Survey of local impacts of biofuel crop production and adoption of ethanol stoves in southern Africa

Abstract

The two datasets outlined in this paper contain information related to (a) the local impacts of biofuel feedstock production, and (b) the factors that influence the adoption and/or sustained use of ethanol stoves in southern Africa. The first dataset was generated through extensive household surveys around four operational jatropha and sugarcane production sites in Malawi, Mozambique, and Swaziland. This project aimed to examine the local impacts of the most prominent modes of existing or intended biofuel feedstock production in southern Africa. The resulting dataset contains information about impacts on rural livelihoods, ecosystem services, food security and poverty alleviation. The second dataset is the outcome of research into factors that influence the adoption and sustained use of ethanol stoves. This dataset was collected through a household survey in Maputo city where the only large-scale ethanol stove dissemination programme in Africa has been implemented.

Human wellbeing outcomes of involvement in industrial crop production: Evidence from sugarcane, oil palm and jatropha sites in Ghana

“…Due to the different configurations of the study projects and the characteristics of the host communities, we used different sampling strategies in order to randomize respondent selection (Table 2). Our sampling approach followed closely the protocol proposed for the elicitation of household-level impacts in industrial crop settings of southern Africa [41]. In a nutshell we purposefully selected intervention and control groups depending on the different characteristics of each study site, including different types of industrial crop smallholders (in Dabala, Kwae) and plantation workers (in Yehi, Kwae) (Table 2).…”

“…In a nutshell we purposefully selected intervention and control groups depending on the different characteristics of each study site, including different types of industrial crop smallholders (in Dabala, Kwae) and plantation workers (in Yehi, Kwae) (Table 2). Based on the available information in each site we randomized the selection of respondents for each group following different techniques, including random selection from smallholder/worker lists, snowballing and transect walks [41] (Table 2). In this sense, study group selection was purposive but respondent selection within each group was randomized to the extent possible [41].…”

“…Based on the available information in each site we randomized the selection of respondents for each group following different techniques, including random selection from smallholder/worker lists, snowballing and transect walks [41] (Table 2). In this sense, study group selection was purposive but respondent selection within each group was randomized to the extent possible [41].…”

“…To avoid sampling households with dual involvement in industrial crop production (e.g. households that grow industrial crops but at least one of their members is employed at a plantation) [41], we asked direct questions at the beginning of the interview. After ensuring that there is no dual involvement we progressed with the main questionnaire.…”

“…The development of the research protocol was informed by a similar protocol that elicited the impact of industrial crops in southern Africa [41], and adopted the good practice recommendations of the UK Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC). The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Review Committee of the Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, University of Tokyo (identification number 15–186).…”