Universal access to clean cookstoves: Evaluation of a public program in Peru

Harvey

et al. 2021

Forests

Over half of the world’s population lack access to modern energy cooking services (MECS) and instead rely on locally harvested biomass for fuel. The collection and burning of such biomass for cooking have significant negative social, health, economic and environmental impacts and is a major sustainability challenge. The adverse development impacts from households’ continued dependence on polluting stove-and-fuel combinations are significant. Household Air Pollution (HAP) from biomass fuel use accounts for some 4.3 million premature deaths each year, disproportionately affecting women and children. Fuel harvesting and use represent a significant time burden for women and girls. Time savings can be realized through multiple pathways. Understanding the importance of timesaving as a factor in the adoption of clean cooking is thus important in informing the design of cookstove programs and their marketing approach. The systematic evidence evaluation of drivers of and barriers to adoption of modern energy systems undertaken for the World Bank’s Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) was further analysed to create a systematic map of evidence relating to time-saving attributable to the adoption of modern energy systems by traditional fuel users. The umbrella ESMAP evaluation comprised 160 studies, of which 48 are relevant to the current systematic map. Time-saving was gained from (i) a switch from collection to buying fuel; (ii) urban market utilization; (iii) reducing collected fuel quantity; (iv) reducing the distance to fuel collection sites; (v) and reductions of meal preparation time were found as the key drivers/enablers of cleaner energy adoption across the evidence base. Perceptions and recognition of the time-saving benefits of cleaner fuel adoption across studies were reported to be understood for: (i) fuel efficiency; (ii) fuel collection time; (iii) buying fuelwood; and (iv) better household economics. Relatively few studies report on what the time saved was used for; however, those that do investigate timesaving use found that additional time was used for: (i) additional income generation; (ii) professional development; (iii) more cooking (iv) other domestic activities (e.g., learning to sew); (v) eating out; and (vi) leisure activities. While many studies speculate that time is taken away from education, none state that saved time was used for education, beyond employment opportunities or overarching claims of professional development.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Time-saving As a Driver/enabler Of Mecs Adoptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Use Of Saved Timementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Importance of Time-Saving as a Factor in Transitioning from Woodfuel to Modern Cooking Energy Services: A Systematic Map

Harvey

et al. 2021

Forests

“…Initially, we conducted exploratory work during which we identified numerous studies that evaluate EE interventions. Programmes that have been studied include weatherisation programmes (Fowlie et al 2018), building code policies (Kotchen 2017), smart meters and feedback information (Shimada et al 2015), EE lightbulb market interventions (Allcott and Taubinsky 2015), energy audits in the industrial sector (Duflo et al 2013), and the uptake of efficient cookstoves in developing countries (Bensch et al 2015;Calzada and Sanz 2018). These early findings suggested a vast amount of high-quality evidence 2 in this field, and an emerging need to synthesise and draw lessons from it.…”

Section: Existing Ies and Evidence Synthesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of food systems interventions on food security and nutrition outcomes in low- and middle-income countries

Moore¹,

Lane²,

Storhaug³

et al. 2021

About 3ieThe International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) promotes evidence-informed equitable, inclusive and sustainable development. We support the generation and effective use of high-quality evidence to inform decision-making and improve the lives of people living in poverty in low-and middle-income countries. We provide guidance and support to produce, synthesise and quality assure evidence of what works, for whom, how, why and at what cost.3ie evidence gap map reports 3ie evidence gap maps are thematic collections of information about impact evaluations or systematic reviews that measure the effects of international development policies and programmes. The maps provide a visual display of completed and ongoing systematic reviews and impact evaluations in a sector or sub-sector, structured around a framework of interventions and outcomes.The evidence gap map reports provide all supporting documentation for the maps, including thematic background information, the methods and results, protocols, and analysis of the results. About this evidence gap map reportThis report presents the findings of a systematic search to identify and map the evidence base of impact evaluations and systematic reviews of interventions that aim to promote energy efficiency and energy conservation.

“…Peru has a population of about 32 million (Central Intelligence Agency, 2019), among whom approximately 6.4 million lack modern-day energy sources for domestic purposes. Ninety-three percent (93%) of Peruvians living in rural areas rely on BMF for heating water, cooking, and household lighting (Calzada & Sanz, 2018;Central Intelligence Agency, 2019;INEI, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low-cost assessment of a stove improvement program in Peru

Reiss¹,

Roa²,

Bacharach³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Background: Approximately 3 billion people worldwide, including more than 20 million people in Peru alone, depend on biomass fuels (BMF) for heating and boiling water, cooking, and lighting their homes. Burning BMF on poorly ventilated stoves results in household air pollution (HAP), which includes carbon monoxide (CO). Stove improvement programs aim to reduce indoor air pollution and are included in various organizations’ education visits to Peru. The programs do not allow sufficient time, or provide equipment or skills training to determine if the stove improvements have been successful.Objective: To develop and implement a rapid, low-cost method to measure CO concentrations in rural Peruvian households in order to assess the success of stove improvements. Methods: CO concentrations were measured 159 times in 14 households (with 7 clean, 6 traditional, and 1 gas stove) near Cusco, Peru. CO concentrations were measured in one-minute intervals with MSA Altair 4X multigas monitors. The likelihood of the 95th percentile exceeding the NIOSH CO ceiling limit of 200 ppm for each stove type was calculated.Results: The probability of overexposure was almost three times lower with “clean” stoves than with traditional stoves, i.e., 24% vs 9%.Conclusion: A promising and pragmatic method to evaluate the increased effectiveness of clean stoves over traditional ones was developed and tested. This method supports the implementation of clean stoves as a risk reduction measure.