Gender Dynamics and Public Health Technology: Clean Cookstoves in Bangladesh

In recent years, development initiatives have frequently focused on the distribution and adoption of simple and inexpensive technologies—from insecticide-treated bed nets to water disinfectants  to clean cookstoves. Clean cookstove technology, for example, seeks to reduce the health, environmental, and economic costs of traditional biomass-burning stoves. According to the World Health Organization, half of the world’s population relies on inefficient traditional stoves, and indoor air pollution causes five percent of all female deaths in the developing world. Despite their notable benefits, clean cookstoves are relatively inexpensive: organizations such as the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves offer clean cookstoves for under $20. Nonetheless, low-income households in developing countries are adopting clean cookstove technology at remarkably low rates.

In a recent paper, “Gender Differences in Preferences, Intra-Household Externalities, and the Low Demand for Improved Cookstoves,” Grant Miller and A. Mushfiq Mobarak examine whether gender dynamics in household decision-making explain the low adoption of clean cookstoves in poor countries. Since women in developing countries bear a disproportionate burden of the health consequences of inefficient stoves, Miller and Mobarak question whether men fully consider the potential health benefits of clean cookstove technology when making financial decisions. They find that women, the main beneficiaries of clean cookstoves, are more likely than men to want to adopt the technology, but men are more likely to refuse to pay for clean cookstoves.

To determine the effect of household gender dynamics on cookstove adoption, Miller and Mobarak conducted a randomized control trial in two rural districts in Bangladesh. The authors randomly selected 50 households from 16 villages in each of the two districts to participate, for a total sample of 799 households. In collaboration with BRAC, a large non-governmental organization, they offered households a choice between an efficient stove, which burns less fuel but releases the same amount of indoor air pollution as traditional stoves, and a “healthy” stove, which uses a chimney to remove air pollution but requires the same amount of fuel as traditional stoves. The authors offered half of the households their choice of stove for free and half of the households their choice of stove for a subsidized price: 50 Taka ($0.70) for the efficient stove or 250 Taka ($3.50) for the healthy stove. To isolate the effect of gender on household decision-making, the authors randomly assigned the husband or wife the responsibility to select a stove, and did not permit them to consult with each other about their decision.

Miller and Mobarak found the decision to select a stove, as well as the type of stove selected, varied significantly by both cost and gender. When considering a free cookstove, both men and women (82 percent of households) overwhelmingly selected the more expensive healthy stove. Furthermore, women were 15 percent more likely to select a healthy stove than men. Surprisingly, 30 percent of the households refused the free stoves, suggesting people may face non-financial barriers to adopting clean cookstove technology.

The introduction of prices changed women’s preferences significantly, however. When faced with a financial decision, most women selected the less expensive stove, which burns fuel more efficiently but produces more pollution. Women were also more likely than men to reject a cookstove altogether. Miller and Mobarak write, “When stoves are offered for free, their choices reflect their own preferences, and women express a stronger preference for healthier stoves. However, they are unable to act on their preferences when even very small positive prices are charged.” Notably, Miller and Mobarak report that women with more education relative to their husbands are more likely to order a healthy stove than women with equal or less education than their husbands, suggesting education may enhance their bargaining power within the household.

In light of their findings, the Miller and Mobarak argue that development initiatives encouraging the adoption of clean cookstove technology must take household gender dynamics into account. Since women bear a disproportionate burden of the costs of inefficient stoves but men’s preferences typically determine household purchases, the authors recommend bundling stoves with other desirable technologies. For example, they note that the Biolite stove generates enough electricity to charge a cell phone, making clean cookstove technology more appealing. At the same time, educated women’s increased bargaining power suggests that investments in female human capital could help encourage households’ adoption of health-related technologies in the developing world. Without accounting for these household imbalances, Miller and Mobarak warn that widespread adoption of clean cookstove technology is unlikely.

Feature Photo: cc/(raccoflickr)