IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/6095.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who benefits most from rural electrification ? evidence in India

Author

Listed:
  • Khandker, Shahidur R.
  • Samad, Hussain A.
  • Ali, Rubaba
  • Barnes, Douglas F.

Abstract

This paper applies an econometric analysis to estimate the average and distribution benefits of rural electrification using rich household survey data from India. The results support that rural electrification helps to reduce time allocated to fuelwood collection by household members and increases time allocated to studying by boys and girls. Rural electrification also increases the labor supply of men and women, schooling of boys and girls, and household per capita income and expenditure. Electrification also helps reduce poverty. But the larger share of benefits accrues to wealthier rural households, with poorer ones having more limited use of electricity. The analysis also shows that restricted supply of electricity, due to frequent power outages, negatively affects both household electricity connection and its consumption, thereby reducing the expected benefits of rural electrification.

Suggested Citation

  • Khandker, Shahidur R. & Samad, Hussain A. & Ali, Rubaba & Barnes, Douglas F., 2012. "Who benefits most from rural electrification ? evidence in India," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6095, The World Bank.
    • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:6095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/06/18/000158349_20120618132639/Rendered/PDF/WPS6095.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cust, J. & Singh, A. & Neuhoff, K., 2007. "Rural Electrification in India: Economic and Institutional aspects of Renewables," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0763, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. Taryn Dinkelman, 2011. "The Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: New Evidence from South Africa," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 3078-3108, December.
    3. Markus Frölich & Blaise Melly, 2013. "Unconditional Quantile Treatment Effects Under Endogeneity," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 346-357, July.
    4. Oriana Bandiera & Imran Rasul, 2006. "Social Networks and Technology Adoption in Northern Mozambique," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(514), pages 869-902, October.
    5. George A. Akerlof & Rachel E. Kranton, 2002. "Identity and Schooling: Some Lessons for the Economics of Education," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(4), pages 1167-1201, December.
    6. Munshi, Kaivan & Myaux, Jacques, 2006. "Social norms and the fertility transition," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 1-38, June.
    7. Khandker, S.R., 1996. "Education Achievements and School Efficiency in Rural Bangladesh," World Bank - Discussion Papers 319, World Bank.
    8. Johan Martins, 2005. "The Impact of the Use of Energy Sources on the Quality of Life of Poor Communities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 72(3), pages 373-402, July.
    9. Shahidur R. Khandker, Douglas F. Barnes, and Hussain A. Samad, 2012. "The Welfare Impacts of Rural Electrification in Bangladesh," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    10. Filmer, Deon & Pritchett, Lant, 1998. "The effect of household wealth on educational attainment : demographic and health survey evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1980, The World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anjani Kumar & Ashok K. Mishra & Sunil Saroj & Shahidur Rashid, 2022. "Government transfers, COVID‐19 shock, and food insecurity: Evidence from rural households in India," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(3), pages 636-659, July.
    2. Holstenkamp, Lars, 2019. "What do we know about cooperative sustainable electrification in the global South? A synthesis of the literature and refined social-ecological systems framework," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 307-320.
    3. Rathi, Sambhu Singh & Vermaak, Claire, 2018. "Rural electrification, gender and the labor market: A cross-country study of India and South Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 346-359.
    4. Rao, Narasimha D., 2013. "Does (better) electricity supply increase household enterprise income in India?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 532-541.
    5. Magnan, Nicholas & Spielman, David J. & Lybbert, Travis J. & Gulati, Kajal, 2015. "Leveling with friends: Social networks and Indian farmers' demand for a technology with heterogeneous benefits," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 223-251.
    6. Koima, Josephat, 2024. "School electrification and academic outcomes in rural Kenya," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    7. Fujii, Tomoki & Shonchoy, Abu S., 2020. "Fertility and rural electrification in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    8. Timothy G. Conley & Christopher R. Udry, 2010. "Learning about a New Technology: Pineapple in Ghana," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 35-69, March.
    9. Santosh Kumar & Ganesh Rauniyar, 2018. "The impact of rural electrification on income and education: Evidence from Bhutan," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 1146-1165, August.
    10. Su, Qinghe & Azam, Mehtabul, 2023. "Does access to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) reduce the household burden of women? Evidence from India," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    11. Nicholas Magnan & David J Spielman & Travis J. Lybbert & Kajal Gulati, 2013. "Leveling with Friends: Social Networks and Indian Farmers’ Demand for Agricultural Custom Hire Services," Working Papers id:5591, eSocialSciences.
    12. Bonan, Jacopo & Battiston, Pietro & Bleck, Jaimie & LeMay-Boucher, Philippe & Pareglio, Stefano & Sarr, Bassirou & Tavoni, Massimo, 2021. "Social interaction and technology adoption: Experimental evidence from improved cookstoves in Mali," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    13. repec:zbw:rwirep:0365 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Gupta, Ridhima & Pelli, Martino, 2021. "Electrification and cooking fuel choice in rural India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    15. repec:mpr:mprres:7760 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Raphaël Soubeyran, 2019. "Technology adoption and pro-social preferences," Working Papers halshs-02291905, HAL.
    17. Rafael Lalive & M. Alejandra Cattaneo, 2009. "Social Interactions and Schooling Decisions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(3), pages 457-477, August.
    18. Jörg Peters & Christoph Strupat & Colin Vance, 2012. "Television and Contraceptive Use – Panel Evidence from Rural Indonesia," Ruhr Economic Papers 0365, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    19. Pascaline Dupas, 2014. "Short‐Run Subsidies and Long‐Run Adoption of New Health Products: Evidence From a Field Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 197-228, January.
    20. Islam, Asadul & Ushchev, Philip & Zenou, Yves & Zhang, Xin, 2019. "The Value of Information in Technology Adoption," IZA Discussion Papers 12672, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    21. Powell-Jackson, Timothy & Ansah, Evelyn K., 2015. "The indirect effects of subsidised healthcare in rural Ghana," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 96-103.
    22. Manning, Dale T. & Means, Peter & Zimmerle, Daniel & Galvin, Kathleen & Loomis, John & Paustian, Keith, 2015. "Using contingent behavior analysis to measure benefits from rural electrification in developing countries: an example from Rwanda," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 393-401.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:6095. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.