Cited by 88Energy and Environment ImpactsEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesChild Nutrition and Water Access

Up in Smoke: The Influence of Household Behavior on the Long-Run Impact of Improved Cooking Stoves

Open access
Hanna, Rema, Duflo, Esther, Greenstone, Michael·2012·National Bureau of Economic Research

Abstract

It is conventional wisdom that it is possible to reduce exposure to indoor air pollution, improve health outcomes, and decrease greenhouse gas emissions in the rural areas of developing countries through the adoption of improved cooking stoves.This belief is largely supported by observational field studies and engineering or laboratory experiments.However, we provide new evidence, from a randomized control trial conducted in rural Orissa, India (one of the poorest places in India), on the benefits of a commonly used improved stove that laboratory tests showed to reduce indoor air pollution and require less fuel.We track households for up to four years after they received the stove.While we find a meaningful reduction in smoke inhalation in the first year, there is no effect over longer time horizons.We find no evidence of improvements in lung functioning or health and there is no change in fuel consumption (and presumably greenhouse gas emissions).The difference between the laboratory and field findings appear to result from households' revealed low valuation of the stoves.Households failed to use the stoves regularly or appropriately, did not make the necessary investments to maintain them properly, and usage rates ultimately declined further over time.More broadly, this study underscores the need to test environmental and health technologies in real-world settings where behavior may temper impacts, and to test them over a long enough horizon to understand how this behavioral effect evolves over time.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3386/w18033

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent evaluations of interventions to promote improved cookstoves in south Asia have revealed that their purported benefits may not have been realized.

    “Recent evaluations of interventions to promote improved cookstoves in south Asia have also revealed that their purported benefits may not have been realized.31,32”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hanna, R., Duflo, E., & Greenstone, M.
Affiliations
National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
2012-05
OpenAlex
W2890589920
Cited by
88
References
1
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 2
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Harvard University
  • Children's Investment Fund Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Energy and Environment Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Child Nutrition and Water Access
Keywords
improved cookstoves, household behavior, indoor air pollution, smoke inhalation, lung function, fuel consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, technology adoption, rural households, Odisha

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review