IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

A model for cost-benefit analysis of cooking fuel alternatives from a rural Indian household perspective

Listed author(s):
  • Patel, Sameer
  • Khandelwal, Anish
  • Leavey, Anna
  • Biswas, Pratim
Registered author(s):

    Nearly half of the world׳s population does not have access to cleaner cooking fuels, and this is attributed to several things including the lack of resources (fuel), infrastructure (production and distribution), purchasing power (poverty), relevant policies, and a combination of these reasons. A household׳s fuel choice aims to minimize cost and maximize benefit, both of which are intricate functions of many factors. The factors influencing a household׳s fuel preference, and how manipulating these factors such as subsidies, improved distribution networks and user awareness will affect fuel preference is reported. A cost-benefit analysis (CBA) model was developed to study the fuel preferences of rural Indian households. Seven cooking fuels (biomass (wood and crop residue), dung, charcoal, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), biogas, kerosene and electricity) were ranked in order of household preference. Various scenarios were considered to demonstrate the sensitivity of fuel preference to multiple factors such as subsidies and improvement in cooking technology. Results obtained from the model demonstrated strong agreement with the current fuel usage pattern in rural India. The model was then applied to compare traditional cookstoves (TCS) to non-subsidized improved cookstoves (ICS). The benefit-to-cost ratio of solid fuels when used in ICS was lower than that when used in TCS. A similar trend was observed for fully-subsidized ICS; indicating that price is not the only obstacle to the adoption of an ICS. Sensitivity analysis was performed to demonstrate the utility of this CBA model in framing policies to promote fuel transition in rural India. Although providing subsidies on LPG and electricity can make these cleaner fuels an attractive option, biomass will remain a household׳s preferred fuel unless distribution networks and infrastructure is developed to ensure their uninterrupted supply and accessibility.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032115013143
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.

    Volume (Year): 56 (2016)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 291-302

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:56:y:2016:i:c:p:291-302
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.11.047
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description

    Order Information: Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/bibliographic
    Web: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/bibliographic

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Deshmukh, S.S. & Deshmukh, M.K., 2009. "A new approach to micro-level energy planning--A case of northern parts of Rajasthan, India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 634-642, April.
    2. Mirza, Bilal & Kemp, Rene, 2009. "Why Rural Rich Remain Energy Poor," MERIT Working Papers 024, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    3. Banerjee, Avishek & Tierney, Michael. J. & Thorpe, Roger. N., 2012. "Thermoeconomics, cost benefit analysis, and a novel way of dealing with revenue generating dissipative units applied to candidate decentralised energy systems for Indian rural villages," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 477-488.
    4. Farsi, Mehdi & Filippini, Massimo & Pachauri, Shonali, 2007. "Fuel choices in urban Indian households," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(06), pages 757-774, December.
    5. Viswanathan, Brinda & Kavi Kumar, K. S., 2005. "Cooking fuel use patterns in India: 1983-2000," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1021-1036, May.
    6. Akella, A.K. & Sharma, M.P. & Saini, R.P., 2007. "Optimum utilization of renewable energy sources in a remote area," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(5), pages 894-908, June.
    7. Pohekar, S.D. & Kumar, Dinesh & Ramachandran, M., 2005. "Dissemination of cooking energy alternatives in India--a review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 379-393, August.
    8. Budya, Hanung & Yasir Arofat, Muhammad, 2011. "Providing cleaner energy access in Indonesia through the megaproject of kerosene conversion to LPG," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7575-7586.
    9. Gupta, Gautam & Kohlin, Gunnar, 2006. "Preferences for domestic fuel: Analysis with socio-economic factors and rankings in Kolkata, India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 107-121, April.
    10. Pokharel, Shaligram & Chandrashekar, M., 1998. "A multiobjective approach to rural energy policy analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 325-336.
    11. Bhattacharyya, Subhes C., 2006. "Energy access problem of the poor in India: Is rural electrification a remedy?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3387-3397, December.
    12. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    13. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1995. "Energy resource allocation incorporating qualitative and quantitative criteria: An integrated model using goal programming and AHP," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 197-218, September.
    14. Pachauri, Shonali & Jiang, Leiwen, 2008. "The household energy transition in India and China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4022-4035, November.
    15. Bansal, Mohit & Saini, R.P. & Khatod, D.K., 2013. "Development of cooking sector in rural areas in India—A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 44-53.
    16. Afrane, George & Ntiamoah, Augustine, 2012. "Analysis of the life-cycle costs and environmental impacts of cooking fuels used in Ghana," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 301-306.
    17. Heltberg, Rasmus, 2004. "Fuel switching: evidence from eight developing countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 869-887, September.
    18. Gangopadhyay, Shubhashis & Ramaswami, Bharat & Wadhwa, Wilima, 2005. "Reducing subsidies on household fuels in India: how will it affect the poor?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(18), pages 2326-2336, December.
    19. Reddy, B. Sudhakara, 2003. "Overcoming the energy efficiency gap in India's household sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(11), pages 1117-1127, September.
    20. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    21. Coelho, Suani T. & Goldemberg, José, 2013. "Energy access: Lessons learned in Brazil and perspectives for replication in other developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1088-1096.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:56:y:2016:i:c:p:291-302. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.