Nationwide Urban Rural Very low power Low power Medium power High power Very high power The top five most common appliances owned by grid-connected households in urban areas are fans (70%), mobile phone chargers (52%), televisions (46%), and incandescent light bulbs (44%) and CFL bulbs (39%) (Figure 17). In rural areas, grid-connected households mainly own incandescent light bulbs (54%), mobile phone chargers (33%), televisions (31%), CFL bulbs (29%), and radios or audio systems (19%). Refrigerators are fairly common in urban areas, where one in five households owns one. The rest of the appliances are owned by only a small percentage of households. FIGURE 17 • Types of appliances owned by grid-connected households (urban/rural) Heating Appliances Electric Rice Cooker Electric Sewing Machine Microwave Oven Washing Machine Electric Kettle Electric Water Heater Black & White TV Air Conditioner Air Cooler Electric Iron Freezer Electric Water Pump Computer LED Light Bulbs Fluorescent Tube/Neon VCD / DVD Urban Fridge Smartphone Charger Rural Flat Screen Color TV Radio/CD Player/Audio System Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs Incandescent Light Bulb Normal Color TV Basic Mobile Phone Charger Fan 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Note: CD = compact disc; LED = light-emitting diode; VCD = video compact disc. 20 Electric Water Heater Black & White TV LED Light Bulbs Fluorescent Tube/Neon VCD / DVD Urban Fridge Access to Electricity Smartphone Charger Rural Flat Screen Color TV Radio/CD Player/Audio System Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs Appliance ownership differs notably between grid-connected and off-grid households (Figure 18). A Incandescent Light Bulb Normal Color TV households use electrical appliances than do off-grid households. Off- larger share of grid-connected grid users mostly Basic Mobile own very Phone low load appliances, while grid-connected households use a diverse array Charger Fan of appliances including medium load and some high load ones. 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% FIGURE 18 • Types of appliances owned by households with grid and off-grid solutions (nationwide) Electric Water Heater Black & White TV Air Conditioner Air Cooler Electric Iron Electric Water Pump Freezer Computer LED Light Bulbs Fluorescent Tube/Neon Off-grid Fridge Grid VCD / DVD Smartphone Charger Flat Screen Color TV Radio/CD Player/Audio System Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs Normal Color TV Basic Mobile Phone Charger Incandescent Light Bulb Fan 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Note: CD = compact disc; LED = light-emitting diode; VCD = video compact disc. In Niger, grid-connected households consume an average of 93 kWh per month. Monthly consumption falls to 65 kWh for rural households and reaches 103 kWh for urban households (Figure 19). On average, households spend CFAF 6,295 (US$12) per month on electricity, corresponding to 6.6% of an average household’s expenditure. Rural households tend to consume less electricity (CFAF 4,857 or US$9.26 per month). Urban households have been connected to the grid for an average of 7.1 years and rural households for 5.4 years. 21 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework FIGURE 19 • Monthly household expenditure on and consumption of electricity (nationwide, urban/rural) 7,141 7,141 6,295 103 6,29593 103 93 4,857 4,857 65 65 Nationwide Urban Rural Nationwide Urban Rural Monthly electricity expenditure (CFAF) Monthly electricity consumption (kWh) Monthly electricity expenditure (CFAF) Monthly electricity consumption (kWh) Almost half the households in the lowest expenditure quintile consume 1 kWh per day or less (Figure 20). Electricity consumption rises as expenditure quintiles increase: no households in the bottom quintile consume 100 kWh or over per month, versus 40.5% of the top spending quintile. FIGURE 20 • Monthly grid electricity consumption by expenditure quintile (nationwide) 10.2% 19.0% 16.8% 20.3% 10.2% 19.0% 16.8% 20.3% 16.5% 40.5% 16.5% 12.2% 40.5% 18.5% 12.2% 18.5% 33.0% 33.0% 40.8% 40.8% 55.4% 39.2% 44.2% 55.4% 39.2% 44.2% 46.7% 46.7% 32.5% 32.5% 14.7% 18.3% 15.6% 14.7% 18.3% 15.6% 5.6% 5.6% Bottom 20% 2nd Quintile 3rd Quintile 4th Quintile Top 20% Bottom 20% 2nd Quintile 3rd Quintile 4th Quintile Top 20% 0-30 Kwh 30-60 Kwh 60-100 Kwh 100 or above Kwh 0-30 Kwh 30-60 Kwh 60-100 Kwh 100 or above Kwh Spending on electricity is, however, disproportionately burdensome for lower spending quintiles (Figure 21). A mere 3% of households in the bottom quintile spend less than 5% of their household budget on electricity, while 84.5% of them spend over 10%. Conversely, less than 1 in 10 households in the top quintile spend more than 10% of their household budget on electricity. 22 Access to Electricity FIGURE 21 • Share of household budget spent on grid electricity by expenditure quintile (nationwide) 8.1% 13.8% 23.6% 33.6% 32.8% 37.4% 27.6% 84.5% 40.0% 48.8% 59.1% 48.8% 26.4% 12.5% 3.0% Bottom 20% 2nd Quintile 3rd Quintile 4th Quintile Top 20% Less than 5% 5-10% More than 10% 8.1% 13.8% 23.6% IMPROVING ACCESS TO ELECTRICITY 33.6% 32.8% 80.5% 37.4% 2% 27.6% 84.5% PROVIDING Tier 0 ELECTRICITY ACCESS TO HOUSEHOLDS WITHOUT A SOURCE OF 40.0% ELECTRICITY National grid connection 48.8% 59.1% Rechargeable Battery 48.8% In Niger, 82.5% of households are in Tier 0 for electricity access, with a larger share located in rural Solar Lantern Solar Multi-Light Product 26.4% grid network and sometimes difficult to reach. Virtually all areas that are less covered by the national 12.5% No electricity households in Tier 0 have no electricity source (Figure 22). 3.0% Bottom Strategies 20% for 2nd Quintile shifting households 3rd Quintile to higher tiers are best determined4th Quintile Top 20% certain by the barriers keeping households in a low tier. For example, it will be helpful to provide on- or off-grid solutions to those Less than 5% without electricity or to improve the Availability of5-10% More than 10% electricity supply for those using electricity service. FIGURE 22 • MTF Tier 0 disaggregation, by source of electricity (nationwide) 25.2% Nationwide 2% 80.5% 15.8% Tier 0 74.7% Urban 45.4% National grid connection Rechargeable Battery Solar Lantern Solar Multi-Light Product 11.0% No electricity Rural 7.3% About 15.8% of households in Niger are connected to the grid. Meanwhile, 25.2% of households are located in communities where a grid connection is available (i.e., where at least one household is connected to the grid) (Figure 23). This means that in grid-electrified communities, only about three Share of households living in grid electrified villages Share of households connected to the grid in five households are connected to the grid. Thus, densification projects may enable about 9.4% of households nationwide to get access to the existing grid. In urban areas, densification may reach almost 30% of households. 25.2% Nationwide 15.8% 23 National grid connection Rechargeable Battery Solar Lantern Solar Multi-Light Product No electricity NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework FIGURE 23 • Comparison between village electrification and household electrification rates (nationwide, urban/rural) 25.2% Nationwide 15.8% 74.7% Urban 45.4% 11.0% Rural 7.3% Share of households living in grid electrified villages Share of households connected to the grid The barriers preventing households from gaining a connection are as follows: the distance to the grid (87%), the high up-front cost of obtaining grid access (6.4%), and delays or difficulties in the administrative process (3.6%) (Figure 24). Distance to the grid is a more acute issue in rural areas (92.7%), connection cost also pose a major constraint in urban areas (24.5%). FIGURE 24 • Barriers to gaining access to grid electricity (nationwide, urban/rural) 92.7% 87.0% Nationwide 52.9% Urban Rural 24.5% 8.6% 6.4% 3.3% 3.6% 5.3% 3.3% 1.2% Too far from HH Connection cost Admin procedure Renting, Landlord too expensive too complicated decision Note: HH = household. To effectively address the high up-front financial cost of connecting to a grid (that is, a fee of CFAF 54,242 or US$103.4), well-targeted subsidies might be an option to consider. When unconnected households nationwide were asked if they were willing to pay for access to the national grid, at a subsidized price, a majority reacted positively. If the connection cost was brought down to 17% of the total cost, 65% were willing to pay CFAF 9,400 (Figure 25). Along with this, proposing a flexible payment plan could further increase the uptake rate of the national grid: 78% of unconnected households were willing to pay for the subsidized connection cost (CFAF 9,400) provided it could be paid in installments. 22% 2% 24 7% 4% Access to Electricity FIGURE 25 • Willingness to pay for the grid connection fee (nationwide) 22% 2% 7% 4% 65% 17% (9,400 CFAF) Yes, upfront Yes, if given 3 months Yes, if given 6 months Yes, if given 12 months Never The large majority of unconnected households that are not willing to pay for a grid connection (82.4%) reported that they cannot afford the wiring costs. These findings point to a need to design and implement more comprehensive policies for grid densification. Also, the financing options may help households not only to pay the official grid connection fee but also any associated costs. This point is valid across the country, as spending on electricity was found to be a financial burden for all households, affecting rural ones a little more severely (Figure 26). FIGURE 26 • Distribution of households by share of budget spent on electricity (nationwide, urban/rural) 49.4% 32.9% 17.7% Nationwide 50.5% 33.1% 16.4% Urban 47.6% 32.6% 19.8% Rural Less than 5% 5-10% More than 10% Nationwide, the use of solar devices is still in its infancy. On average, households have been using solar devices for less than 2.5 years. Willingness to pay for solar home systems (SHSs) increases as the price drops (Figure 27). Although only 25% of households are willing to pay for a high-capacity SHS at the full price of CFAF 682,000 (US$1,300.7), the share reaches 38% for a low-capacity SHS priced at CFAF 39,000 (US$74.4) (corresponding to one-third of the initial price). Depending on the price, 13% to 29% of households were interested in flexible payment options (installments over 6, 12, and 24 months). 62% 73% 66% 71% 70% 75% 15% 12% 4% 7% 10% 10% 6% 1% 5% 9% 7% 12% 8% 1% 4% 2% 25 5% 5% 18% 14% 5% 5% 9% 9% 47.6% 32.6% 19.8% Rural 50.5% 33.1% 16.4% NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework Urban Less than 5% 5-10% More than 10% 47.6% FIGURE 27 • Willingness to 32.6% pay for a solar home system (nationwide) 19.8% Rural Less than 5% 5-10% More than 10% 62% 73% 66% 71% 70% 75% 15% 12% 4% 7% 10% 10% 6% 1% 5% 9% 7% 62% 12% 8% 73% 1% 66% 71% 70% 4% 75% 2% 5% 5% 18% 14% 5% 5% 9% 9% 15% 39,600 CFAF 79,200 CFAF 120,000 CFAF 225,060 CFAF 450,120 CFAF 682,000 CFAF 12% 4% 7% 10% 10% 6% LOW CAPACITY HIGH CAPACITY 1% 5% 9% 7% 12% 8% 1% Yes, upfront Yes, if given 6 months Yes, if given 12 months Yes, if given 24 4% months Never 2% 5% 5% 18% 14% 5% 5% 9% 9% Note: Here, a low-capacity SHS corresponds to a 5-watt system and a high-capacity SHS corresponds to a 150-watt system. 39,600 CFAF 79,200 CFAF 120,000 CFAF 225,060 CFAF 450,120 CFAF 682,000 CFAF The large majority households (92.1%) are not willing to pay for HIGH ofCAPACITY LOW a solar device under any price or CAPACITY payment plan, due to Affordability issues (Figure 28). Only 6.5% of households considered maintenance to be a barrier. Thus, Affordability Yes, upfront is important Yes, if given 6 months to Yes, if address given when Yes, 12 months Other if given 24 access promoting months to Never off-grid solar solutions. Maintenance not available 1.4% 6.5% FIGURE 28 • Reasons cited by households for not being willing to pay for a solar home system (nationwide) Other Maintenance Cannot afford paymentnot available 1.4% 6.5% 92.1% Cannot afford payment 92.1% IMPROVING ELECTRICITY ACCESS AMONG GRID-CONNECTED HOUSEHOLDS In Niger, the national grid provides a fair Quality of service to consumers (Figure 29). Nationwide, four in five grid-connected households (79.6%) are in Tier 3 or above, while nearly one in three households (31.1%) reach Tier 5 access. The remaining 20.4% of grid users suffer from poor supply, but mainly fall in Tier 2. Urban households enjoy a better level of access than rural ones. 26 Access to Electricity FIGURE 29 • MTF Tier distribution of grid-connected households (nationwide, urban/rural) 0.3% 19.9% 23.3% 25.2% 31.1% 0.2% Nationwide 0.2% 0.1% 15.3% 19.6% 27.3% 37.5% Urban 0.6% 28.2% 29.8% 21.6% 19.8% Rural Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 0.3% 19.9% 23.3% 25.2% 31.1% 0.2% Nationwide More than two-thirds of grid-connected households are not in the highest tier (Tier 5) and could move 0.3% More specifically, up to higher tiers. 0.2% 0.7% 7.2% 30.4% improving the Availability, Reliability, and Affordability of electricity 61.4% 0.1% 15.3% shift grid supply could eventually tier. users to the highest27.3% 19.6% 37.5% Nationwide Urban Limited Availability 31.1% supply is an issue for 38.6% of grid-connected of electricity 0.1% 0.8% 3.5% 64.4% households in Niger (Figure 30). Most of these 0.6% 28.2% households receive between 29.8% 16 and 23 hours of electricity per day, whereas Urban 21.6% 19.8% 8.1% of grid-connected households receive less than 16 hours of electricity per day. Urban households 0.6% more hours of enjoy Rural electricity 0.3% 13.7% service than rural ones. Evening Availability is 29.2% an issue for about one- 56.2% fifth of grid-connected households (Figure 31). Rural Tier FIGURE 30 • Distribution of Tier 1 0 grid-connected Tier 2 households Tier 3 based on dailyTier 4 Availability Tier 5 a 24-hour (over Tier 0 (< 4 hours) Tier 2 (4 - 8 hours) Tier 3 (8 - 16 hours) day) (nationwide, urban/rural) Tier 4 (16 - 23 hours) Tier 5 (≥ 23 hours) 0.3% 30.4% 61.4% 0.7% 7.2% Nationwide 0.1% 0.8% 31.1% 64.4% 3.5% Urban 0.2% 4.3% 81.5% 0.6% 14.0% 0.3% 29.2% 56.2% Nationwide 13.7% Rural 0.3% 80.9% 5.4% 13.4% Urban Tier 0 (< 4 hours) Tier 2 (4 - 8 hours) Tier 3 (8 - 16 hours) 0.1% Tier 4 (16 - 23 hours) Tier 5 (≥ 23 hours) 0.2% 82.5% 2.2% 15.0% Rural Tier 0 (<1 hour) Tier 1 (1 - 2 hours) Tier 2 (2 - 3 hours) Tier 3 (3 - 4 hours) Tier 5 (4 hours) 0.2% 81.5% 4.3% 14.0% Nationwide 0.3% 80.9% 5.4% 13.4% Urban 0.1% 0.2% 82.5% 27 2.2% 15.0% Rural Tier 0 (< 4 hours) Tier 2 (4 - 8 hours) Tier 3 (8 - 16 hours) Tier 4 (16 - 23 hours) Tier 5 (≥ 23 hours) NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework FIGURE 31 • Distribution of grid-connected households based on evening Availability (4-hour period) (nationwide, urban/rural) 0.2% 81.5% 4.3% 14.0% Nationwide 0.3% 80.9% 5.4% 13.4% Urban 0.1% 0.2% 82.5% 2.2% 15.0% Rural Tier 0 (<1 hour) Tier 1 (1 - 2 hours) Tier 2 (2 - 3 hours) Tier 3 (3 - 4 hours) Tier 5 (4 hours) More than half of grid-connected households experience more than three outages a week or more than 2 hours of interruptions (Figure 32). The situation is much better in urban areas, where a mere 3.7% of grid users experience more than 14 interruptions per week—compared to 14.6% of grid-connected rural households. FIGURE 32 • Distribution of grid-connected households based on Reliability (nationwide, urban/ rural) 44.3% 48.5% 7.2% Nationwide 3.7% 42.5% 53.8% Urban 14.6% 48.1% 37.3% Rural Tier 3 (> 14 interruptions per week) Tier 4 (4-14 interruptions OR <4 interruptions of >2 hours per week) Tier 5 (<4 interruptions lasting <2 hours per week) Also, 15.5% of grid-connected households spend more than 5% of their budget on electricity. Rural households are especially affected by Affordability constraints (Figure 33). 15.5% 84.5% Nationwide 9.2% 90.8% Urban 26.6% 73.4% Rural 28 Urban Tier 3 (> 14 interruptions per week) Tier 4 (4-14 interruptions OR <4 interruptions of >2 hours per week) Access to Electricity 14.6% 48.1% 37.3% Tier 5 (<4 interruptions lasting <2 hours per week) Rural FIGURE 33 • Distribution of grid-connected households based on Affordability (nationwide, urban/ rural) 15.5% Tier 3 (> 14 interruptions per week) 84.5% Tier 4 (4-14 interruptions OR <4 interruptions of >2 hours per week) Nationwide Tier 5 (<4 interruptions lasting <2 hours per week) 9.2% 90.8% Urban 15.5% 84.5% 26.6% 73.4% Nationwide Rural 9.2% 90.8% Urban Tier 2 (cost 365kWh/year ≥ 5% household expenditure) Tier 5 (cost 365kWh/year < 5% household expenditure) 26.6% 73.4% Rural 46.7% 1% of grid-connected Only 5. households reported that they have encountered no issue with their electricity 43.3% supply (Figure 34). The remaining 41.3% households reported interruptions, low voltage, supply constraints, and cost as the main problems. These findings Tier 2 (cost are based 365kWh/year on consumer ≥ 5% household perceptions of key issues. expenditure) Tier 5 (cost 365kWh/year < 5% household expenditure) FIGURE 34 • Main issues related to grid electricity supply (nationwide, urban/rural) Nationwide 25.6% 46.7% 22.5% Urban 43.3% 17.1% 18.1% 41.3% 14.8% Rural 12.9% 8.0% 7.5% 7.2% 5.1% Nationwide 4.2% 4.8% 4.9% 5.4% 3.0% 25.6% 22.5% Urban Unpredictable Low Voltage Supply Unpredictably High cost of No Problems 17.1% 18.1% interruptions shortage 14.8% high bills electricity Rural 12.9% 8.0% 7.5% 7.2% 5.1% 4.2% 4.8% 5.4% 4.9% 3.0% Unpredictable Low Voltage Supply Unpredictably High cost of No Problems interruptions shortage high bills electricity To cope with power outages, grid-connected households in Niger use dry-cell batteries almost exclusively: 73.7% of rural households and 80.8% of urban households use dry-cell batteries as their backup source of power for lighting (Figure 35). Among grid-connected households, 17.6% do not have any backup source of lighting; and more urban households (86.3%) than rural households (75.6%) use a backup source. 29 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework FIGURE 35 • Share of grid-connected households using a backup power source for lighting (nationwide, urban/rural) 78.2% 80.8% 73.7% Nationwide Urban 24.4% Rural 17.6% 13.7% 4.2% 5.5% 1.9% Dry-cell battery Other No backup POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS A mere 15.8% of households in Niger are connected to the national grid. Among them, nearly one-third (31.1%) are in Tier 5. Improvements in the Availability of electricity (that is, increasing the amount of time during which electricity service is available) and its Reliability (reducing the number and duration of outages) and Affordability (reducing the share of electricity in the household budget) could shift more than two-thirds (68.9%) of the grid-connected households to higher tiers. 3.2% 0.3% Only 3.7% of households use off-grid solutions, including 1.2% who rely on solar lanterns and 0.8% using solar home systems. Government policies are needed to facilitate the development of a market for solar products and their distribution, installation, and maintenance. More than four-fifths of households (82.5%) are in Tier 0 for electricity access. Virtually all households in to any electricity source. Moving them to higher tiers would require the provision Tier 0 have no access60.0% of either grid or off-grid access. The following are policy recommendations for providing electricity to those who do not have access: • Formulate optimal energy solutions with the least cost, considering the population density, the distance to the national grid network, potential electricity demand from various types of consumers, and the socioeconomic environment. With the advancement in geographic information system (GIS) 0.3% devised using the geospatial planning methodology. technology, optimal energy solutions are often 17 0.1% • Densify the grid, especially by offering longer payment periods and more financing options for the connection cost, which would effectively address 1.1% the financial barrier of the connection fee that Beyond grid densification, expansion of grid infrastructure can provide electricity households face.23.2% 2.8% to those without electricity as long as this is the lowest-cost approach.18 1.1% 0.8% 1.7% 0.7% 4.6% Since the 17 survey Three was conducted, stones stove this has been included in Traditional the 2019 Cook National Electrification Stoves ImprovedStrategy (NES). Cook Stoves Clean Fuel Stoves As per the NES, grid densification and extension are the least-cost solutions toward electrifying 85% of the population by 2035. 18 Wood purchased Wood collected Charcoal LPG/cooking gas Coal/Lignite Animal Waste/Dung Crop Residue/Plant Biomass 30 Access to Electricity • Consider the development of mini-grids, especially for settlements located far from the grid infrastructure, and where households have sizeable electricity demand, including for productive uses. • Consider introducing off-grid solar products; this may be a more feasible solution for households living in areas where the grid infrastructure is not available. Although households in Niger have only started using solar devices in recent years, the majority of these solar users seem to be satisfied with the current service. Thus, providing off-grid access through solar devices of at least 3 watts (or 12 watt-hours) can move Tier 0 households to higher tiers (most likely Tier 1 or 2) for access to electricity. Strengthening quality assurance systems coupled with micro-finance and leasing opportunities could increase the adoption of solar devices. Consumer awareness programs could help raise the demand and the willingness to pay, and help potential consumers choose products of adequate quality and use them more sustainably. 31 ACCESS TO MODERN ENERGY COOKING SOLUTIONS Photo: World Bank 78.2% 80.8% 73.7% Nationwide Urban 24.4% Rural 17.6% 13.7% ASSESSING ACCESS TO MODERN ENERGY 4.2% COOKING SOLUTIONS 5.5% 1.9% Dry-cell battery Other No backup TECHNOLOGIES In Niger, over 90% of households primarily cook with biomass (Figure 36). They almost exclusively use a three-stone stove for burning firewood as their primary cooking solution (83.2%). Improved cookstoves are used by a mere 1.5% of households with firewood, and clean fuel stoves (using liquefied petroleum gas [LPG]) are the primary cooking solution of 4.6% of households. FIGURE 36 • Distribution of cookstove types and fuel used (nationwide) 3.2% 0.3% 60.0% 0.3% 0.1% 1.1% 23.2% 2.8% 1.1% 0.8% 1.7% 0.7% 4.6% Three stones stove Traditional Cook Stoves Improved Cook Stoves Clean Fuel Stoves Wood purchased Wood collected Charcoal LPG/cooking gas Coal/Lignite Animal Waste/Dung Crop Residue/Plant Biomass Note: LPG = liquefied petroleum gas. Although three-stone stoves are the main cooking solution used in both urban and rural settings, urban and rural households have different cooking patterns (Figure 37). Urban households show a more diverse array of cooking technologies and rely less on biomass fuels. Urban households cook predominantly with firewood (66.7%), followed by LPG (19.9%) and charcoal (9.5%). Over half of urban households use a three-stone stove as their primary cooking solution (58.1%), followed 33 0.1% 0.7% 0.9% 15.4% NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework 1.3% 1.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.1% by clean fuel stoves (19.9%) and traditional stoves (19.2%). Improved cookstoves are only marginally (2.8%). used Three In rural stones stove areas, nearly allCookstoves Traditional households cook Cookstoves (93.5%). Rural with firewood Improved households Clean Fuel Stoves use three-stone stoves almost Wood purchased exclusively to cook Wood collected with biomass. Wood Charcoal is mainly collected in rural LPG/cooking gas settings and purchased in urban areas. Charcoal and LPG use is concentrated in urban settings. There is no Coal/Lignite Animal Waste/Dung Crop Residue/Plant Biomass significant pattern of stove stacking in Niger (1.4% of households). FIGURE 37 • Distribution of cookstoves and fuels used (urban/rural) URBAN 0.9% 6.4% 50.7% 0.3% 2.5% 9.5% 19.9% 0.3% 0.1% 6.6% 2.7% Three stones stove Traditional Cookstoves Improved Cookstoves Clean Fuel Stoves Wood purchased Wood collected Charcoal LPG/cooking gas Coal/Lignite Animal Waste/Dung Crop Residue/Plant Biomass RURAL 3.9% 0.4% 75.4% 0.3% 0.1% 0.7% 0.9% 15.4% 1.3% 1.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.1% Three stones stove Traditional Cookstoves Improved Cookstoves Clean Fuel Stoves Wood purchased Wood collected Charcoal LPG/cooking gas Coal/Lignite Animal Waste/Dung Crop Residue/Plant Biomass Note: LPG = liquefied petroleum gas. 34 URBAN 0.9% Access to Modern Cooking Solutions MTF TIERS About 95% of Niger households are in Tiers 0–1 for access to modern energy cooking solutions. Only 1.9% of households are in Tier 5 among the 4.7% that are in Tier 2 or above (Figure 38). A significant gap between urban and rural households has been identified in the MTF cooking tier distribution: all rural households are within Tiers 0–1 while 20% of urban households are within Tiers 2–5. Nearly 1 in 10 urban households is in Tier 5 for access to modern energy cooking solutions. FIGURE 38 • MTF tier distribution (nationwide, urban/rural) 1.9% 21.2% 74.1% 1.7% 0.1% 1.0% Nationwide 24.3% 55.5% 0.3% 3.8% 7.5% 8.6% Urban 20.3% 79.4% 0.2% Rural Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 1.9% 21.2% 74.1% 1.7% 0.1% 1.0% MTF ATTRIBUTES Nationwide 21.2% 73.2% 4.6% 1.0% 24.3% 55.5% 3.8% 7.5% 8.6% NationwideExposure Cooking 0.3% Urban 24.3% attribute, which represents an53.6% For the Cooking Exposure 2.2% during estimate of personal exposure 19.9%cooking 20.3% activities based on 79.4% ventilation,19 nearly 95% of Niger emissions from cooking and its mitigation through 0.2% Urban households Rural are in Tiers 0 and 1 (Figure 39). The Cooking Exposure Tier is negatively affected by the fact that 86.7% of households use biomass with three-stone stoves. Less than 1% of rural households are 0.2% in Tiers 2–5 (0.9%) compared with 22% of urban households. 78.8% 20.3% 0.7% Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Rural FIGURE 39 • Tier distribution of Cooking Exposure (nationwide, urban/rural) 21.2% Tier 0 Tier 1 73.2% Tier 2 Tier 5 4.6% 1.0% Nationwide 24.3% 53.6% 2.2% 19.9% Urban 0.5% 20.3% 4.9% 78.8% 0.2% 0.7% Rural Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 5 67.8% 2.2% In this survey, the categorizations are based on typology of stoves, fuels, and their context of use, not on actual technical measurements. 19 0.5% 19.0% 4.9% 4.6% 35 1.0% Nationwide 24.3% 53.6% 2.2% 19.9% NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework Urban 92.2% 92.8% 90.0% 0.2% Households using three-stone stoves as their primary stoves 20.3% account for the largest share 78.8% 0.7%of Tier 0 for the Cooking Exposure attribute. A large portion of primary stoves (67.8%) that are three-stone fire Rural stoves reach Tier 1, because of their better ventilation. Households using an improved cookstove are Female classified between Tier 1 and Tier 2 for Cooking Exposure. Biomass stoves, however, do not achieve TierMale Tier 0 3 for exposure because of the absence Tier 1 of advanced biomassTier 2 stoves, Tier such as 5 gasifier stoves, which could reduce pollutants significantly (Figure 40). 7.8% 10.0% FIGURE 40 • Distribution 7.2% of households based on Cooking Exposure, by primary cookstove (nationwide) Nationwide 0.5% Urban Rural 4.9% 81.1% 67.8% 2.2% 60.5% Female 19.0% 4.6% 1.0% Male 24.8% TIER 0 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 5 Three-stone stove Traditional Cookstoves 12.9% 12.0% Improved Cookstoves Clean Fuel Stoves 1.4% 1.0% 1.6% 1.3% 3.4% For ventilation, biomass fuel stoves mostly range from Tier 4 to Tier 5 and to a lesser extent from Tier 0 to Tier 2 (Figure 41). A large Married Divorced cooking outdoors share of households Married Widow(er) have relatively good ventilation. Single The(monogamous) (polygamous) bad ventilation tiers result from the many households that cook in small indoor spaces with no or few openings. The absence of Tier 4 in the ventilation structure indicates that households do not use chimneys in kitchens. FIGURE 41 • Distribution of households based on ventilation, by primary biomass cookstove (nationwide) 1.1% 4.9% 67.8% 0.3% 2.0% 18.7% 0.2% 0.3% Tiers 0-2 (Bad) Tier 3 (Average) Tier 4-5 (Good) Three-stone stove Traditional Cookstoves Improved Cookstoves 36 Access to Modern Cooking Solutions 67.8% 2.0% 4.0% Convenience 2.0% 18.7% 3.0% Convenience is determined by the time spent collecting and preparing fuel per week and preparing TIERS 0 2 BAD TIER 3 AVERAGE TIER 4 5 GOOD the stove for cooking. In Niger, 91.8% of households (Tier 1 and 2) spend more than 3 hours a week at least 10 in fuel collection or Three-stone minutes per stove meal in Traditional stove preparation Cookstoves (Figure Improved 42). Biomass users are Cookstoves overrepresented in the low Convenience Tiers, while all LPG users reach Tier 5 for Convenience. 3.5% FIGURE 42 • Distribution of households based on Convenience (nationwide, urban/rural) 9.9% 4.6% 1.1% 88.2% 2.5% 3.6% Nationwide 0.9% 71.8% 2.5% 19.8% 5.0% 67.8% Urban 2.0% 4.0% 92.9% 1.1% 0.3% 3.2% 2.5% Rural 2.0% 18.7% 3.0% TIERS 0 2 BAD Tier 1 Tier TIER Tier 3 2 3 AVERAGE 4 Tier TIER Tier 5 4 5 GOOD Safety of primary cookstove Three-stone stove Traditional Cookstoves Improved Cookstoves The degree of risk of injury varies by type of cookstove and the fuel used. Risks may include exposure to hot surfaces or fire or the potential for fuel splatter. In defining this attribute, the reported incidence of 6.6% 93.4% past injury or fire is used to measure Safety. Over the years prior to the survey, if household members4.6% did not experience any accidents that required professional medical attention, then the cooking1.1% device was Nationwide 88.2% 2.5% 3.6% considered safe. This was the case for 99.5 % of households,86.5% which did not experience such accidents. Nationwide 13.5% All households that reported such accidents during the previous 12 months were using open fire stoves. Urban 0.9% 71.8% 2.5% 19.8% 5.0% Affordability 4.6% 95.4% Urban Rural 0.3% Affordability is calculated using two factors: total monthly household expenditure2.5% 92.9% and 1.1% household 3.2% expenditure on cooking fuel. If a household’s expenditure on cooking fuel does not exceed 5% of the Rural Tier 3 - cooking fuel expenditure ≥ 5% household total expenditure household’s monthly expenditure, the fuel is considered affordable. According to this criterion, 6.6% Tier 5 - of households in Niger do not view cooking their fuel expenditure current cooking 14 4–14 ≤3 disruptions per week) Reliability (Duration of > 2 hrs (if ≤ 2 hrs disruptions frequency ≤ 3) per week) Quality (voltage problems affect Yes No the use of desired appliances) Affordability (cost of a standard ≥ 5% of household expenditure (income) < 5% of household expenditure (income) consumption package of 365 kWh/year) Formality (bill is paid to the utility, pre-paid card No Yes seller, or authorized representative) Health and Safety (having past accidents Yes No and perception of high risk in the future) Source: Bhatia and Angelou 2015. Note: Colors signify tier categorization. 53 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework TABLE A1.2 • The Multi-Tier Framework for measuring access to modern energy cooking solutions Attributes Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 ISO’s voluntary performance targets (Default ventilation)a >1030 ≤1030 ≤481 ≤218 ≤62 ≤5 PM2.5 (mg/MJd) >18.3 ≤18.3 ≤11.5 ≤7.2 ≤4.4 ≤3.0 CO (g/MJd) Cooking High Ventilation >1489 ≤1489 ≤321 ≤92 ≤7 Exposure PM2.5 (mg/MJd) ≤733 >26.9 ≤26.9 ≤10.3 ≤6.2 ≤4.4 CO (g/MJd) ≤16.0 Low Ventilation >550 ≤550 ≤252 ≤115 ≤32 ≤2 PM2.5 (mg/MJd) >9.9 ≤9.9 ≤5.5 ≤3.7 ≤2.2 ≤1.4 CO (g/MJd) Cookstove ISO’s voluntary performance Targets ≤10% > 10% > 20% > 30% > 40% > 50% Efficiency Fuel acquisition and preparation ≥7 <7 <3 < 1.5 < 0.5 time (hours per week) Convenience Stove preparation time (minutes ≥15 < 15 < 10 <5 <2 per meal) No serious accidents Safety Serious Accidents over the past 12 months over the past year Fuel cost < 5% of Fuel cost ≥ 5% of household Affordability household expenditure expenditure(income) (income) Readily Available available Fuel availability Primary fuel available less than 80% of the year 80% of throughout year the year Source: Bhatia and Angelou 2015. Note: Colors signify tier categorization. 54 Annexes ANNEX 2. SAMPLING STRATEGY SAMPLE FRAME AND SAMPLE SELECTION PROCEDURE The household survey sample selection was based on a stratified household sampling by region and urban/ rural strata and connection/no connection to the national electric grid, aimed at achieving nationally representative samples. A two-degree sample selection was applied. The first degree corresponds to the enumeration area (EA) selection. For each region, the sampling frame used was the exhaustive list of all EAs from the latest population census dating from 2012 (4ème Recensement Général de la Population et de l’Habitat, RGP/H-2012). The sampling frame comprised 19,838 EAs. Each EA entails the following information: region, department, ID code, number of households, total population, and settlement type. The borders for each EA are clearly identified on maps especially created for the RGP/H-2012. The procedure to draw the survey sample is a stratified two-degree sample. The first degree sample was drawn independently in each strata (region and type of residency: urban/rural) with a probability proportional to the size of the EA (number of households). The formula to calculate the sample size is: z 2 r (1 - r ) fk z 2 r (1 - r )[1 + r (m - 1)]k n= = e2 e2 where: n = Sample size in terms of number of households to be selected. z = z-statistics corresponding to the level of confidence desired. The commonly used level of confidence is 95% for which z is 1.96. r = Estimate of the indicator of interest to be measured by the survey. f = Sample design effect. This represents how much larger the squared standard error of a two-stage sample is when compared with the squared standard error of a simple random sample of the same size. Its default value for infrastructure interventions is 2.0 or higher, which should be used unless there is supporting empirical data from similar surveys that suggest a different value. The sample design effect has been included in the sample size calculation formula (1) and is defined as: f = 1 + ρ (m – 1). ρ = Intra-cluster correlation coefficient. This is a number that measures the tendency of households within the same Primary Sampling Unit (PSU) to behave alike with regards to the variable of interest. ρ is almost always positive, normally ranging from 0 (no intra-cluster correlation) to 1 (when all households in the same PSU are exactly alike). For many variables of interest in the Living Standards Measurement Study (LSMS) household surveys, ρ ranges from 0.01 to 0.10, but it can be 0.5 or larger for infrastructure related variables. m = Average number of households selected per PSU. 55 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework k = Factor accounting for non-response. Households are not selected using replacement.23 Thus, the final number of households interviewed will be slightly less that the original sample size eligible for interviewing. For most developing countries, the non-response rate is typically 10% or less. So, a value of 1.1 (= 1 + 10%) for k would be conservative. e = Margin of error, sampling errors, or level of precision. These depend to a large degree on the size of the sample, and very little on the size of the population. ESMAP–World Bank calculated a sample size of 4,128 households to be drawn from 344 EAs. Thus, EAs are drawn in the first degree. For each region, the sampling frame consists of an exhaustive list of all EAs from RGP/H-2012. Since each region has a different size in terms of population, and hence number of households and number of EAs, the sample will be proportional to the size of each region. So, the first degree sample will be drawn independently in each strata. The total number of 344 EAs are randomly drawn proportionate to the size of the EA (number of households) and its electrification status. The EAs are spread over the whole national territory, of which 138 are in urban areas and 139 in rural areas. An additional sample of 67 urban EAs is drawn independent of their electrification status. TABLE A2.1 • Breakdown of sample enumeration areas by region, urban/rural, and electrification status Region Urban  Rural  Total With electricity Without electricity With electricity Without electricity Agadez 7 4 2 2 15 Diffa 3 2 0 0 5 Dosso 5 4 10 7 26 Maradi 11 8 16 10 45 Niamey 31 20 0 1 52 Tahoua 10 6 20 13 49 Tillaberi 5 3 13 9 30 Zinder 11 8 22 14 55 Total 83 55 83 56 277 LISTING AND SECOND-DEGREE SELECTION Each EA that is selected in the first degree is subject to an exhaustive listing (without omission or double count) thanks to a listing form used to find out the total number of households living in a locality, be they connected or not to the national grid. Twelve households are then systematically selected with equal probability. So, within those 344 EAs, 4,128 households are interviewed in total, of which 2,460 are in urban areas (including 804 additional households in the 7 main cities excluding Diffa) and 1,668 in rural areas. The 12 households selected in each EA will be surveyed. The sample size should be calculated to reflect experience in the country in question. Hence, certain households may be replaced in particular countries if need- 23 ed. In this case, a different weight will be considered when preparing the estimates. 56 Annexes TABLE A2.2 • Breakdown of sample urban households by region and electrification status Urban EAs with electricity (3/5) EAs without electricity (2/5) Number of Number of Number of Number of connected unconnected Number of unconnected Additional Region EAs households households EAs households households Agadez 7 70 14 4 48 72 Diffa 3 30 6 2 24 0 Dosso 5 50 10 4 48 48 Maradi 11 110 22 8 96 120 Niamey 31 310 62 20 240 300 Tahoua 10 100 20 6 72 96 Tillaberi 5 50 10 3 36 48 Zinder 11 110 22 8 96 120 Total 83 830 166 55 660 804 Note: EA = enumeration area. TABLE A2.3 • Breakdown of sample rural households by region and electrification status Rural EAs with electricity (3/5) EAs without electricity (2/5) Number of Number of Number of connected unconnected unconnected Region Number of EAs households households Number of EAs households Agadez 2 20 4 2 24 Diffa 0 0 0 0 0 Dosso 10 100 20 7 84 Maradi 16 160 32 10 120 Niamey 0 0 0 1 12 Tahoua 20 200 40 13 156 Tillaberi 13 130 26 9 108 Zinder 22 220 44 14 168 Total 83 830 166 56 672 Note: EA = enumeration area. 57 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework ANNEX 3. Cookstove Typology Typology Picture Three-stone stove - Open fire - Fuel rests on the ground Traditional biomass stove - Enclosed combustion chamber - Pot placed above the fire Improved biomass stove - The combustion chamber is well insulated - Fuel rests on a shelf Clean fuel stove - Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stoves 58 References REFERENCES Bhatia, M., and N. Angelou. 2015. Beyond Connections: Energy Access Redefined. ESMAP Technical Report 008/15. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/24368. License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. Blackden, M., and Q. Wodon. 2006. “Gender, Time Use, and Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Working Paper 73, World Bank, Washington, DC. Clancy, J. S., M. Skutsch, and S. Bachelor. 2003. “The Gender-Energy-Poverty Nexus: Finding the Energy to Address Gender Concerns in Development.” DFID Project CNTR998521, Department for International Development, London, UK. Dherani, M., D. Pope, M. Mascarenhas, K. R. Smith, M. Weber, and N. Bruce. 2008. “Indoor Air Pollution from Unprocessed Solid Fuel Use and Pneumonia Risk in Children Aged Under Five Years: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Bulletin of the World Health Organization 86 (5): 390–98. Ekouevi, K., and V. Tuntivate. 2012. Household Energy Access for Cooking and Heating: Lessons Learned and the Way Forward. World Bank Studies. Washington, DC: World Bank. ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Program). 2004. The Impact of Energy on Women’s Lives in Rural India. Washington, DC: ESMAP/World Bank. Gwavuya, S. G., S. Abele, I. Barfuss, M. Zeller, and J. Muller. 2012. “Household Energy Economics in Rural Ethiopia: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Biogas Energy.” Renewable Energy 48 (December): 202–09. IEA, IRENA, UNSD, WB, and WHO. 2019. Tracking SDG 7: The Energy Progress Report 2019. Washington, DC: World Bank. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2018. Clean Cookstoves and Clean Cooking Solutions: Harmonized Laboratory Test Protocols, Part 3: Voluntary Performance Targets for Cookstoves Based on Laboratory Testing. Technical Report ISO/TR 19867-3 (October). Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/ standard/73935.html. Mills, E. 2016. “Identifying and Reducing the Health and Safety Impacts of Fuel-Based Lighting.” Energy for Sustainable Development 30 (February): 39–50. Ministère de l’Energie du Niger. 2018. Stratégie nationale d’accès à l’électricité, Annexe au DECRET N°2018-743/ PRN/M/E du 19 octobre 2018. Parikh, J. 2011. “Hardships and Health Impacts on Women Due to Traditional Cooking Fuels: A Case Study of Himachal Pradesh, India.” Energy Policy 39 (12): 7587–94. Rehfuess, E. A., S. Mehta, and A. Prüss-Üstün. 2006. “Assessing Household Solid Fuel Use: Multiple Implications for the Millennium Development Goals.” Environmental Health Perspectives 114 (3): 373–78. Smith, K. R., S. Mehta, and M. Maeusezahl-Feuz. 2004. “Indoor Air Pollution from Household Use of Solid Fuels.” In Comparative Quantification of Health Risks: Global and Regional Burden of Disease Attributable to Selected Major Risk Factors, edited by M. Ezzati, A. D. Lopez, A. Rodgers, and C. J. L. Murray, 1435–93. Geneva: World Health Organization. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) and WHO. 2009. The Energy Access Situation in Developing Countries: A Review Focusing on the Least Developed Countries and Sub-Saharan Africa. New York: UNDP and WHO. Wang, X., J. Franco, O. R. Masera, K. Troncoso, and M. X. Rivera. 2013. What Have We Learned about Household Biomass Cooking in Central America? ESMAP Report 76222. Washington, DC: ESMAP/World Bank. 59 NIGER | Energy Access Diagnostic Report Based on the Multi-Tier Framework World Bank. 2011. Household Cookstoves, Environment, Health, and Climate Change: A New Look at the Old Problem. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank. 2018a. Tracking SDG7: The Energy Progress Report 2018. Washington, DC: World Bank. https:// World Bank. 2018b. Policy Matters: Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy 2018. ESMAP Report. Washington, DC: World Bank. 60 References 61