World Bank2014-08-252014-08-252003-06https://hdl.handle.net/10986/19643Household fuel choice in the past, has often been analyzed and understood through the lens of the energy ladder model. This model places relatively heavy emphasis on household fuel switching in response to rising incomes. This report views energy use through a household economics framework. The household economics framework clarifies that, in addition to income and market prices, the opportunity costs of firewood collection also need to be taken into account, in shaping demand for all fuels. The opportunity costs of firewood collection are determined by household cash, labor, land, and wood resources. Fuel choices therefore need to be understood in terms of relative household resource scarcities. The household economics framework also makes it clear that it may be perfectly rational for households to use a portfolio of different energy sources at any point in time. The results of logit, and multinomial logit regression analysis suggest that expenditure, education, household size, region, ethnicity, electrification status, and gender composition are important in influencing fuel choice. Prices and opportunity costs of firewood also matter. It remains intriguing that so many urban households continue to use wood, which is not a cheap fuel when it has to be purchased. Experience of household energy use in Guatemala suggests that, as household fuel policies elsewhere concerned with switching from biomass, need to look beyond simple pricing instruments to a wider array of policy options. Household energy strategies must be based on the realization that large groups will continue to meet their cooking needs with fuel wood for the foreseeable future. Strategies therefore cannot rely exclusively on inter-fuel substitution. A balance needs to be struck between policies aiming at inter-fuel substitution, and policies seeking to ameliorate the negative consequences of fuel wood, such as improved stoves and better ventilation. And, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) needs to be targeted primarily to areas where households rely on expensive purchased wood.en-USCC BY 3.0 IGOHOUSEHOLD ENERGY; FUEL WOOD; FUEL CONVERSION; FUEL SWITCHING; HEALTH IMPACTS; POVERTY INCIDENCE; INCOME LEVELS; ENERGY ECONOMICS; BIOMASS ENERGY; ENERGY PRICES; OPPORTUNITY COSTS; POLICY FRAMEWORK; LIQUIFIED PETROLEUM GAS; LOGIT ANALYSIS; AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIONAIR POLLUTIONANIMAL DUNGAPPLIANCESCANCERCERTAIN EXTENTCHARCOALCLEAN FUELSCOALCOMMERCIAL FUELSCOMMON PROPERTYCOMMON PROPERTY RESOURCESCONCENTRATIONSCONSUMPTION OF ENERGYCOOKINGCOOKING FUELSDEFORESTATIONDISTRIBUTION SYSTEMSDRYLANDSECONOMIC FACTORSECONOMIC MODELSELECTRICITYELECTRICITY GRIDELECTRICITY SECTOREMPIRICAL ANALYSISEMPIRICAL EVIDENCEEMPLOYMENTENERGY CONSUMPTIONENERGY CONSUMPTION PATTERNSENERGY DEMANDENERGY EFFICIENCYENERGY EXPENDITURESENERGY LADDERENERGY MARKETSENERGY OPTIONSENERGY SECTORENERGY SECTOR INTERVENTIONSENERGY SECTOR MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCEENERGY SOURCESENERGY USEENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMSEXCHANGE RATEFIREWOODFOREST COVERFOREST MANAGEMENTFUELFUEL MARKETSFUEL SWITCHINGFUEL TYPEFUEL USEFUELSFUELWOODGASGASEOUS FUELSGASESGENERATION ASSETSGRID COVERAGEHEALTH HAZARDHEATINGHOUSEHOLD ENERGYHOUSEHOLD ENERGY STRATEGIESHOUSEHOLD ENERGY USEHOUSEHOLD FUELHOUSEHOLD FUELSHYDROCARBONSINCOMEINCOME DISTRIBUTIONINTERMEDIATE INPUTSKEROSENELABOR MARKETSLABOR PRODUCTIVITYLEISURELIGHTINGLIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GASLIVING CONDITIONSLIVING STANDARDSLOGGINGLOW-INCOME COUNTRIESLOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDSLPGMARKET PRICESNATURAL GASOILOPEN ACCESS RESOURCESOPPORTUNITY COSTSPARTICULATE MATTERPER CAPITA ENERGYPETROLEUMPETROLEUM GASPOLLUTION LEVELSPOVERTY LINEPOWER GENERATIONPRICE SETTINGPRODUCTION FUNCTIONSPRODUCTIVITYPURCHASING POWERRAINFALLREFRIGERATIONRENEWABLESRESPIRATORY SYMPTOMSRURAL COMMUNITIESRURAL HOUSEHOLDSSMOKESOOTSTOVESTOWNSTRADITIONAL BIOMASSTRADITIONAL FUELSTRANSACTION COSTSURBAN AREASURBAN POPULATIONUTILITIESWAGES10.1596/19643