Professional Documents
Culture Documents
doi:10.14355/ijes.2014.0405.01
www.ijesci.org
FactorsAffectingtheAdoptionofFuel
EfficientStovesamongRuralHouseholdsin
BorenaWoreda:NorthcentralEthiopia
AmogneAsfawEshetu
WolloUniversity(Ethiopia):DepartmentofGeographyandEnvironmentalStudies
amuvenu@yahoo.com
Abstract
Descriptivesurveyresearchhasbeenemployedtoassessthe
major factors which affect the adoption of fuel efficient
stovesintheruralhouseholdsaroundBorenaSayntnational
park. Data were collected from 248 randomly selected
householdheadsusingastructuredquestionnaireandfrom
22 purposively selected key informants for FGD. The
findings revealedthat the prominent sourceof fuel is wood
followed by animal dung and shrubs; the sources are own
plantation and kebelle forests. Modern energy efficient
stoves are not common in the study area due to financial
constraint(66.7%)andlackofaccess(25.9%).Chisquaretest
and binary logistic regressionmodel results reveal that
income level of the household head (2 = 64.914, N= 248, df
=1, V=0.512, OR=23.7 and p < .001) and educational level of
husband(2=60.514,N=232,df=1,V=0.511,OR=11.3andp<
.001)arefoundtobethemajorvariableswhichincreasesthe
propensity of stove adoption. The independent ttest shows
statistically significant difference (t=12.063, N=248, df =246,
p<0.001)intheaveragetimespentweeklybystoveusersand
nonusers.Onesamplettestresultrevealthatlocalresidents
do have positive attitude on the benefits of fuel efficient
stoves. Both governmental and nongovernmental
organizations have to take their part in making stoves
available to users. Concerned bodies should also see fuel
wood plantation projects in degraded lands and agro
forestrypracticesaswellasbiogasenergyasanotheroption.
Keywords:
Indoor Air Pollution; Fuel Efficient Stoves; Energy Ladder;
Deforestation
suffereverydaywithdifficultiesinbreathing,stinging
eyes, adverse pregnancy outcomes and chronic
respiratory diseases (WHO, 2006; Martnez and
Alfonso, 2014). Traditional stoves tend to be highly
inefficient and lose a large percentage of the fuel
energy due to incomplete combustion (Owsianowski
and Barry, ND; WHO, 2006). As a result, high
dependency on traditional stoves deplete resources
and degrades local environments, multiplies the time
needed to collect fuel, and creates IAP that threatens
the wellbeing of the most vulnerable members of
households(Douglasandetal,1994andBarnesetal.,
1994). Improved stoves can cut back indoor smoke
levels considerably (WHO, 2006). Lack of energy, in
particular lack of access to modern cooking fuels and
electricity, already represents a bottleneck, holding
back progress towards achieving the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs). As a result, UN highly
recommended that without increased investment in
the energy sector, the MDGs will not be achieved in
the poorest countries (Modi et al., 2006 and Manyo
Plange,2011).
InEthiopia,fuelwoodisthemajorenergysourceand
over 90 percent of the countrys total energy for
household cooking is derived from biomass fuels
(EPAE,2004).AccordingtoCSA(2012:18),woodisthe
main type of cooking fuel, used by 77 percent of
households.Burningofdungandcropresidueswhich
were sources of soil humus and fertility has brought
about a progressive decline in land quality and
agricultural productivity (Zenebe and et al., 2006).
According to EPAE (2004), improved charcoal stove
(Lakech)andbiomassclosedEnjerastove(Gounzie)can
save up to 25 percent and 47 percent over open fire
stoverespectively.Theyhelptoreducepressureonthe
biomass resources including forests; increase land
productivitybyreducingcropresidueanddungusage
forfuelwoodandimprovefamilyhealth(Barnesetal.,
1994; FAO, 2003 and EPAE, 2004). Even though the
141
www.ijesci.orgInternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
142
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
www.ijesci.org
FIGURE1NUMBEROFDEATHSFROMINDOORAIRPOLLUTIONRELATEDHEALTHCOMPLICATIONS
SOURCE:WHO(2009)ASCITEDINIBRD,2011
FIGURE2:TRADITIONALFIREWOODSTOVE(SOURCE:WORLD
VISION,2011)
143
www.ijesci.orgInternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
Povertyreduced
Moreproduction
MDG1
Moretimefor
Landproductivity
otheractivities
increases
Woodcollectiontime
Dungusedfor
reducedforwomen
fertilizer
attend school
FUELEFFICIENT
STOVEUTILIZATION
ENABLES:
IAP
femalestudentsto
productivity
Minimize
Moretimefor
Increaselabor
Healthstatus
improved
Engagein
MDG4, 5, 6
more
productive
activities
Decreasewood
consumption
Betteracademic
achievement
MDG2,3
Medical
Lesscarbon
Fuelwooddemand
reduced
emission
MDG3
expense
decreases
Mitigateclimate
Pressureonforests
changeMDG7
decreasedMDG7
FIGURE3:CONCEPTUALFRAMEWORK:FUELEFFICIENTSTOVESANDMDGS
OWNDEVELOPEDAFTER(WHO,2006;MODIETAL.,2006ANDUNDESA,2005)
FactorsAffectingtheAdoptionofFuelEfficientStoves
Peopleseldomadoptinnovationswithoutgoodreason
(Barnesetal.,1994).Theamountandqualityofenergy
consumption has a correlation with poverty,
deprivation,socialseclusion,accesstoknowledgeand
achievements, health, livelihood and security because
energyservicesaredirectlyassociatedwiththequality
oflifeandlevelofdevelopment(ESCAP,ND).Modiet
al. (2006) stressed that progress towards providing
greater access to modern energy services has been
slow, due to a combination of interrelated
circumstances.Theseincludelowincomelevelsamong
theunservedpopulation;lackoffinancialresourcesfor
serviceproviderstobuildthenecessaryinfrastructure
and reduce firstcost barriers to access; weak
institutional,financial,andlegalstructures;andlackof
longtermvisionandpoliticalcommitmenttoscaleup
services(Modietal.,2006).Themostimportantfactor
worth mentioned by different scholars is poverty and
lack of access. Households at lower levels of income
and development tend to be at the bottom of the
144
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
www.ijesci.org
145
www.ijesci.orgInternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
ApproximateLocationofBorenaSayntNationalPark
basedonANRSPaDPA(2006)(nottoscale)
FIGURE4:RELATIVELOCATIONOFBORENASAYNTNATIONALPARK(SOURCE:WOLLOUNIVERSITYGISTEAM)
146
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
www.ijesci.org
usinganimaldungeitherpartiallyortotally.Theresult
is consistence with the 2011 demographic and health
survey of Ethiopia which came up with wood as the
major cooking fuel (86.2%) for rural households
followed by animal dung (8.3%) and others like
agricultural residue and shrubs accounts 5.5% (CSA,
2012). During field observation, the researcher
observed dung cakes prepared for fuel and FGD
participantsalsorespondedthatitiscommonpractice
to use animal dung for fuel due to shortage of fuel
wood.Householdsalsocollectadditionalanimaldung
for fuel from fields. But using charcoal and crop
residues for fuel were not identified as a source of
energy in this research. Woldegabreil (2003) has also
indicatedthatfirewoodanddungcakesarethemajor
sources of fuel in the study area and absence of
alternative source of energy forces local communities
to exert pressure on the park. Furthermore, using
dungasfuelinsteadofasorganicfertilizercanreduce
grainproductionbysome550,000tonsannuallyacross
thecountry(ForumforEnvironment,2009).For87.1%
of the respondents, the source of fuel wood comes
from their own plantation either home stead or wood
lotsand11.7%indicatedkebelleforestsastheirsource
of wood. It was only 1.2% that reported the park as
theirsourceoffuelwood.Butthis was not confirmed
during the FGD session. FGD Participants asserted
that, even though the pressure over the park for fuel
wood decreases from time to time due to fear of the
guards and penalty, still there is a tendency to collect
woodeitherforhomeconsumptionorformarket.One
indicators for this is that out of 78 illegal acts (only
those reported with written letter) done by localsand
reportedbyguardstoBorenaweredaagriculturaland
rural development office during the period of 2006
2008, fuel wood collection from the park ranks
second (18 or 23.1% cases) next to 20 (25.6%) cases
relating grazing of livestock in the park cases
(Amogne, 2011). As observed during field work,
except the homestead plantations and very few
woodlots, it is very difficult to get fire wood outside
the park. The researcher also observed fire wood
collectedfromtheparkaroundthehomesofresidents.
The members of the family who are frequently
engaged in gathering of fuel wood in the study area
are both women and female children. Rural women
(andchildren)aretheprimarycollectorsofwoodand
residue fuels in poor developing countries; they also
manage most of the energy used by households
(ESCAP,ND).
147
www.ijesci.orgInternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
FactorsAffectingAdoptionofFuelSavingStove
Modernenergyefficientstovesarenotcommoninthe
study area. But there is an increasing trend of using
stoves made up of mud and stone with the
consultation of health extension workers (this was
confirmedduringfieldobservationandFGDsession).
42.3%ofthehouseholdsusedstovesmadeupofmud
andstoneinsteadofthetraditionalopenfiretype.But
the majority (55.6%) still used the open fire system
which is not energy efficient. Mudstove enables to
save about 20% of energy over threestone fireplaces.
A common problem with mud stoves is that a lot of
energy is wasted in heavy stove mass and it is not
durable like the modern ones. Since most part of the
studyareahasdegaagroclimaticcondition(highland),
open fire cooking stoves also serves as source of
heating and this might affect adoption of fuel saving
stove which are not as such conducive for heating
purpose.ProvisionofstovebygovernmentandNGOs
wereinsignificant.Theheadofwaterandenergyoffice
of the wereda, Ato Tesfaye Gebru (representative),
reported that a nongovernmental organization, sewech
lesewech, is currently distributing fuel efficient stoves
for eight kebelles. Till 2012, 620 stoves have been
distributedtoruralcommunitiesandmoreisreadyto
be distributed to users. But none of the kebelles
borderingtheparkwasincludedbytheprojectsofar.
The prominent factors which affect the adoption of
fuelefficientstovesinthestudyareaintheirdegreeof
influence were financial constraint (66.7%), lack of
access (25.9%) and lack of information/knowledge
(4.1%). Though the number of respondents for the
suitableness of the stove is small (3.3%), most of the
participants during FGD mentioned that the stove
madeupofmudandstone,sincebothsidesareclosed,
arenotfavorableespeciallyforlighteningandheating.
In line with this, Anhalt and Holanda (2009) stressed
that in developing countries, fuel is used not only for
cooking but also for heating and serves as a source
light.InChina,therewassimilarprobleminthe1980s
but a stove model that enables for both cooking and
space heating was developed. A chisquare test of
independence was employed to see the association
between stove users 1 and nonusers in terms of
Category
2
value
df
p
value
Phi
value
p
value
Income
levelofthe
HHhead
Medium
Vspoor
64.914
.000
0.512
.000
Educational
levelof
wife
Literate
Vs
illiterate
4.186
.041
0.13
.041
Educational
levelof
husband
Literate
Vs
illiterate
60.514
.000
0.511
.000
Source:ownsurvey(2012)
TheCramersV3value(0.512)indicatestheassociation
ismoderatelystrong.Intheotherwayround,81.8%of
thestoveuserswerefrommediumincomelevelandit
was only 18.2% from poor category. The result is
consistent with the findings of Beyene and Koch
(2013), a study conducted in urban Ethiopia, which
concluded that households in the lowest income
bracketaretheleastlikelyandslowesttoadopt,while
thoseinthehighestincomebracketarethemostlikely
and quickest to adopt. A significant relationship was
also found between educational status of
wives/husbands and degree of stove adoption (2=
4.186,N=246,df=1,V=0.13,p<.05forwivesand2=
1
for this analysis stove users includes both users (modern stove
made up of cement and stove made from mud and stone locally)
while non- users consists those who are using the traditional
three-stone open fire stove
148
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
www.ijesci.org
Yi=expu(4)
expu
1+
Where
Yi=thedependentvariable(theestimatedprobability
ofstoveadoption)
0andi=coefficients
u=0+1THHSIZE+2EDuHUS2+3EDuWIF2+4
SIZELAND+5INCMECGRY+ =errorterm
Logisticregressionwasperformedtoassesstheimpact
offiveindependentvariablesonthelivelihoodoffuel
efficientstoveadoptionofhouseholds.Thefullmodel
containingallpredictorswasstatisticallysignificant,2
(5,N=248)=100.56,p<.001,indicatingthatthemodel
was able to distinguish between respondents who
adoptanddidnotadoptthetechnology.Themodelas
a whole explain between 39.8% (Cox and Snell R
Square) and 53.2% (Nagelkerke R Square) of the
variance in adoption level, and correctly classified
78.8%ofcases.Asthebinarylogisticregressionmodel
revealedinthetable2,educationalstatusofhusbands
andincomelevelofthehouseholdheadwerefoundto
be significant in determining the probability of stove
adoption positively at p<0.001 alpha level of
significance. The exp(B) result in logistic regression
indicates the odds ratio (Pallant, 2011:180 and
Tabachnick and Fidell; 2013:463). The propensity of
using fuel efficient stoves increases when the
educational level of husbands (OR=23.65) and the
income level of the household head (OR=11.25)
increases.Theeducationalstatusofwivesinthestudy
areawasnotfoundtobesignificantinthelogitresult
though Chisquare test revealed a weak association.
This might be due to low decision making power of
women in adoption of stoves. The finding is more
consistent with the study conducted in northwest
PakistanbyJan(2012)whichassertedthateventhough
stove utilization is the responsibility of women, its
provision is mostly the responsibility of male
household heads. As the household head is the major
decisionmaking body, particularly on financial
decisions, his education (awareness) is more
significant for adoption of cook stoves. Total house
hold size and land size were not found significant in
determiningadoptionofstoveinthestudyarea.
Abinarylogisticregressionmodelhasbeenappliedto
identify the determinants of fuel efficient stove
utilization.Asindicatedinthemodelbelow,adoption
(stove user =1, nonuser = 0: dummy variable) was
used as a dependent variable. The probability of
adoption of a household to improved devices is
formulatedasa functionofindividual and household
levelcharacteristics.Totalhouseholdsize(THHSIZE)
continuous variable, educational status of husband
(EDuHUS2; 1= literate of any level and 0=otherwise),
educationalstatusofwife(EDuWiF2;1=literateofany
level and 0=otherwise), total land size (SIZELAND)
continuous variable, and income/wealth level
(INCMECGRY; 1= poor, 2 = medium) were used as
independentvariables.
Logit(P)=Log[P/(1P)](1)
LetPi=Pr(Y=1/X=xi)thenwecanwritethemodelas
Log(Pi/1Pi)=logit(Pi)=0+iXi(2)
149
www.ijesci.orgInternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
TABLE2:BINARYLOGISTICMODELRESULT(DETERMINANTSOFFUELEFFICIENTSTOVEADOPTION)
VariablesintheEquation
Variables
S.E.
Wald
df
pvalue
OddsRatio
EDuHAS
WDuWiF
INCMECGRY
THHSIZE
SIZELAND
Constant
3.163
.309
2.420
.352
.064
7.344
.562
.683
.410
.203
.097
1.793
31.680
.204
34.919
3.005
.435
16.783
1
1
1
1
1
1
.000*
.651
.000*
.083
.509
.000
23.652
.734
11.250
1.422
.938
.001
95%C.I.forOR
Lower
Upper
7.861
71.165
.193
2.800
5.041
25.108
.955
2.117
.775
1.135
*SignificantatP<0.001alphalevelSource:Ownsurvey,2012
TABLE3:INDEPENDENTTTESTRESULTAVERAGETIMESPENTINHOURSFORCOLLECTIONOFWOODWEEKLY(N=248)
Category
Mean
SD
df
pvalue
stovenonusers
stoveusers
138
110
14.6449
9.9091
3.09414
3.04265
12.063
246
.000
Total
248
12.544
3.8669
Averagetimespent(inhour)tocollect
fuelwoodweekly
Source:Ownsurvey,2012
150
determinestheextentofadoption.TableXIdepictsthe
attitudeofrespondentstowardsthevariedbenefitsof
fuelefficientstove.
One sample ttest was used to examine whether the
attitudes of the local residents towards the benefitsof
fuel efficient stoves are different from neutral (see
table 4). The attitudes of respondents towards the
benefits of fuel efficient stoves are different from
neutral. But when we observe the percentage, a
significant number of respondents reported either
neutral or disagree or strongly disagree mainly
regarding the benefits of fuel efficient stoves to
minimize fire related accidents (52.4%), to prevent
indoorairpollution(58.9%)anditsroleinminimizing
thepressureonthepark(47.6%).Agreatproportionof
respondentseitheragreedorstronglyagreedwiththe
benefits of using fuel efficient stove to save time for
wood collection (95.1%), in minimizing demands of
fuel wood (96.8%), enables to use animal dung for
fertilizer (97.6) and in saving fuel wood consumption
(99.2%). Kebelles development agents and health
extension workers were their sources of information
regarding its benefits. Having knowledge on the
benefits of fuel saving stove makes adoption process
more ease if there is accessibility of the technology.
Ergeneman (2003) pointed out that much of the time
rural households are unaware of the benefits of the
improvedstoves,especiallythehealthrelatedbenefits.
Theexternalbenefitsarelesslikelytobeperceivedby
theruralpopulation;althoughthisiscertainlyagross
underestimation of the capability of the poor to
understand the ecological problems in their
surroundings(AnhaltandHolanda,2009).
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
www.ijesci.org
TABLE4:RESPONDENTSATTITUDETOWARDSTHEBENEFITSOFFUELEFFICIENTSTOVES(ONESAMPLETTEST)
OneSampleTest TestValue=3
Usingfuelefficientstoveenablesto:
df
MeanDifference
minimizefirerelatedaccidents
savetimeoffirewoodcollection
minimizethedemandoffuelwood
preventsindoorairpollution
useanimaldungforfertilizer
savefuelwoodconsumption
minimizethepressureonthepark
6.946
31.374
36.588
4.954
36.833
44.511
8.879
247
247
247
247
247
247
247
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.46774
1.21371
1.20565
.33065
1.47177
1.45565
.48387
95%ConfidenceInterval
Lower
Upper
.3351
.6004
1.1375
1.2899
1.1407
1.2705
.1992
.4621
1.3931
1.5505
1.3912
1.5201
.3765
.5912
Source:ownsurvey,2012
Ho:theattitudeofhouseholdsinthestudyarearegardingthebenefitsoffuelefficientstovesisneutral
Ha:theattitudeofhouseholdsinthestudyarearegardingthebenefitsoffuelefficientstovesisdifferentfromneutralAtdf=247;p<0.01;
testvalue3(neutral)
151
www.ijesci.orgInternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
REFERENCES
NewDelhi,2012.
dunguseasmanure:Evidencefromruralhouseholdsin
theAmharaRegionofEthiopia,2008.
and
administrative
determination
pollutionindevelopingcountries:amajorenvironmental
and public health challenge. Bulletin of the World Health
Organization,2000;78(9).
Central Statistical Agency [Ethiopia]. Ethiopia Demographic
and Health Survey 2011.Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and
NewYork:Pearson,2012.
AmharaNationalRegionalState(ANRS).BorenaSayntpark
demarcation
Beins,BCandMcCarthyMA.ResearchMethodsandStatistics.
Amhara
NortheastAfricanstudies;2001;8(1):726.
Regional
State
rural
land
Calverton,Maryland,USA:CSAandICFInternational,
2012.
DessalegnR.EnvironmentalismandconservationinWollo
2006.
31(1):4578.
Ethiopia:LessonsfromPastExperience.ForumforSocial
Studies;MonographSeries2.AddisAbaba:Ethiopia,2001.
year2008.6 edition;BahirDar,Ethiopia,2009.
th
152
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
www.ijesci.org
improvedbiomassstoves?Acomparativeinternational
(5):32003205.Doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012.02.038
reviewofstoveprograms:WorldBanktechnicalpaper
number242energyseries.Washington,D.C,1994.
Duflo E., Greenstone M. and Hanna R. Indoor air pollution,
health and economic wellbeing, Surveys and Perspectives
LakewB.,FanuelK.&GizachewA.Biodiversityassessment
of the proposed DenkoroChaka National Park. ANRS;
BahirDar,Ethiopia,2007(unpublished).
ManyoPlange, N.C. The changing climate of household
energy:Determinantsofcookingfuelchoiceindomestic
no.1,2008.
www.ssrn.com/abstract=1999345.
Colombia:TrendsandChallenges.InternationalJournalof
Energy
11/05/09
10.14355/ijes.2014.0401.08.
Science:
2014;
4(1):3134.doi:
Modi,V,McDade,S,Lallement,D,andSaghir,J.Energyand
2004.
Developmentprogramme.WorldBank:NewYork,2006.
trainingcenter,2003.
Ethiopia,2006.
ESCAP.Energyservicesforsustainabledevelopmentinrural
areasinAsiaandthePacific:Policyandpractice:Energy
resourcesdevelopmentseriesno40.EconomicandSocial
VolumeI,maintext.MinistryofFinanceandEconomic
CommissionforAsiaandthePacific(ESCAP),ND.
Development(MoFED);AddisAbaba:Ethiopia,2010.
Ethiopia,byI.ThomasandM.Bekele.WorkingPaper29.
www.paracod.orgon2/12/11.
Health
Ababa:Ethiopia,2009.
Doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306639.
Perspectives;
2014;
122(2):120130.
Washington:D.C,2011.
AbabaUniversity;AddisAbaba:Ethiopia,1984.
153
www.ijesci.orgInternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume4Issue5,October2014
2427.doi:10.14355/ijes.2014.0401.06.
Australia,2011.
Tabachnick,BGandFidellLS.UsingMultivariateStatistics,6
th
edt.NewYork:Pearson,2013.
USAID. Fuelefficient stove programs in humanitarian
settings:Animplementerstoolkit,2010.
associationofagriculturaleconomistsconference;Gold
Coast:Australia,2006.
Denkoro
highland
and
management
options.
Environmentalprotection,landadministrationanduse
authority.ANRS:BahirDar,2003.
World Health Organization (WHO). Fuel for Life:
Household energy and Health; France, 2006.World
Vision. Fuelefficient cooking stoves: A triple win for
154