Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya

Pashupati Chaudhary; Reinmar Seidler; Kamal Bawa

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya

Pashupati Chaudhary, Reinmar Seidler, Kamal Bawa

Published in International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science (Volume 2, Issue 1)

Received: 17 December 2016 Accepted: 16 January 2017 Published: 13 February 2017

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

In the Kanchenjunga Transboundary Conservation Landscape of the Eastern Himalaya, people remain dependent upon biomass energy for virtually all domestic uses, including cooking food, boiling water and tea, space heating, and preparing cattle feed. Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) is being adopted only gradually and unevenly. We examined patterns and determinants of fuel wood versus LPG use for 250 households in India and Nepal. Over 90% of households use fuel wood for the purposes mentioned above. Major determinants of fuel wood consumption rates include household (family) size, education level of household head, number of cattle owned, and time spent collecting fuel wood. Major determinants of LPG use include age and education level of household head, household size, household income, time spent collecting fuel wood, membership of the household head in social organization, and land tenure status. Patterns of fuel wood use differ across Indian and Nepali sites. These differences are correlated with differences in the social, economic and policy factors mentioned above. Our results suggest that direct promotion of LPG may not contribute greatly to reductions of fuel wood use and the consequent pressure on forest resources. On the other hand, investment in a number of social and economic factors, including education and improved ownership of forests by local communities, can in some cases reduce fuel wood use, consequently ameliorating forest degradation caused by overharvest of fuel wood.

Published in	International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science (Volume 2, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11
Page(s)	1-11
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2017. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Fuel Wood, Biomass, LPG, Energy, Forests

References

[1]	Cecelski, E.; Dunkerley, J.; Ramsay, W. "Household Energy and the Poor in the Third World." in Resources for the Future. Washington, D. C., 1979.
[2]	Heltberg, R.; Arndt, T. C.; Sekhar, N. U. Fuel wood consumption and forest degradation: A household model for domestic energy substitution in rural India. Land Economics, 2000, 70, 213-232.
[3]	Macht, C.; Axinn, W. G.; Ghimire, D. Household Energy Consumption: Community Context and the Fuelwood Transition. Population Studies Center Research Report 07-629, Population Studies Center, University of Michigan, 2007.
[4]	MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: General Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press and World Resources Institute, 2005.
[5]	Bensel, T. G. Fuelwood, deforestation, and land degradation: 10 years of evidence from Cebu Province, the Philippines. Land Degradation & Development. 2008, 19, 587-605.
[6]	Vakkilainen E.; Kuparinen, K.; Jussi Heinimö. Large industrial users of energy biomass (p55). IEA Bioenergy, Task 40: International Bioenergy Trade, Lappeenranta University of Technology, 2013.
[7]	Myers, N. The primary source. W. W. Norton, New York and London, 1984.
[8]	Osei, W. Y. Woodfuel and deforestation—answers for a sustainable environment. Journal of Environmental Management, 1993, 37, 51–62.
[9]	FAO. Forest resources assessment 1990. Global synthesis. FAO Forestry paper 124, Rome, 1995, 90pp.
[10]	WCSFD. Our forests, our future. World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, New York, and Melbourne, 1999.
[11]	Broadhead, J.; Bahdon, J.; Whiteman, A. Woodfuel consumption modeling and results. Annex 2 in “Past trends and future prospects for the utilization of wood for energy”. Working Paper No: GFPOS/WP/05, Global Forest Products Outlook Study, FAO, Rome, 2001.
[12]	Amacher, G. S.; Hyde, W. F.; Kanel, K. R. "Household Fuelwood Demand and Supply in Nepal's Tarai and Mid-Hills: Choice Between Cash Outlays and Labor Opportunity." World Development, 1996, 24, 1725-1736.
[13]	World Bank. World Development Report 2006: Equity and Development: New York, Oxford University Press.
[14]	Pachauri, S.; Jiang, L. The household energy transition in India and China. Energy Policy, 2008, 36, 4022– 4035.
[15]	Bhatt, B. P.; Sachan, M. S. Firewood consumption pattern of different tribal communities in Northeast India. Energy Policy, 2004, 24, 1-6.
[16]	USAID. Sustainable natural resources assessment-Philippines, Prepared by Dames and Moore International, Louis Berger International and Institute for Development Anthropology. USAID/Manila, Philippines, 1989.
[17]	Ali, J.; Benjaminsen, T. A. Fuelwood, Timber and Deforestation in the Himalayas: The Case of Basho Valley, Baltistan Region, Pakistan. Mount. Research and Development, 2004, 24, 312–318.
[18]	Chettri, N.; Sharma, E. A scientific assessment of traditional knowledge on firewood and fodder values in Sikkim, India. For. Ecology and Management, 2009, 257, 2073–2078.
[19]	ADB. Asian Development Bank Report on forest policy, cited in "Asian forest destruction targeted by aid bank." Reuter, 6 March 1995.
[20]	Chettri, N.; Sharma, E. Prospective for developing a transboundary conservation landscape in the Eastern Himalayas. In McNeely J. A.; McCarthy T. M., Smith A., Whittaker O. L., Wikramanayake E. D. (eds.) Conservation Biology in Asia, pp 21-44. Kathmandu: Society for Conservation of Biology Asia Section and Resources Himalaya Foundation, 2006.
[21]	Pandey, D. Fuel wood studies in India: myth and reality. Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Indonesia, 2002.
[22]	Arnold, M.; Köhlin, G.; Persson, R.; Shepherd, G. Fuel wood revisited. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 39. Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Indonesia, 2003.
[23]	Smith, K. R. Indoor air pollution in India: national health impacts and cost-effectiveness of intervention. Report Prepared for Capacity 21 Project of India, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, 1998.
[24]	Parikh, S.; Brennan, P.; Boffetta, P. Meta-analysis of social inequality and the risk of cervical cancer. International Journal of Cancer, 2003, 105, 687-691.
[25]	Ekholm, T.; Krey, V.; Pachauri, S.; Riahi, K. Determinants of household energy consumption in India. Energy Policy, 2010, 38, 5696–5707.
[26]	Jha, S. Household-specific variables and forest dependency in an Indian hotspot of biodiversity: challenges for sustainable development. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2009, 11, 1215-1223.
[27]	Kauppi, P. E.; Ausubel, J. H.; Fang, J.; Mather, A.; Sedjo, R. A.; Waggoner, P. E. Returning forests analyzed with the Forest Identity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006, 103, 17574–17579.
[28]	The World Bank. Energy Strategy for Rural India: Evidence from Six States. Report of the Joint UNDP/World Bank Energy Sector Management Assistance Programme (ESMAP), 258/02. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2002.
[29]	Ravindranath, N. H.; Somashekar, H. I.; Dasappa, S.; Reddy, C. N. J. Sustainable biomass power for rural India: Case study of biomass gasifier for village Electrification. Current Science, 2004, 87, 932-941.
[30]	Arjunan, M.; Holmes, C.; Puyravaud, J.; Davidar, P. Do developmental initiatives influence local attitudes toward conservation? A case study from the Kalakad–Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, India. Journal of Environmental Management, 2006, 79, 188–197.
[31]	Arjunan M.; Puyravaud, J.-Ph, and Davidar, P. The impact of resource collection by local communities on the dry forests of the Kalakad–Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve. Tropical Ecology, 2005, 46, 135–144.
[32]	Donovan, D. G. Fuelwood: how much do we need? (p23) Institute of current world affairs, Hanover, NH, 1981.
[33]	Fox, J., 1984. Firewood consumption in a Nepali village. Environmental Management, 1984, 8, 243-250.
[34]	Rai, Y. K.; Chettri, N.; Sharma, E. Fuelwood value index of woody tree species from forests of Mamlay Watershed, South Sikkim, India. Forest, Trees and Livelihoods, 2002, 12, 209–219.
[35]	Rastogi, A.; Shengji, P.; Amatya, D. Regional consultation on conservation of the Kanchenjunga Mountain Ecosystem. ICIMOD, Kathmandu, 1997.
[36]	Wikramanayake, E. D.; Carpenter, C.; Strand, H.; McKnight, M. Ecoregion-based conservation in the Eastern Himalaya: identifying important areas of biodiversity conservation. Kathmandu: WWF and ICIMOD, 2001.
[37]	WWF, ICIMOD. Ecoregion-based conservation in the Eastern Himalaya: Identifying important areas for biodiversity conservation. Kathmandu: WWF Nepal program, 2001.
[38]	Sherpa, M. N.; Peniston, B.; Lama, W.; Richard, C. Hands around Everest: Transboundary cooperation for conservation and sustainable livelihoods. Kathmandu: ICIMOD, 2003.
[39]	Shakya B.; Joshi, R. M. Protected areas and biodiversity conservation in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan region with special reference to the Kanchenjunga landscape. In Biodiversity Conservation in the Kanchenjunga Landscape, N. Chettri, B. Shakya and E. Sharma (eds.). International Center for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Kathmandu, Nepal, 2008.
[40]	World Wildlife Fund (WWF). WWF Annual Report 2005-2006. WWF, Washington D. C, 2007.
[41]	Bilsborrow, R.; Okoth-Ogendo, H. W. O. Population-driven changes in land-use in developing countries. Ambio, 1992, 21, 37-45.
[42]	Brown, K.; Pearce, D. (Eds.). The causes of tropical deforestation. UCL Press London, 1994.
[43]	Andersen, L. E. An econometric analysis of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. University of California, San Diego, Department of Economics, Discussion paper 95-40, October 1995, 16p.
[44]	Kaimowitz, D.; Angelsen, A. Economic models of tropical deforestation. A Review. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, 1998.
[45]	Zhang, Y.. Deforestation and transition: Theory and evidence in China. In Palo M and H. Vanhanen (eds.) World forests from deforestation to transition. Kluwer Academic Publishers, World For. 2000, Vol II, p 41-65.
[46]	Barbier, E. The economics of tropical deforestation and land use: an introduction to the special issue. Land Economics, 2001, 77, 155–171.
[47]	Uusivuori, J.; Lehto, E.; Palo, M. Population, income and ecological conditions as determinants of forest area variation in the tropics. Global Environmental Change, 2002, 12, 313-323.
[48]	O'Brien R. M. A caution regarding rules of thumb for Variance Inflation Factors. Qual & Quan, 2007, 41, 673-690.
[49]	Mitchell, R. C.; Carson, R. T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: the Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the future, Washington D.C., 1989
[50]	Poudel, D.; Jonsen, F. H. Valuation of crop genetic resources in Kaski, Nepal: Farmers’ willingness to pay for rice landraces conservation. Journal of Environmental Management, 2009, 90, 483-491.
[51]	Maikhuri, R. K.,. Fuelwood consumption pattern of different tribal communities living in Arunachal Pradesh in Northeast India. Bioresearch Technology, 1991, 35, 291–296.
[52]	Shankar, U. Increasing biomass scarcity in Northeastern India: options with the villagers. In: Arunachalam, A.; Khan, M. L. (Eds.), Sustainable Management of Forests—India. International Book Distributors, Dehradun, India, 2002, pp. 278–309.
[53]	Bhatt, B. P.; Negi, A. K.; Todaria, N. P. Fuel wood consumption pattern at different altitudes in Garhwal Himalaya. Energy, 1994, 19, 465-468.
[54]	Mahat, T. B. S.; Griffin, D. M.; Shepherd, K. P. Human impacts on some forest of the middle hills of Nepal. Part IV. A detailed study in Southeast Sindhu Palanchock and Northeast Kabhere Palananchock. Mountain Research and Development, 1987, 7, 114-134.
[55]	Sundriyal, R. C; Rai, S. C.; Sharma, E.; Rai, Y. K. Hill agroforestry system in South Sikkim, India. Agroforestry System, 1994, 26, 215–35.
[56]	Chettri, N.; Sharma, E.; Deb, D. C.; Sundriyal, R. C. Impact of Firewood Extraction on Tree Structure, Regeneration and Woody Biomass Productivity in a Trekking Corridor of the Sikkim Himalaya. Mountain Research and Development, 2002, 22, 150-158.
[57]	IPCC Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report. See http://www.ipcc.ch (accessed 12 April 2007).
[58]	Sharma, E.; Chettri, N.; Tse-ring, K.; Shrestha, A. B.; Jing, F.; Mool, P.; Eriksson, M. Climate change impacts and vulnerability in the Eastern Himalayas. Kathmandu: ICIMOD, 2009.
[59]	Shrestha, A. B.; Devkota, L. P. Climate change in the Eastern Himalayas: observed trends and model projections; climate change impact and vulnerability in the Eastern Himalayas. Technical report no. 1, ICIMOD, Kathmandu, Nepal, 2010.
[60]	Shrestha, U. B.; Gautam, S.; Bawa, K. Widespread climate change in the Himalayas and associated changes in local ecosystems. PLoS One, 2011, 7, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036741
[61]	Godoy, R.; O’Neill, K.; Groff, S.; Kostishack, P.; Cubas, A.; Demmer, J.; McSweeney, K.; Overman, J.; Wilkie, D.; Brokaw, N.; Martinez, M. Household determinants of deforestation by Amerindians in Honduras. World Development, 1997, 25, 977-987.
[62]	Cincotta, R. P; Engelman, R. Nature’s place: human population and the future of biological diversity. Population Action International, Washington DC, 2002.
[63]	Myers, N.; Mittermeier, R. A.; Mittermeier, C. G.; da Fonseca, G. A. B.; Kent, J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 2000, 403, 853-858.
[64]	Cardillo, M.; Mace, G. M.; Gittleman, J. L.; Purvis, A. Latent extinction risk and the future battlegrounds of mammal conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006, 103, 4157-4161.
[65]	Jha, S.; Bawa, K. S. Population growth, human development and deforestation in biodiversity hotspots. Conservation Biology, 2006, 20, 907-912.
[66]	Jian, L.; O’Neill, B. C. The energy transition in rural China. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 2004, 21, 2-26.
[67]	Farsi, M.; Filippini, M.; Pachauri, S. Fuel choices in urban Indian households. Environment and Development Economics, 2007, 12, 757–774.
[68]	Adhikari, B.; Falco, S. D.; Lovett, J. C. Household characteristics and forest dependency: evidence from common property forest management in Nepal. Ecological Economics, 2014, 48, 245-257.
[69]	Silori, C. S.; Mishra, B. K. Assessment of livestock grazing pressure in and around the elephant corridors in Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary, South India. Biodiversity and Conservation, 2001, 10, 2181-2195.
[70]	Viswanathan, B.; Kumar, K. S. K. Cooking fuel use patterns in India: 1983– 2000. Energy Policy, 2005, 33, 1021– 1036.
[71]	Davidar, P.; Sahoo, S.; Mammena, P. C.; Acharya, P.; Puyravaud, J.; Arjunan, M.; Garrigues, J. P.; Roessingh, K. Assessing the extent and causes of forest degradation in India: Where do we stand? Biological Conservation 2010, 143, 2937–2944.
[72]	Singh, K. D. Balancing fuel wood production and consumption in India. International Forestry Review, 2008, 10, 1.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Pashupati Chaudhary, Reinmar Seidler, Kamal Bawa. (2017). Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science, 2(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Pashupati Chaudhary; Reinmar Seidler; Kamal Bawa. Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya. Int. J. Energy Environ. Sci. 2017, 2(1), 1-11. doi: 10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Pashupati Chaudhary, Reinmar Seidler, Kamal Bawa. Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya. Int J Energy Environ Sci. 2017;2(1):1-11. doi: 10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11,
  author = {Pashupati Chaudhary and Reinmar Seidler and Kamal Bawa},
  title = {Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya},
  journal = {International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-11},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijees.20170201.11},
  abstract = {In the Kanchenjunga Transboundary Conservation Landscape of the Eastern Himalaya, people remain dependent upon biomass energy for virtually all domestic uses, including cooking food, boiling water and tea, space heating, and preparing cattle feed. Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) is being adopted only gradually and unevenly. We examined patterns and determinants of fuel wood versus LPG use for 250 households in India and Nepal. Over 90% of households use fuel wood for the purposes mentioned above. Major determinants of fuel wood consumption rates include household (family) size, education level of household head, number of cattle owned, and time spent collecting fuel wood. Major determinants of LPG use include age and education level of household head, household size, household income, time spent collecting fuel wood, membership of the household head in social organization, and land tenure status. Patterns of fuel wood use differ across Indian and Nepali sites. These differences are correlated with differences in the social, economic and policy factors mentioned above. Our results suggest that direct promotion of LPG may not contribute greatly to reductions of fuel wood use and the consequent pressure on forest resources. On the other hand, investment in a number of social and economic factors, including education and improved ownership of forests by local communities, can in some cases reduce fuel wood use, consequently ameliorating forest degradation caused by overharvest of fuel wood.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya
AU  - Pashupati Chaudhary
AU  - Reinmar Seidler
AU  - Kamal Bawa
Y1  - 2017/02/13
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11
T2  - International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science
JF  - International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science
JO  - International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science
SP  - 1
EP  - 11
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2578-9546
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11
AB  - In the Kanchenjunga Transboundary Conservation Landscape of the Eastern Himalaya, people remain dependent upon biomass energy for virtually all domestic uses, including cooking food, boiling water and tea, space heating, and preparing cattle feed. Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) is being adopted only gradually and unevenly. We examined patterns and determinants of fuel wood versus LPG use for 250 households in India and Nepal. Over 90% of households use fuel wood for the purposes mentioned above. Major determinants of fuel wood consumption rates include household (family) size, education level of household head, number of cattle owned, and time spent collecting fuel wood. Major determinants of LPG use include age and education level of household head, household size, household income, time spent collecting fuel wood, membership of the household head in social organization, and land tenure status. Patterns of fuel wood use differ across Indian and Nepali sites. These differences are correlated with differences in the social, economic and policy factors mentioned above. Our results suggest that direct promotion of LPG may not contribute greatly to reductions of fuel wood use and the consequent pressure on forest resources. On the other hand, investment in a number of social and economic factors, including education and improved ownership of forests by local communities, can in some cases reduce fuel wood use, consequently ameliorating forest degradation caused by overharvest of fuel wood.
VL  - 2
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Pashupati Chaudhary

Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research and Development (LI-BIRD), Pokhara, Nepal
Reinmar Seidler

Department of Biology, University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA
Kamal Bawa

Department of Biology, University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Pashupati Chaudhary, Reinmar Seidler, Kamal Bawa. (2017). Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science, 2(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Pashupati Chaudhary; Reinmar Seidler; Kamal Bawa. Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya. Int. J. Energy Environ. Sci. 2017, 2(1), 1-11. doi: 10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Pashupati Chaudhary, Reinmar Seidler, Kamal Bawa. Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya. Int J Energy Environ Sci. 2017;2(1):1-11. doi: 10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11,
  author = {Pashupati Chaudhary and Reinmar Seidler and Kamal Bawa},
  title = {Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya},
  journal = {International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-11},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijees.20170201.11},
  abstract = {In the Kanchenjunga Transboundary Conservation Landscape of the Eastern Himalaya, people remain dependent upon biomass energy for virtually all domestic uses, including cooking food, boiling water and tea, space heating, and preparing cattle feed. Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) is being adopted only gradually and unevenly. We examined patterns and determinants of fuel wood versus LPG use for 250 households in India and Nepal. Over 90% of households use fuel wood for the purposes mentioned above. Major determinants of fuel wood consumption rates include household (family) size, education level of household head, number of cattle owned, and time spent collecting fuel wood. Major determinants of LPG use include age and education level of household head, household size, household income, time spent collecting fuel wood, membership of the household head in social organization, and land tenure status. Patterns of fuel wood use differ across Indian and Nepali sites. These differences are correlated with differences in the social, economic and policy factors mentioned above. Our results suggest that direct promotion of LPG may not contribute greatly to reductions of fuel wood use and the consequent pressure on forest resources. On the other hand, investment in a number of social and economic factors, including education and improved ownership of forests by local communities, can in some cases reduce fuel wood use, consequently ameliorating forest degradation caused by overharvest of fuel wood.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Patterns and Determinants of Domestic Energy Use in Kanchenjunga Himalaya
AU  - Pashupati Chaudhary
AU  - Reinmar Seidler
AU  - Kamal Bawa
Y1  - 2017/02/13
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11
T2  - International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science
JF  - International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science
JO  - International Journal of Energy and Environmental Science
SP  - 1
EP  - 11
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2578-9546
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20170201.11
AB  - In the Kanchenjunga Transboundary Conservation Landscape of the Eastern Himalaya, people remain dependent upon biomass energy for virtually all domestic uses, including cooking food, boiling water and tea, space heating, and preparing cattle feed. Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) is being adopted only gradually and unevenly. We examined patterns and determinants of fuel wood versus LPG use for 250 households in India and Nepal. Over 90% of households use fuel wood for the purposes mentioned above. Major determinants of fuel wood consumption rates include household (family) size, education level of household head, number of cattle owned, and time spent collecting fuel wood. Major determinants of LPG use include age and education level of household head, household size, household income, time spent collecting fuel wood, membership of the household head in social organization, and land tenure status. Patterns of fuel wood use differ across Indian and Nepali sites. These differences are correlated with differences in the social, economic and policy factors mentioned above. Our results suggest that direct promotion of LPG may not contribute greatly to reductions of fuel wood use and the consequent pressure on forest resources. On the other hand, investment in a number of social and economic factors, including education and improved ownership of forests by local communities, can in some cases reduce fuel wood use, consequently ameliorating forest degradation caused by overharvest of fuel wood.
VL  - 2
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download