Publication: Primary Household Energy for Cooking and Heating in 52 Developing Economies
Loading...
Date
2021-06
ISSN
Published
2021-06
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
Recent household surveys from 52 developing economies that include questions about energy use show that the most commonly cited primary energy for cooking is wood, followed by gas, natural gas and, where natural gas is not available, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and then by electricity. Biogas use is rare, and the use of ethanol and solar cookers is essentially non-existent. Households in the economies with a very high share of the population relying on clean energy as the primary source for cooking overwhelmingly prefer gas over electricity. In two-thirds of the economies more than half of the rich cook with clean energy, again preferring gas over electricity. As income rises and natural gas infrastructure becomes better established, urban households shift from LPG to natural gas, leaving LPG primarily for rural households. By contrast, in low-income and some lower-middle-income economies even the rich cook primarily with charcoal or kerosene (usually preferring charcoal over kerosene), while LPG is used by some well-off urban households. In one out of every six economies less than one-tenth of the population in the top 20 percent cites clean energy as their primary energy source for cooking. The choice of gas is driven in many instances by historical fuel price subsidy policies, which in some cases have continued to this day. Where natural gas is not available and LPG has not been subsidized but electricity has historically been reliable and cheap, such as in Southern Africa, the rich cook with electricity. Aside from price and supply reliability, community-wide familiarity with a particular technology and fuel, and economies of scale arising from popular use, may be partially driving the pattern of each economy’s showing dominant preference for gas or electricity.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Kojima, Masami. 2021. Primary Household Energy for Cooking and Heating in 52 Developing Economies. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/35947 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Household Energy Access for Cooking and Heating : Lessons Learned and the Way Forward(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2012)Half of humanity about 3 billion people are still relying on solid fuels for cooking and heating. Of that, about 2.5 billion people depend on traditional biomass fuels (wood, charcoal, agricultural waste, and animal dung), while about 400 million people use coal as their primary cooking and heating fuel (UNDP and WHO 2009). The majority of the population relying on solid fuels lives in Sub-Saharan Africa and in South Asia. In some countries in Central America and in East Asia and the Pacific, the use of solid fuels is also significant. The inefficient and unsustainable production and use of these fuels result in a significant public health hazard, as well as negative environmental impacts that keep people in poverty. Strategies to improve energy access to the poor have focused mainly on electricity access. They have often neglected non electricity household energy access. It is, however, estimated that about 2.8 billion people will still depend on fuel wood for cooking and heating in 2030 in a business-as-usual modus operandi (IEA 2010). The need for urgent interventions at the household level to provide alternative energy services to help improve livelihoods is becoming more and more accepted. This report's main objective is to conduct a review of the World Bank's financed operations and selected interventions by other institutions on household energy access in an attempt to examine success and failure factors to inform the new generation of upcoming interventions. First, the report provides a brief literature review to lay out the multidimensional challenge of an overwhelming reliance on solid fuels for cooking and heating. Second, it highlights how the Bank and selected governments and organizations have been dealing with this challenge. Third, it presents lessons learned to inform upcoming interventions. And finally, it indicates an outlook on the way forward.Publication China : Accelerating Household Access to Clean Cooking and Heating(Washington, DC, 2013-09)The China Clean Stove Initiative (CSI), a collaborative effort of the Chinese government and the World Bank, aims to scale up access to clean cooking and heating stoves for poor, primarily rural households, who are likely to continue using solid fuels beyond 2030. More than half of China's population still relies on solid fuels (coal and biomass) for cooking and heating; many of these households, located mainly in rural areas, are likely to continue using solid fuels in the near future. Switching to modern energy alternatives would be the most effective way to achieve clean cooking and heating solutions and should be encouraged; yet such fuels are more expensive than solid fuels, requiring more costly stoves and delivery infrastructure. Effective strategies to scale up the dissemination of clean burning, fuel-efficient stoves for household cooking and heating can mitigate the health hazards associated with the burning of solid fuels. It is estimated that Household Air Pollution (HAP) from solid fuel use results in more than a million premature deaths each year in China. Scaled-up access to clean and efficient stoves is consistent with China's strategy to promote energy conservation, reduced carbon emissions, and green energy in villages. The China CSI comprises four phases: 1) initial stocktaking and development of the implementation strategy; 2) institutional strengthening, capacity building, and piloting of the strategy; 3) scaled-up program implementation; and 4) evaluation and dissemination of lessons learned. This report will serve as a knowledge base and roadmap to encourage and engage all interested parties in working together on this important agenda. The initial CSI stocktaking exercise calls for a comprehensive strategy comprising institutional strengthening and building of an enabling policy and regulatory environment, market and business development, and stimulation of household demand, supported by an innovative, results based financing approach.Publication Who Uses Bottled Gas? Evidence from Households in Developing Countries(2011-07-01)Household surveys in Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka were analyzed using a two-stage Heckman model to examine the factors influencing the decision to use liquefied petroleum gas (stage 1) and, among users, the quantity consumed per person (stage 2). In the first stage, liquefied petroleum gas selection in all six countries increased with household expenditure and the highest level of education attained by female and male household members. Electricity connection increased, and engagement in agriculture and increasing household size decreased, liquefied petroleum gas selection in five countries; urban residence increased selection in four countries; and rising firewood and kerosene prices increased selection in three countries each. In the second stage, the quantity of liquefied petroleum gas consumed increased with rising household expenditure and decreasing price of liquefied petroleum gas in every country. Urban residence increased and engagement in agriculture decreased liquefied petroleum gas consumption. Surveys in Albania, Brazil, Mexico, and Peru, which did not report quantities, were also examined by calculating quantities using national average prices. Although fuel prices faced by individual households could not be tested, the findings largely supported those from the first six countries. Once the education levels of men and women were separately accounted for, the gender of the head of household was not statistically significant in most cases across the ten countries. Where it was significant (five equations), the sign of the coefficient was positive for men, possibly suggesting that female-headed households are burdened with unmeasured economic disadvantages, making less cash available for purchasing liquefied petroleum gas.Publication Household Use of Bottled Gas for Cooking(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2022-06)Analysis of household energy use has tended to focus on primary energy sources for cooking, lighting, and heating. However, even those using clean primary energy sources are not necessarily free from household air pollution and the burden of biomass collection because of commonly practiced fuel stacking. This paper examines household energy use in 24 Sub-Saharan African countries with a focus on bottled cooking gas, which is expected to play a pivotal role in the attainment of universal access to clean household energy by 2030. The share of people using clean energy (electricity and gas) as the primary source exceeded half only in five countries, with liquefied petroleum gas dominating in three and electricity in two. As income rose, households shifted away from wood in every country, to clean energy in most countries and to charcoal in some. Of the 12 countries (nationally or in urban areas) in which at least one-fifth of the population used liquefied petroleum gas as their primary cooking fuel, more than three-fifths of primary liquefied petroleum gas users had abandoned polluting fuels in five countries. Within per capita expenditure quintiles, households who had abandoned all polluting fuels were consistently smaller than those who continued to use polluting fuels, mainly charcoal or kerosene, perhaps pointing to the ease of cooking for small families exclusively with liquefied petroleum gas and electricity. However, liquefied petroleum gas–using households in the top expenditure quintile who had not abandoned polluting fuels were on average smaller than those in the fourth quintile who had abandoned polluting fuels. These findings point to reasons for fuel stacking that seem to go beyond the question of affordability.Publication Pakistan : Household Use of Commercial Energy(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2006-05)This study aimed to examine the impact of changing availability of different energy sources and their price levels on household energy choice, consumption, and expenditures. Knowledge of household expenditures and energy consumption patterns is an essential building block for further work on possible policies in the energy sector and associated poverty and social impact analysis. To this end, the four most recent household expenditure surveys-conducted in 1994, 1997, 1999, and 2001-were analyzed in detail. The survey periods included those with low fuel prices (1999) and a time of rising world oil prices (2001). No household expenditure surveys are available from the last two years, when the increase in fuel prices has far outstripped general inflation. Nevertheless, between 1994 and 2001, prices of electricity, natural gas, kerosene, and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) rose more rapidly than the consumer price index (CPI), potentially offering insights into how households might react to, and manage, sharply rising energy prices. The household survey analysis was supplemented by focus group discussions and individual interviews conducted in 2004 and 2005. Participants were asked questions about reasons for energy choice, the quality of service provided, evidence of increasing competition, affordability of different energy sources, benefits and costs, and commercial malpractice.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
No results found.