Energy poverty reduction by fuel switching. Impact evaluation of the LPG conversion program in Indonesia

R.K. Andadari, P. Mulder, P. Rietveld

Research output: Scientific - peer-reviewArticle

Abstract

In low- and middle-income countries, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) can be an attractive alternative to the widespread use of traditional kerosene. Not only is LPG a relatively clean, safe and cost-effective fuel for households, its large-scale adoption also reduces the heavy burden of kerosene consumption subsidies on government budgets. Against this background, we evaluate the impact of a large government program to substitute LPG for kerosene in Indonesia. Using a household survey across urban, suburban and rural regions we find that this program was very effective in causing a large scale shift from kerosene to LPG. This shift was positively influenced by level of education, household size and household income. Contradicting the energy-ladder model, the LPG program, reinforced by an increase in the price of kerosene, led to increased stacking of fuels, including increasing consumption of both electricity and traditional biomass. In addition, our analysis shows that the LPG program failed to substantially reduce the overall number of energy-poor people, but it has been effective in alleviating extreme energy-poverty. Finally, we find that medium and higher income households in suburban areas benefitted most from the LPG program. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.
LanguageEnglish
Pages436-449
JournalEnergy Policy
Volume66
Issue numberMarch
Early online date4 Dec 2013
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Cite this

@article{93e51d35fcad46a19a9fff5c2bcf20c8,
title = "Energy poverty reduction by fuel switching. Impact evaluation of the LPG conversion program in Indonesia",
abstract = "In low- and middle-income countries, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) can be an attractive alternative to the widespread use of traditional kerosene. Not only is LPG a relatively clean, safe and cost-effective fuel for households, its large-scale adoption also reduces the heavy burden of kerosene consumption subsidies on government budgets. Against this background, we evaluate the impact of a large government program to substitute LPG for kerosene in Indonesia. Using a household survey across urban, suburban and rural regions we find that this program was very effective in causing a large scale shift from kerosene to LPG. This shift was positively influenced by level of education, household size and household income. Contradicting the energy-ladder model, the LPG program, reinforced by an increase in the price of kerosene, led to increased stacking of fuels, including increasing consumption of both electricity and traditional biomass. In addition, our analysis shows that the LPG program failed to substantially reduce the overall number of energy-poor people, but it has been effective in alleviating extreme energy-poverty. Finally, we find that medium and higher income households in suburban areas benefitted most from the LPG program. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.",
author = "R.K. Andadari and P. Mulder and P. Rietveld",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.021",
volume = "66",
pages = "436--449",
journal = "Energy Policy",
issn = "0301-4215",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "March",

}

Energy poverty reduction by fuel switching. Impact evaluation of the LPG conversion program in Indonesia. / Andadari, R.K.; Mulder, P.; Rietveld, P.

In: Energy Policy, Vol. 66, No. March, 2014, p. 436-449.

Research output: Scientific - peer-reviewArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Energy poverty reduction by fuel switching. Impact evaluation of the LPG conversion program in Indonesia

AU - Andadari,R.K.

AU - Mulder,P.

AU - Rietveld,P.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - In low- and middle-income countries, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) can be an attractive alternative to the widespread use of traditional kerosene. Not only is LPG a relatively clean, safe and cost-effective fuel for households, its large-scale adoption also reduces the heavy burden of kerosene consumption subsidies on government budgets. Against this background, we evaluate the impact of a large government program to substitute LPG for kerosene in Indonesia. Using a household survey across urban, suburban and rural regions we find that this program was very effective in causing a large scale shift from kerosene to LPG. This shift was positively influenced by level of education, household size and household income. Contradicting the energy-ladder model, the LPG program, reinforced by an increase in the price of kerosene, led to increased stacking of fuels, including increasing consumption of both electricity and traditional biomass. In addition, our analysis shows that the LPG program failed to substantially reduce the overall number of energy-poor people, but it has been effective in alleviating extreme energy-poverty. Finally, we find that medium and higher income households in suburban areas benefitted most from the LPG program. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

AB - In low- and middle-income countries, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) can be an attractive alternative to the widespread use of traditional kerosene. Not only is LPG a relatively clean, safe and cost-effective fuel for households, its large-scale adoption also reduces the heavy burden of kerosene consumption subsidies on government budgets. Against this background, we evaluate the impact of a large government program to substitute LPG for kerosene in Indonesia. Using a household survey across urban, suburban and rural regions we find that this program was very effective in causing a large scale shift from kerosene to LPG. This shift was positively influenced by level of education, household size and household income. Contradicting the energy-ladder model, the LPG program, reinforced by an increase in the price of kerosene, led to increased stacking of fuels, including increasing consumption of both electricity and traditional biomass. In addition, our analysis shows that the LPG program failed to substantially reduce the overall number of energy-poor people, but it has been effective in alleviating extreme energy-poverty. Finally, we find that medium and higher income households in suburban areas benefitted most from the LPG program. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

U2 - 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.021

DO - 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.021

M3 - Article

VL - 66

SP - 436

EP - 449

JO - Energy Policy

T2 - Energy Policy

JF - Energy Policy

SN - 0301-4215

IS - March

ER -