Driving forces for fuelwood choice of households in developing countries: environmental implications for Bangladesh

Abstract

Energy planning is an important task for every nation. Understanding the energy preferences of households influences a major part of energy planning and policy. In the preference system, socio-economic driving forces act critically, dictating energy use. Thus, the present study was undertaken to understand the socio-economic driving forces for energy preferences in developing countries, considering the Energy Ladder and the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis. Results show that biomass still plays a vital role in meeting energy demand in many regions of developing countries, and household income is the most common factor in energy preference. However, the macro-economic condition is the primary driving force. With this understanding, the study argues that Bangladesh is still in the first half of the inverted U-shaped EKC for energy use at household level, and also confirms that the Energy Ladder is true at the second stage of the EKC in Bangladesh. Finally, the study suggests that alternative shorter paths in the EKC for energy use should be developed in Bangladesh. The study will be important for energy policy and planning in Bangladesh.

Keywords:

• EKC
• energy ladder
• environment
• income
• firewood

Introduction

Biomass from forests and agriculture makes a large contribution to the total energy supply of developing countries. Among these fuel sources, firewood, charcoal and waste from agricultural crops dominate (Rubab and Kandpal 1996). The sectoral analysis of energy use shows that households consume most biomass energy, with cooking as the major purpose (Pokharel 2004). As a renewable energy, biomass is not regarded as environmentally friendly in either developing or developed countries (Demirbas 2004; Balat and Ayar 2005). As the production of biomass in forests and agriculture in most developing countries is not sustainable, so this over-dependence on biomass fuels is degrading the environment, reducing biodiversity, jeopardising the forest ecosystem, depriving agricultural soil of its fertility and emitting greenhouse gases (Streets and Waldhoff 1999). Furthermore, the poor fuel efficiency of traditional cooking stoves in developing countries is worsening the situation (Bhattacharya and Salam 2002; Miah et al. 2009). Bangladesh is one of the least developed countries in South Asia, and most of its people (77%) live in rural areas (BBS 2009). About 90% of total traditional energy is consumed for domestic purposes, especially for cooking (Bhattacharya et al. 2003). Forests are the major source of biomass fuel supply and homestead forests are the major fuel source for individual households in developing countries.

The Energy Ladder shows the interrelationships between fuel choice and socio-economic factors, especially household income, and is regarded as an important model for household fuel choice in developing countries (Alam et al. 1998; Davis 1998; Leach 1992; Hosier and Dowd 1987). Through this hypothesis, the energy transition of how the households shift from using apparently dirty fuels to efficient cleaner fuels can be explained. Studies in different countries have analysed the biomass fuel preferences of households in relation to socio-economic factors. For example, Pachauri (2004) studied the effect of income on fuel use in India; Rao and Reddy (2007) reported effects of different socio-economic factors on energy use by households in India; Reddy and Balachandra (2006) examined technology shifts in energy at the household level. For Bangladesh, Miah et al. (2003) studied biomass fuel use by rural households in the Chittagong region; Miah et al. (2009) studied fuelwood use in traditional cooking stoves at household level and its impact on the environment; and Jashimuddin et al. (2006) reported the consumption pattern of biomass fuel in selected villages. However, no research has been carried out specifically on the socio-economic driving forces influencing biomass fuel choice of households in Bangladesh, which must be understood for the fuel transition. The present study aims to find such driving forces in different developing countries and their implications for Bangladesh. The findings are expected to be crucial for environmentally friendly energy development in Bangladesh.

Methods

To explore driving forces of fuel choice at household level in developing countries, this study was conducted from February to November 2009. The data on total energy, biomass energy, environment, forests, economy and demography were collected mostly from authoritative sources available on the Internet. Some facts were cross-checked directly in government offices in Bangladesh, mostly in Dhaka and Chittagong. To obtain the most recent data, Scirus (http://www.scirus.com) and Scopus (http://www.scopus.com) were used. As biomass is the major contributor to the total energy supply in Bangladesh, so household preferences on biomass fuel was the focus of this study. The driving forces for South Asian, North-East Asian, African and Latin and Central American developing countries were analalysed. India, Nepal and Sri Lanka in South Asia, China, the Philippines, Tibet and Vietnam in Northeast Asia, Botswana, Burkina Fuso, Ghana, Malawi, South Africa and Zimbabwe in Africa and Bolivia, Brazil, Guatemala and Nicaragua in South and Central America were incorporated in the study. These developing countries were selected solely based on the availability of published findings. An attempt was made to link perceived knowledge on fuel choice in different developing countries to the situation in Bangladesh.

Household fuel choice – theoretical background

The fuel choice of households is widely explained by the Energy Ladder theory. With an increase/improvement of socio-economic conditions, especially household income, the cleanliness of the energy source increases according to the Energy Ladder (Davis 1998; Leach 1992). The process incorporates a three-stage energy transition. Total dependence on biomass is the first stage, followed by dependence on charcoal, coal and kerosene and finally dependence on LPG (liquefied petroleum gas), natural gas and electricity (Figure 1) (Leach 1992). van Ruijven et al. (2008) also noted that the Energy Ladder shows a typical increase in cleanliness, convenience, efficiency and cost as the household income increases. Barnes and Floor (1999) extended this simple model with more intermediate steps. Such analysis of energy with this model gives some practical clues as to how a national energy policy can be designed using the economic framework of households (Dewees 1989).

Figure 1. Energy Ladder model for explaining energy preferences in developing countries.

However, the Energy Ladder does not show sufficient macro-economic effects on energy use by households; it only focuses on the household-level socio-economic factors. If we consider the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) for overall environmental degradation of a developing nation, then one must consider when the Energy Ladder works in a nation. The inverted U-shape EKC curve implies that, environmental degradation first increases with increasing income per capita at the national level (Figure 2), then after a certain point of increasing income per capita, environmental degradation tends to diminish (Selden and Song 1994). Although environmental degradation has a steep slope in the EKC, its reduction gives a moderate slope; however, it gives an inverted ‘U’ curve, with income per capita on the X-axis and environmental degradation on the Y-axis (Bhattarai and Hammig 2001; Stern 2004). Thus, the energy transition in a country must be considered within the constraints of the national economic framework. Hiemstra van der Horst and Hovorka (2008) showed that without the long-term socio-economic development of a nation/region, the energy transition described in the Energy Ladder does not occur at a lower level of aggregation. Therefore, the energy transition for households in Bangladesh should be understood using the Energy Ladder with adjustment from the EKC.

Figure 2. General environmental Kuznets curve with a full trajectory and inverted U-shape.

Uses of direct energy are important determinants of the quality of human civilisation. These ensure the quality of life, with better health and a sound environment, and contribute to economic development (Demirbas 2004). Among the direct energy carriers, biomass is most important in developing countries (Balat and Ayar 2005). Bioenergy contributes 13.4% to current total world energy consumption (Balat 2009), and in developing countries, the figure is about 38% (Sims 2003). Biomass fuel as a portion of regional energy consumption is 60% in Africa, 56.3% in South Asia, 25.1% in East Asia, 23.5% in China, 18.2% in Latin America, 3.5% in Europe, 2.7% in North America and 0.3% in the Middle East (Demirbas 2006). Unlike developed countries, fuelwood is the basic source of energy in households of developing countries (Balat and Ayar 2005), which puts great demand on forestry. As agricultural residues also contribute to total biomass fuel, agriculture is also implicated in this issue. Although biomass fuel has the potential for sustainable development in developing countries and is effective for mitigation of global climate change (Bhattacharya et al. 2003; Sims 2003; Balat and Ayar 2005), it often leads to deforestation and loss of fertility of agricultural lands due to the unsustainability of production of biomass and over-dependence on it (Mahapatra and Mitchell 1999).

Energy resources and consumption in Bangladesh

Biomass, oil, coal and natural gas are the main energy sources in Bangladesh. Biomass energy is traditionally used for domestic cooking and in small rural industries. As of 2005, the total natural gas reserve (proven) was 14.37 trillion cubic feet; as of December 2007, estimated coal resources were 3300 million tones; and up to June 2005, oil reserves were 5.5 million barrels and the estimated hydropower was 230 MW. Estimated consumption of total primary energy in Bangladesh was 1402 trillion BTU in 2004–2005, where the contribution of biomass was 35%, natural gas 49%, oil 15%, coal 0.36% and hydro 0.30% (GOB 2008a). The country's per capita annual energy consumption was about 123 kg of oil equivalents (kgoe) in 1990, 145 kgoe in 2000 and 171 kgoe in 2005 (OECD/IEA 2007). From 1990 to 2005, fair total energy consumption per capita was observed in Bangladesh, well below the world average. Until 2005, only around 38% of the population of Bangladesh had access to electricity, with only 14% of rural people having access to electricity (GOB 2008a). However, electrical system loss was 19.37% for distribution and 3.42% for transmission. Over 80% of people depend on traditional energy sources such as firewood, cow dung and agricultural residues for their energy needs. Excessive usage of firewood threatens the remaining forest cover, which is only 10% of total land area (WEC 2000). The share of biomass in total energy consumption estimated for 1999–2000 to 2004–2005 was gradually decreasing, but the quantity was increasing at an average rate of about 2% per annum (GOB 2008b).

From 2004 to 2008, energy consumption increased by 5.05% per year. Transport, household, agriculture, industries and commercial sectors constitute the major energy consumers in Bangladesh. Currently, the most important primary commercial fuel is natural gas, which contributed about 89% of commercial primary energy generation in 2004–2005 (GOB 2008a). The power sector in 2006–2007 had 211.14 billion cubic feet of natural gas, which, at 41.24%, was the largest contribution to one sector. The fertiliser industry was the second largest consumer of natural gas at 93.47 billion cubic feet, or 17.43% of the total supply. Other industries, households and captive markets consumed 77.48 billion cubic feet, 14.45%, 63.25 billion cubic feet, 11.80% and 62.52 billion cubic feet, 11.66%, respectively (GOB 2008a).

Biomass energy use preferences in developing countries

Firewood, charcoal, dung, agricultural residues, coal, LPG, kerosene, gas, paraffin and candles were the main energy carriers in all developing countries. Among these, biofuel, especially firewood collected from forests, was universally dominant, especially in rural areas. 1–4 give details of energy use preferences in South Asia, Northeast Asia, Africa and Latin and Central America, respectively, in relation to their socio-economic factors. Household income was the common driving force for preferred type of energy carrier in all the countries.

Table 1. Socio-economic factors of fuel preferences by households in South Asian countries

Reference	Topic	Country	Study area	Energy types used	Socio-economic factors
(Elias and Victor 2005)	Energy transitions in developing countries	India	Not defined	Firewood, liquid fuels, gas, electricity	Income, population density, availability of rival fuels, macro-economic growth
(Gupta and Köhlin 2006)	Preferences for domestic fuel	India	Urban	Firewood, coal, kerosene and LPG	Income, education, age of head of household, women's participation in wage work, family size, religion and caste
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	India	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tapwater inside the house, dwelling size, education
(Joon et al. 2009)	Household energy consumption pattern	India	Rural	Firewood, crop residues, dung, LPG	Income, socio-cultural factors
(Rao and Reddy 2007)	Variations in energy use	India	Rural and Urban	Firewood, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, household size, education status, occupation, household location
(Reddy and Srinivas 2009)	Energy use in Indian household sector	India	Rural and Urban	Biofuels, kerosene, LPG, electricity	Availability of energy, security of supply, efficiency of use, cost of device, price of energy carrier, ease of use, technological development, introduction of subsidies, environmental considerations
(Reddy 2004)	Economic and social dimension of household energy use	India	Rural and Urban	Biofuel (firewood, charcoal, agri-waste), kerosene, LPG, electricity	Income, location, education, occupation, infrastructure
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	Nepal	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tapwater inside house, dwelling size, education
(Wijayatunga and Attalage 2002)	Household cooking energy demand and environmental effect	Sri Lanka	Rural and Urban	Biomass (firewood, agri-residues), LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, availability, infrastructure

Table 2. Socio-economic factors of fuel preferences of households in Northeast Asian countries

Reference	Topic	Country	Study area	Energy types used	Socio-economic factors
(Chen et al. 2006)	Energy consumption	China	Rural	Firewood, coal	Exogenous income, household size, labour force in household, education, wealth, cultivated area, distance to forest
(Elias and Victor 2005)	Energy transitions in developing countries	China	Not defined	Firewood, liquid fuels, gas, electricity	Income, population density, availability of rival fuels, macro-economic growth
(Samson et al. 2001)	Strategies for enhancing biomass energy use	The Philippines	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, agricultural residues, LPG, kerosene	Income, fuel availability
(Liu et al. 2008)	Household energy consumption and its impacts on environment	Tibet	Rural	Firewood, dung, crop residues	Income, cultural tradition, population growth, macro-economic situation, policy guidance
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	Vietnam	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tapwater inside house, dwelling size, education

Table 3. Socio-economic factors of fuel preferences of households in African countries

Reference	Topic	Country	Study area	Energy typesused	Socio-economicfactors
(Hiemstra-van der Horst and Hovorka 2008)	Energy ladder reassessment	Botswana	Urban	Firewood, gas, electricity, paraffin	Income, long-term socio-economic development
(Ouedraogo 2006)	Household energy preferences	Burkina Faso	Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, access to electricity, household size, frequency of cooking
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	Ghana	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tapwater inside house, dwelling size, education
(Manda et al. 2005)	Socio-economic factors and different energy options	Malawi	Urban	Firewood, charcoal, electricity, paraffin	Income, education, housing density
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	South Africa	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tapwater inside house, dwelling size, education
(Madubansi and Shackleton 2006)	Changing energy profiles and consumption patterns	South Africa	Rural	Firewood, agri-residues, paraffin, candles, electricity	Income, infrastructure, governance
(Masekoameng et al. 2005)	Household energy needs and use patterns	South Africa	Rural	Firewood, paraffin, candles	Income, fuel availability, infrastructure
(Campbell et al. 2003)	Energy transition	Zimbabwe	Urban	Firewood, kerosene, electricity	Income, rate of electrification, infrastructure
(Chambwera and Folmer 2007)	Fuel switching	Zimbabwe	Urban	Firewood, kerosene, electricity	Income, price of alternative fuels

Table 4. Socio-economic factors of fuel preferences of households in Latin and Central America

Reference	Topic	Country	Study area	Energy types used	Socio-economic factors
(Israel 2002)	Fuel choice in developing countries	Bolivia	Urban	Firewood, kerosene, LPG, electricity	Income, household size, ethnicity
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	Brazil	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tapwater inside house, dwelling size, education
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	Guatemala	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tapwater inside house, dwelling size, education
(Heltberg 2005)	Household fuel choice	Guatemala	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, household size, education, fuel price, ethnicity, taste preference, cooking habits
(Heltberg 2004)	Fuel switching	Nicaragua	Rural and Urban	Firewood, charcoal, LPG, kerosene, electricity	Income, per capita expenditure, electrification, existing tap water inside house, dwelling size, education

In India, income, population density, availability of rival fuels and macro-economic growth are important determinants for energy transition at household level (Elias and Victor 2005). In urban India, Gupta and Köhlin (2006) found more factors, i.e. education, age of head of household, women's participation in wage work, household size, religion and caste. They conclude that subsidies have no effect on reducing use of polluting fuels such as coal and firewood, neither does availability of clean energy and awareness of household members. Heltberg (2004) found that fuel switching has more potential for success in urban than in rural areas, as availability of modern fuels does not act dramatically to replace the dirty fuels. He reiterated the importance of electrification, dwelling size and education, as well as income, as confirmed by Joon et al. (2009). Rao and Reddy (2007) found that occupation and household location are important factors in variation in energy use between rural and urban areas of India, while Reddy and Srinivas (2009) identified many factors in energy choice of households: availability of energy, security of supply, efficiency of use, cost of device, price of energy carriers, ease of use, technological development, introduction of subsidies and environmental consideration. Reddy (2004) and Wijayatunga and Attalage (2002) for rural and urban areas in India and Sri Lanka, respectively, emphasised the influence of infrastructural facilities on energy use.

The socio-economic factors for fuel choice in the Northeast Asian countries are almost the same as those for South Asian countries. In rural areas of China, labour force, wealth and cultivated area of a household, as well as distance of households from forests are the important factors for firewood or coal preference (Chen et al. 2006). Similarly, population density, availability of rival fuels and macro-economic growth of a nation were driving forces for fuel choice (Elias and Victor 2005), while in rural and urban areas of the Philippines only income and fuel availability were important (Samson et al. 2001), whereas in Tibet the cultural tradition of the family, population growth, macro-economic situation and policy guidance (Liu et al. 2008) were most important. Almost the same driving forces were also reported for Vietnam (Heltberg 2004).

The driving forces in African countries are almost the same as in Asian countries. However, Hiemstra van der Horst and Hovorka (2008) reported other factors for urban areas of Botswana: the impact of long-term socio-economic development of the nation on fuel choice of households. Ouedraogo (2006) added the frequency of cooking for urban areas of Burkina Faso; Manda et al. (2005) added housing density for urban Malawi; infrastructure condition was commonly reported for South Africa (Heltberg 2004; Masekoameng et al. 2005; Madubansi and Shackleton 2006) and Zimbabwe (Campbell et al. 2003), while Chambwera and Folmer (2007) added price of the alternative fuels.

Ethnicity is an important factor in Bolivia and Guatemala (Israel 2002; Heltberg 2004), as well as taste preference and cooking habits, as also in Brazil and Nicaragua (Heltberg 2004).

Macro-economic situation and energy preferences in Bangladesh

Bangladesh is a developing South Asian country (20°34′–26°38′N, 88°01′–92°42′E) with an area of 147,570 km². The population was about 156 million, with a growth rate of 1.3%, in June 2009, and about 77% live in rural areas (BBS 2009). The climate is characterised by high temperatures, heavy rainfall, often very high humidity and fairly marked seasonal variations. Temperature ranges from 36°C to 40°C in the hot summer season and from 8°C to 15°C in the dry winter season. Mean annual rainfall is 1,200 mm in the extreme west to 5,800 mm in the east and northeast. Bangladesh is now at the early stage (upward slope) of the EKC for environmental degradation, which assumes that the country has the right to degrade now, become developed and then abate later on. However, environmentalists are concerned about the results of further degradation and about when the turning point of the EKC will occur. Bangladesh is under severe threat of climate change and forest biodiversity loss. According to the IPCC and Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan 2008 (IPCC 2007; MoEF 2008), Bangladesh will be among the worst affected countries for climate change.

Macro-economy

Bangladesh is characterised by low per capita GNP, low natural resource base and high incidence of natural disasters. It is one of 13 developing countries that have the potential for faster economic growth (ADB 2009). GDP has more than tripled in real terms and food production has increased three-fold (MoEF 2008). It is assumed that it will become a middle income country by 2020. In three of the last five years, the economy has grown at >6% (CIA 2008). The economic survey of Bangladesh (GOB 2000) states that though a decrease in growth is observed in some years, growth is still occurring. For a developing country with this GDP growth, Bangladesh is defying the impact of the global economic fallout (ADB 2009) and is ranked 68th in the world ranking (CIA 2008). It has been reported that the global centre of economic activity is shifting to India, China and other emerging economies, and Bangladesh must make all efforts to capitalise on its comparative advantages to benefit from this shift (ADB 2009).

Energy preferences

Considering the EKC and growth trend of national income in Bangladesh, it is now clear that it will soon face severe environmental degradation. From the studies of the EKC in developing countries, it is assumed that environmental complications will be relentless until a peak is achieved (Cole et al. 1997; Koop and Tole 2001; Mather 2007). However, economic growth and development is important. The prime task will be to prevent upcoming environmental threats. As a low-income country, Bangladesh needs to increase per capita income in order to reach the EKC turning point. If we wait for this standard turning point, the forest ecosystem in Bangladesh might be irreversibly degraded. It will be best to follow alternative routes (tunnelling) (Munasinghe 1995,1999). 1–4 for other developing countries show that national infrastructure, governance and policy guidelines are critical to energy preferences. The better options for that macro-economic situation will confirm clean energy in a country. The unsustainable biomass pools and use in Bangladesh show environmental degradation, as confirmed by Miah et al. (2009). The present macro-economic upgrading of Bangladesh also confirms the position in the first half of the EKC. The simple Energy Ladder to explain energy preferences in developing countries fails in the Bangladesh perspective. It is certain, however, that the Energy Ladder will work at the second stage of the EKC in Bangladesh. Nonetheless, creating alternative and shorter routes in the EKC is important (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Tunnelling through the environmental Kuznets curve.

Oestreicher et al. (2009) concluded that several surveillance measures that require more funding and proper governance are critical to slowing deforestation. Santilli et al. (2005) confirmed that adequate funding of programmes for enforcing environmental legislation, finding alternative livelihoods for forest-dependent people, alternatives to massive forest clearing and capacity-building for dealing with remote forest regions are critical to reducing deforestation. In this regard, a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) can work towards a forest transition. Introducing improved cooking stoves at the household level and improving kitchen hygiene will significantly upgrade the environmental situation (Miah et al. 2009).

Conclusion

This study confirms that biomass is still the dominant energy carrier at household level in almost every developing country in South Asia, Northeast Asia, Africa, Latin and Central America. Income is the most important factor for energy transition from dirty energy use to clean energy use. However, the primary driving force is the macro-economic situation of the nation. In this respect, the Energy Ladder is necessary to understand the overall macro-economic situation. The implications of the EKC (environmental Kuznets curve) for the overall macro-economic situation and environmental degradation dictate the current situation in Bangladesh. It is clear that the environmental implications of energy use in Bangladesh place it in the first half of the EKC. To reach the turning point for environmentally sound energy use in Bangladesh will take a long time. In the meantime, environmental degradation may be irreversible. Therefore, the study suggests creating alternative routes in the EKC. Surveillance measures, adequate funding, introducing improved cooking stoves, CDM and REDD have been suggested to create shorter alternative paths in the EKC for Bangladesh. The findings of this study will be of importance for energy policy and planning in Bangladesh.