Dale V. Shaller
DALE V. SMALLER, an American sociologist, and his wife conducted the Lorena stove survey reported in this article.
In 1976 the Lorena stove was introduced to the deforested highlands of Guatemala in order to save wood. How has it worked out? What do people like most about it? What don't they like? What did its designers overlook? How has it been modified by its users? And how is it influencing their way of living?
Nearly four fifths of the densely settled population in western Guatemala is indigenous. These descendants of ancient Mayan culture are largely subsistence farmers who continue to follow most of their ancient traditional ways. Indian families still cook over an open fire - a hearth of three rocks arranged in a triangle on the ground. In recent years, however, it has become increasingly difficult for the highland Indians to obtain the wood they use exclusively for burning. A massive deforestation has caused serious wood shortages, thus raising the cost of firewood as well as hastening the erosion of precious topsoil from the famlands.
The Estación Experimental Choqui-CADA, a small technology centre near Quezaltenango, in an attempt to limit some of the economic and ecological damages caused by deforestation, developed in 1976 the Lorena stove as an alternative to open-fire cooking. The stove - a large, monolithic block of sand and clay - was designed to contain the heat and channel it through a system of internal flues, thus conserving the amount of firewood required for cooking and eliminating smoke build-up in the kitchen. Relatively easy and inexpensive to make with locally available materials, the stove also aims to accommodate as much as possible the traditional cooking practices of the Indian population.
The Lorena stove is now being promoted in the highland region by several private and governmental organizations. Its diffusion takes place through stove-building courses, exhibits at local fairs, dissemination of instruction booklets, and individual entrepreneurs who build the stove on a profit-making basis. Although the number of people using the stove is not known, interest is extending rapidly throughout Guatemala and to other Latin American countries, including Honduras and Mexico.
Assets. The results of our study carried out for three months in the Quezaltenango area, in the fall of 1978, indicate an overall high level of acceptance of the Lorena stove. Of the 40 stove-owning families we interviewed and observed, 34 were generally satisfied with the new cooking technology; 37 used their stoves on a daily basis: only 8 continued to use an open fire along with the stove. Six families had completely abandoned their stoves after several weeks of use, but, of these, three built new ones later and are now using them regularly.
When compared to the open fire, the primary advantage of the Lorena stove cited by the majority of families interviewed and observed is the reduction of smoke in the kitchen. Virtually all considered unventilated smoke as a significant health hazard which can cause serious eye and lung damage. Although the stove does not in fact remove all the smoke from the cooking area, it does eliminate most of it.
Despite the overwhelming conviction that smoke is undesirable, some positive attributes of smoke were mentioned by a few of the families. An ancient practice of the Mayan people is to use the thick smoke from the open fire to help seal their roofs of straw: the sooty residue of the smoke causes the straw to stick tightly together, thus preventing water leaks and adding strength to the roof. Ears of corn are hung from the rafters above the open fire and the smoke serves to eliminate parasites, preserving the corn for as long as six or seven years. Finally, one person identified certain curative properties of smoke, but this belief does not seem to be widely shared.
The second most important advantage of the stove, its users said, was that it needed less wood. They stressed this economic advantage but totally ignored its role against deforestation. Most of them could not estimate the amount of fuelwood saved. Only 6 percent of the families interviewed claimed that the stove uses half the amount of wood they needed before, and 12 percent believed they burned the same amount.
The third most frequently mentioned advantage was the ability for a person to cook in a standing position on an elevated surface. Several women even identified this difference from open-fire cooking as the stove's primary advantage Indeed the "elevated cooking" benefits included the increased comfort of standing as opposed to constant sitting or bending by an open fire: the greater degree of cleanliness afforded by removing pots and pans from dirt floors and away from wandering domestic animals; and greater safety for small children resulting from their limited access to burning embers and hot pots. Although many of these same advantages might be achieved by using an open fire on an elevated surface (poyo), they are mainly recognized in association with the Lorena stove. The women also said that cooking was easier because both the fire and the pots were in fixed, stable positions They could attend to their many daily chores without being constantly interrupted to, say, save a bean pot from tipping over or to tend the stove when preparing slow-cooking food.
Two more advantages were frequently mentioned - the constant availability of hot water (provided by the water-can sunk into the stove body) and the aesthetic qualities of the stove. Hot water is important to the Indians not only because it makes washing easier and drinking water safer, but also because of a belief that rinsing one's hands or bathing in cold water is harmful. As for the stove's appearance, many families found it very attractive and were proud of their decoratively finished stoves even where, as happened in a few cases, the internal structure was poor. This tendency to strongly value its outward appearance indicates that considerable prestige might be attached to the stove's mere presence in the kitchen.
There are however, several negative aspects. The most important is the stove's inability to provide space heat in the cold highland evenings and early mornings. By contrast, the open fire has traditionally been a source of warmth, especially for smaller children and the elderly. Because the Lorena stove is built precisely to contain heat rather than emit it, its fuel-saving properties conflict with values Dot related to fuel efficiency. When given the choice, many of the more conservative Indians decide that they would rather enjoy the heat of the open fire than economize on firewood.
Another drawback of the stove is the inflexible nature of its cooking surface. Several women interviewed find that the pot holes excavated in the stove body limit the size and number of pots which can be used. This limitation is particularly significant at harvest time and on fiesta days, when the stove cannot accommodate the special large pots used to cook food in quantity. Almost invariably, women will return to using an open fire when they cannot cook the necessary amount of food fast enough with the stove.
Few stove owners have made major modifications in the basic design of the Lorena stove. All the stoves we observed were rectangular in shape, with the firebox in front, two pot holes at the sides, and the water can next to the chimney. About half of the stoves had been finished either with whitewash or with a thin layer of cement.
About the cost, the Estación Experimental Choqui-ICADA estimates the building cost of the stove at $4.00 yet the average cost of the stoves we observed was about $14.00. This difference in cost is largely due to the price of the chimney pipe, which we found to average about $7.00. (Interestingly, four families in the Llano de Pinal had not yet purchased chimneys, even though two of them had been using the stove on a daily basis for several weeks.) Another factor which may inflate the real price of the stove is the cost of transporting the construction materials.
To have hot water on hand all the time is one of the most important features of the stove. Another is that it has developed into a prestigious piece of furniture. Its owners frequently decorate it with cheerful and original designs.
Adaptation by users. Several interesting adaptations were noted in the way people use the Lorena stove. Contrary to the cooking techniques originally intended for it, most families followed a method of cooking very similar to that commonly used when cooking over an open fire: they seldom used all the pot holes for slow, simultaneous cooking of different foods, but instead almost always used the firebox to cook individual foods rapidly.
To begin cooking, most people place their pots directly inside the firebox and then transfer them to the pot holes once the food is partly cooked. As in open-fire cooking, some families build fires right around the pots to be heated. Or, they may support the pots in the firebox with a cries-cross arrangement of firewood, or place them on a metal stand often used with open fires. In some instances, a metal wash basin with a circular opening in the bottom is suspended over the firebox, and a small pot is rested in the hole to take advantage of the intense heat of the firebox without being placed directly inside. Regardless of the particular technique, the general trend is to cook over the fire in the firebox, using the pot holes primarily to keep cooked food warm.
Another major departure from intended cooking procedure is the misuse or abandonment of the firebox door and flue dampers. Very few of the families used the firebox door in a systematic or effective way, and virtually none displayed an understanding of damper function in controlling and directing the flow of heat inside the stove. In some cases, the firebox door and flue dampers were altogether absent from the stove, and some families had even filled the slot for the door with clay. Significantly, owners frequently stated that they had removed the door to take advantage of what little space heat is emitted through the firebox opening.
The problem we most often observed was cracking or crumbling of the stove body. Nearly every stove had cracked in at least one area and even though the cracks seldom affected function, they were considered very unattractive by most families. The cracking was due to the use of an improper mixture of sand and clay, or of an inferior clay; but good-quality clay which does not crack is hard to find. Cracking is a much less frequent problem in stoves finished with a thin layer of cement; whitewashing, however, is of little value in preventing this problem.
In a few kitchens with Lorena stoves, smoke is still an annoying problem caused, for example, by uncovered pot holes, improper draft created by door misuse, inadequate chimney diameter or height, and the use of green firewood with a high moisture content. Many families obtain their firewood on an irregular basis, felling it or buying it in small quantities, and they give little attention to drying.
Another frequently encountered problem is the build-up of ash and creosote deposits in the stove flues, caused partly by inadequate maintenance and partly by the use of green wood. The residue becomes a problem when it interferes with the normal draft of the stove and when it presents a fire hazard.
Faulty stove construction has, of course, inevitably led to problems in stove function. Improper excavation of the firebox and flues has resulted in poor heating performance in almost half of the stoves we observed.
The introduction of the Lorena stove has brought about few changes in the traditional lifestyle of the highland Indians. Most families have been able to adopt the new cooking implement without significantly altering established cooking procedures. There are, however, some areas of traditional behaviour which have been affected.
Although the types of food prepared using the stove do not differ from those cooked over the open fire, the manner in which the food is eaten has changed slightly. Whereas in open-fire cooking the women eat kneeling on the ground next to the fire, they stand to eat when using the stove. The elevated surface of the stove has thus become a kind of table on which to eat as well as cook.
Interestingly, adoption of the Lorena stove has not adversely affected the nature of those social rituals which have traditionally revolved around the open fire. Despite its poor space-heating capacity, many families gather around the stove for fellowship during the early morning and evening hours as they did before the open fire. As already mentioned, though, the firebox door is usually removed to take advantage of as much heat as possible. Moreover, if the stove is unable to provide enough warmth, some families kindle a separate fire on the ground (often in the hearth previously used for open-fire cooking).
At the time of writing, no data were available on how the stove might affect traditional practices associated with the sweat bath. In their "Ethnography" of the highland Mam-speaking people (in Languages of Guatemala, ed. Marvin K. Mayers, The Hague, Netherlands. Mouton and Co., 1965), H. Dudley and Dorothy M. Peck describe how, after bathing, the Indian dries himself in front of the open fire before going to bed. Given the importance of the sweat bath in highland culture, further study should be done on how the Lorena stove might disrupt this tradition by eliminating the space heat of the open fire.
The traditional division of labour within the Indian family remains virtually unaffected by the stove, yet employment patterns at the community level have shifted somewhat. Although still on a very small scale, the promotion of the stove has created new sources of work for a few people. By building the stove for a small fee, an enterprising individual is able to earn some extra income while working in his free time.
In general, the promotional methods used by the Estación Experimental Choqui-ICADA and other organizations have been successful in distributing the stove throughout the highland region, yet several important problems exist.
Compared to an open fire the stove is technology. It means using dampers and a closed fire box to conserve and transfer heat. But this part was forgotten. Neither the men who were taught to build them, nor the women who use them were instructed about the best ways to cook on them.
Stove-building courses are relatively effective in teaching basic construction skills, yet they offer little instruction on how to use and maintain the stove once it is built. "Stove courses" introduce the Lorena stove primarily as a block of semi-hardened mud to be carved according to a specified design. Understanding the stove as a new technique of cooking, however, is seldom emphasized. As a result, participants often complete two days of practical stove-building experience without learning about heat transfer or how the dampers and the chimney function to regulate air flow in the stove. The failure of stove-building courses to communicate the simple theory underlying the Lorena stove cooking process may be a major obstacle to its ultimate acceptance.
Furthermore, by training almost exclusively men they are practically depriving the primary users of the stove women - of the information they need to make it function properly. Thus women are forced to learn its use and function by trial and error, or from their husbands, who have very little understanding of this new cooking process.
By disseminating pamphlets and holding stove courses and exhibits in numerous, widely scattered communities, promotional groups distribute the stove widely throughout the highlands without providing for an effective control over its quality. Individual owners are thus often unable to solve technical problems because expert advice is usually too far away to be of any practical assistance. Although the Estación Experimental keeps a record of all stove course participants, its follow-up visits are inadequate and local promoters are often insufficiently trained - some attend only one course and are therefore incapable of training the users. In short, the widely dispersed nature of stove promotion has resulted in a large number of stoves in diverse areas, but the quality of stove construction has degenerated owing to the lack of a systematic extension service.
The Estación Experimental undertakes research in the design and use of the Lorena stove, but without consulting the people who are to use it. Although most of the personnel at the centre have stoves of their own which they use regularly, their fundamental knowledge of the stove's problems and potentials is seldom supplemented by the insights of families who may have different cooking needs and priorities. Because they take no direct part in the stove development and testing process, most stove owners passively adapt to a technology designed for them, rather than actively collaborating to improve a technology which can best meet those needs defined by them. By concentrating promotional efforts in one community at a tune, new and potential stove owners would have better access to technical assistance, and local promoters could be carefully supervised and trained to assume responsibility for extension work once the promotional group moves to another community.
In this way, the Lorena stove can become a more flexible and dynamic technology, capable of adapting to the diverse and changing needs of the highland people.
