4.3 Micro factors affecting wood energy consumption

4.3.1 Household Income

Perhaps the most important determinant of fuelwood consumption in households is income. Fuelwood consumption tends to decrease in proportion relative to other fuels as household income increases. This is true for urban and rural households, but the decrease in relative fuelwood consumption is more pronounced in urban areas. The data for India illustrate this point (see Figure 4.12). One reason for this pattern is that in urban areas, more commercial fuels are available for households to choose from, and they have more opportunity to choose because of the higher income. Another related reason is that in high income households, cooking, which consume most of the fuelwood supply, decreases in relative importance as household energy needs become more sophisticated. For example, the data for India also show that the share of cooking in household energy end-use decreases from almost 80% in low income households to less than 40% in high income households (see Figure 4.13). Moreover, on average, 85% of household fuelwood supply in India go to cooking. As a consequence, firewood consumption is expected to decrease in high income households.

Figure 4.12

Figure 4.13

Nevertheless, income is not the only determinant of fuelwood consumption in households. These other factors include affordability and availability of fuels, scarcity of fuelwood supply, fuel preferences, and cost and performance of end-use equipment. The impacts of all these factors also depend to a large extent on urban/rural location.

4.3.2 Affordability and Availability

Traditional fuels are perceived to be the least-cost alternative fuel in both the rural and urban areas even though they are one of the most expensive in terms of useful energy output (see, for example, Figure 4.14 with data for Pakistan). In many cases, traditional fuels are the only ones available in the rural areas, because of their limited access to commercial fuels. In urban areas, the issue of affordability is compounded by the presence of commercial fuels (or available fuel alternatives). Though fuelwood maybe still be apparently the least-cost alternative in urban areas, the presence of commercial fuels opens households to choose among other fuel alternatives.

Figure 4.14

The presence of competing fuels partly explains the tendency of the price of urban fuelwood to decline in real terms. Data available for Pakistan show that the price of fuelwood in many of the country’s major urban areas increased by only less than 2% in real terms during the period 1957-1991 (see Table 4.1). The only exception was Peshawar City where fuelwood price increased by an average of 4% per annum during this period. However, in the first ten years and last few years of this period, prices of fuelwood were actually declining in most cities, even in Peshawar. The 2% average increase can be attributed mostly to the abnormally high price increases during 1967-77 when these averaged more than 4%.

Table 4.1: Growth in Retail Prices of Firewood in Major Cities of Pakistan
(in %)

Source: Hoiser (1993)

4.3.3 Fuel Preferences

In urban areas, fuel preferences become an important determinant of fuelwood use because households are offered a variety of fuels that differ in price, efficiency and convenience of use, accessibility and availability. Women, who are one most exposed to household fuels, know well that the modern commercial fuels are a lot cleaner than fuelwood. It is very easy to notice the irritating smoke coming from burning firewood, for example, compared to the tolerable fumes released by kerosene and LPG stoves. Urban households generally have higher income than rural households, and the higher income is the reason why urban households prefer cleaner and more efficient and convenient fuels. The lifestyles that come along with higher living standards are also biased towards the more convenient modern fuels. Households in urban areas normally do not want to spend a lot of time in cooking (this is the reason why many high income households in Thailand do not even own cookstoves and simply buy cooked food from stalls).

4.3.4 Cost and Performance of End-Use Equipment

It is very difficult to separate the type of fuel and the end-use equipment used by households as the choice of the former dictates the latter. In most cases, a decision to use a particular fuel is first made; then the choice of an end-use equipment follows. However, the decision to use a particular fuel is also sometimes influenced by the cost and performance of the associated end-use device. A particular household will not immediately shift to modern fuel if this entails buying an equipment which may be beyond the household budget. A balance will probably be made between cost and efficiency as more efficient stoves tend to cost more but their efficiency could be as high as five times that of a conventional or traditional equipment (see Table 4.2).

Table 4.2: Cost of Cooking Fuel Use in Urban Areas, Philippines, 1990

Source: UNDP (1992)

In any case, given a particular fuel and equipment, fuel consumption is obviously affected by the efficiency of the end-use equipment. A more efficient equipment will consume less fuel than a less efficient one for the same energy output. Table 4.3 shows the efficiency of various end-use equipment according to the type of fuel.

Moreover, as the choice of fuel is affected by household income so is the choice of end-use equipment. In rural Thailand, for example, half of the households in the very low income class own fuelwood stoves (see Table 4.4). This proportion falls to 15% in the high income households. It is interesting to note in the case of Thailand, that as income increases, the number of households not owning any stove also increases. This implies that households at the higher income bracket prefer to buy than cook their food.

Table 4.3: Efficiency of Various Cooking Equipment

Source: DENR (Philippines,1989)

Table 4.4: Ownership of Cooking Stoves by Households in Thailand, 1986
(in %)

Source: UN (1989)

4.3.5 Scarcity of Fuelwood Supply

The impact of dwindling fuelwood supply on fuelwood consumption depends very much on the responses or adaptations people have on this situation. Fuelwood scarcity will have more impact on the rural households which are highly dependent on this fuel. Scarcity of fuelwood supply, for example, will force them to using other traditional fuels (animal dung and crop residues) or, if the scarcity is localized, to collecting fuelwood at greater cost (in terms of time spent and distance covered). Leach and Gowen (1987) identify the following stages of adaptations by rural households:

• Households begin to use lower quality but more accessible woodfuels.
• Households start to economize on fuel.
• Households begin to use crop residues and animal wastes.
• Households reduce their living standards and diet in conditions of acute scarcity.
• Households begin to purchase biomass or modern fuels substitutes to freely collected fuelwood.

All of these adaptations would reduce household consumption of fuelwood but the extent or magnitude of the impact would vary with the response. For example, it should be expected that the impact would be greatest if households begin to collect crop residues or animal dung instead, or purchase modern fuel substitutes. The impact would be different if households just economize on fuelwood use or shift to lower quality fuelwood.

The impact of scarcity on urban households dependent on fuelwood would be different. First, the impact would not be as much as that in rural households which spend a larger proportion of income on energy use. Secondly, urban household energy consumption depends to a large extent on price, income, and the presence of substitutes. In particular, the effects of these three factors on the choice of fuel are more important in urban households which have better access to modern fuel substitutes. In India, for example, fuelwood competes with LPG and kerosene, but more households prefer LPG than kerosene for cooking. In Cambodia, charcoal is the next best alternative fuel after fuelwood for urban households. For Pakistan’s urban households, the presence of natural gas makes it the next most popular fuel after fuelwood. Lastly, most urban households in the Philippines prefer to use electricity, but LPG and kerosene are also used by many households.