Constrained cooking energy choices in Tanzania: why urban dwellers cling on dirty even where clean energy alternatives are accessible?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine households’ behavior towards dirty cooking energy utilisation in an environment where relatively higher accessibility to clean energy is noted. Although the low utilisation rate of clean energy can partly be attributed to utility gains anticipated in dirty energy mixes (DEMs) arising out of accessibility constraints, affordances and enablers, it is still unclear on the extend at which each of these contributes towards DEMs manifestation among the seemingly well-to-do households with higher levels of clean energy mixes (CEM) access. This study, therefore, hinges on scrutinising on this lower utilisation patterns despite a seemingly higher accessibility of CEMs, specifically liquified petroleum gases (LPG). Design/methodology/approach The study is based on a household’s survey that was carried out in 2018, reaching a sample of 393 households using questionnaires in four wards of the Kigamboni district in Tanzania. Subsequent analyses were descriptive as well as inferential based on binary logistic regression analysis where utilisation of DEMs was predicted for both the high and low social economic status (SES) households by incorporating accessibility constraints, affordances and enablers. Findings The results show, first, if one assumes energy stacking is not an issue, as households become more constrained towards CEMs utilisation, they shift towards DEMs suggesting that the overall effect is a substitution, and second, the complementarity effect ultimately outweighs the substitution effect as households do not shift from DEMs to CEMs rather stack multiple energy. DEMs flourish in this case study area because those with high income are among those in the lowest SES, and some of those with the highest SES are from among the lowest income category, and all of them end up with more DEMs because shifting towards CEMs require income to complement SES. Practical implications Policy-wise, removing hurdles in accessing CEMs such as LPG subsidy programme, gas stove provision to the poor, and enhanced LPG awareness will most likely benefits only those who do not stack energy in cooking while strategies targeting those at the lowest SES such as higher education attainment, empower women as a family decision maker, encourage co-occupancy to enlarge the household size and contain urban growth within certain perimeter will have a significant impact only if they raise both incomes and SES. Originality/value Despite of the dominance of DEMs for cooking such as charcoal and firewood in Tanzania, CEMs such as LPG, have emerged as complements or alternatives in the household energy basket. The utilisation of such CEMs is, however, still very low despite the accessibility, cost, environmental and health advantages they offer. Accessibility is not the only factor fuelling CEMs; a complementarity must exist between SES and income for the positive transition towards CEMs to be realised.