210
C. Nabukalu and R. Giere
similar observations in Ethiopia, following inflation of charcoal prices
and currency devaluation. Mukwaya (2016) also suggested that poor
consumers would prepare fewer meals per day when charcoal becomes
unaffordable, although Tabuti, Dhillion, and Lye (2003) showed that
those with less disposable incomes would turn to firewood, which is
abundant and typically free in rural areas. Even though wealth is a major
factor in the energy transition from biomass to ‘modern’ alternatives
(Maria de Fatima, Zahran, & Bucini, 2010), some consumers choose
to use charcoal regardless of income levels, as a backup to electricity
and also because charcoal is often linked favourably to the taste of food
(Pesa, 2017; Bailis, Rujanavech, Dwivedi, Chang, & de Miranda, 2013;
Mukwaya, 2016).
The capability and willingness of a household to invest in electric
appliances is a major determinant of fuel choice. When contrasted with
charcoal, consuming electricity requires more investment in sophisticated technology, such as cookers, microwave devices and ovens ( Maria
de Fatima, Zahran, & Bucini, 2010), which are often imported and
manufactured in standardized sizes. LPG requires access to gas cookers
(Akpalu, Dasmani, & Aglobitse, 2011), which are often inaccessible to
rural consumers. Moreover, maintaining gas cookers necessitates compatible spare parts, which may be scarce in the local markets. Where the
number of people living together in a household is high, a regular oven
may be too small to accommodate daily cooking needs. Moreover, food
that takes a long time to cook, such as beans (Mukwaya, 2016), may
affect overall electricity or gas consumption and thus energy expenditure because the supply of these energy resources is metered, and charges
accrue for the duration of use. Charcoal, on the other hand, is not
metered. It requires essential equipment, such as portable stoves made
from clay or sheet metal, which are painted to eliminate risks of rusting
thereby diminishing repair and maintenance costs for the consumer (see
Nabukalu & Gieré, 2019). In Zambia, consumers favoured charcoal
made from trees over charcoal pellets made from sawdust and designed
for use in ICS, partly because the ICS were more expensive than regular
charcoal stoves, despite subsidies and possibilities to pay in instalments
(Pesa, 2017). In general, the infrastructure on the consumption side of
biomass is more accessible than that of electricity because it is far more
C. Nabukalu and R. Giere
similar observations in Ethiopia, following inflation of charcoal prices
and currency devaluation. Mukwaya (2016) also suggested that poor
consumers would prepare fewer meals per day when charcoal becomes
unaffordable, although Tabuti, Dhillion, and Lye (2003) showed that
those with less disposable incomes would turn to firewood, which is
abundant and typically free in rural areas. Even though wealth is a major
factor in the energy transition from biomass to ‘modern’ alternatives
(Maria de Fatima, Zahran, & Bucini, 2010), some consumers choose
to use charcoal regardless of income levels, as a backup to electricity
and also because charcoal is often linked favourably to the taste of food
(Pesa, 2017; Bailis, Rujanavech, Dwivedi, Chang, & de Miranda, 2013;
Mukwaya, 2016).
The capability and willingness of a household to invest in electric
appliances is a major determinant of fuel choice. When contrasted with
charcoal, consuming electricity requires more investment in sophisticated technology, such as cookers, microwave devices and ovens ( Maria
de Fatima, Zahran, & Bucini, 2010), which are often imported and
manufactured in standardized sizes. LPG requires access to gas cookers
(Akpalu, Dasmani, & Aglobitse, 2011), which are often inaccessible to
rural consumers. Moreover, maintaining gas cookers necessitates compatible spare parts, which may be scarce in the local markets. Where the
number of people living together in a household is high, a regular oven
may be too small to accommodate daily cooking needs. Moreover, food
that takes a long time to cook, such as beans (Mukwaya, 2016), may
affect overall electricity or gas consumption and thus energy expenditure because the supply of these energy resources is metered, and charges
accrue for the duration of use. Charcoal, on the other hand, is not
metered. It requires essential equipment, such as portable stoves made
from clay or sheet metal, which are painted to eliminate risks of rusting
thereby diminishing repair and maintenance costs for the consumer (see
Nabukalu & Gieré, 2019). In Zambia, consumers favoured charcoal
made from trees over charcoal pellets made from sawdust and designed
for use in ICS, partly because the ICS were more expensive than regular
charcoal stoves, despite subsidies and possibilities to pay in instalments
(Pesa, 2017). In general, the infrastructure on the consumption side of
biomass is more accessible than that of electricity because it is far more