Skip Navigation

Your Environment. Your Health.

How much do alternative cookstoves reduce biomass fuel use? Evidence from North India

Environmental Health Economic Analysis Annotated Bibliography

Details

Research article Cost-benefit analysis (CBA)
Authors
Brooks N, Bhojvaid V, Jeuland MA, Lewis JJ, Patange O, and Pattanayak SK
Journal
Resour Energy Econ
Summary
This analysis evaluated how the use of non-traditional stoves (predominantly liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)) affected biomass fuel consumption, time spent cooking on traditional stoves, and time spent collecting biomass fuels for households in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, India. Non-traditional stove use reduced biomass fuel use by 4.5 kg/day (50 percent), cooking on traditional stoves by about 160 min/day (80 percent), and biomass fuel collection time by 105 min/day (80 percent). Back-of-the-envelope calculations using an existing model of costs and benefits suggested that air quality and environmental benefits from reduced use of biomass fuel use would be worth at least $1.8/household-month.
Population
Not available

Health Outcomes

  • Not available

Environmental Agents

List of Environmental Agents:

  • Single

Source of Environmental Agents:

  • Cookstoves

Economic Evaluation / Methods and Source

Type:

  • Cost-benefit analysis (CBA)

Cost Measured:

  • Cost of non-traditional stove and fuel
  • other costs accounted for in the Jeuland and Pattanayak (2012) cost benefit model

Potential Cost Measures:

  • Costs of supply to remote areas

Benefits Measures:

  • Reduced biomass fuel consumption
  • reduced time spent cooking on traditional stoves
  • reduced time spent collecting biomass fuels
  • improvements to air quality (averted greenhouse gas emissions)
  • environmental benefits (avoided deforestation)
  • other benefits accounted for in the Jeuland and Pattanayak (2012) cost benefit model

Potential Benefits:

  • Health benefits

Location:

  • Two states of northern India (Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand)

Models Used: (Not available)

Methods Used:

  • The authors examined the relationship between use of non-traditional stoves and three key outcomes related to solid fuel use. The authors – 1) collected data on fuel consumption using a 24-hour fuel measurement exercise; 2) collected data on cooking practices using a larger self-report baseline survey; 3) used Heckman two-step estimator to examine the impact of non-traditional cookstoves on the amount of biomass fuel consumed (in kg/day), time spent cooking on traditional stoves (min/day), and time spent collecting biomass fuels (min/day); and 4) compared Heckman model results to those from propensity score matching and simple Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) estimation approaches.

Sources Used:

  • Data about fuel use collected from fuel measurement survey of 1,234 households in northern India during the summer of 2012; self-reported socioeconomic and demographic data from larger sample of over 2,100 households; additional sources cited in publication

Economic Evaluation / Methods and Source

Citation:

  • Brooks N, Bhojvaid V, Jeuland MA, Lewis JJ, Patange O, and Pattanayak SK. 2016. How much do alternative cookstoves reduce biomass fuel use? Evidence from North India. Resour Energy Econ.

Pubmed:

DOI:

NIEHS Funding: (Not available)

Other Funding:

  • USAID Translating Research into Action (GHS-A-00-09-00015-00)
  • Sanford Masters in Public Policy Program